National service/conscription

[Longcol]

I take it everybody on this thread who is wanting people to do National Service has done it themselves.......................

[redrobbo]

A conscript army of young lads (and lasses!) who are disruptive and anti-social is not what the forces need. The armed services want volunteers, who wish to be trained as a fighting force and perhaps also learn a trade at the same time.

 

If you want to do something about delinquents, then national service in the army is not the answer.

[Hels]

I wasn't around in the 50's, so i'm not 'harking back to past times'. What I want to see is a firm, positive step that will bring these young hooligans back from the brink.

 

I stongly believe that there is good in everybody, I am not a 'namby pamby liberal' though. Young people who have lacked boundries, who have not had firm parental guidance, and who have not learned what being a respectable member of society means - need help. We, the general public need help.

 

I have not done national service, but if I was called to do it I would do. My parents brought me up in a strict environment, I don't think I suffered for that, I think I am a better person for knowing the boudries, for knowing right from wrong, for knowing if I stepped out of line and punishment from school/police etc would be nothing compared to the punishment I would get at home.

 

I most certainly do not condone child abuse, what I do condone is young people being taught right from wrong, self respect and respect for others. If the only way this can be taught is in 'some kind of National Service type environment' then so be it. I am sure if you speak to some of those young people on Bad Lads Army you would realise that it was the harsh discipline that they needed to put them on the straight road.

 

I am not talking about these young people being part of the regular army - they are trained by ex-forces in a similar environment. Some of them, at the end of it, may choose to join the regular army - and that is a big bonus for the army as they will already be part way there in terms of training etc.

 

Does anyone who does not agree with a similar type of solution have a better idea?

[Fareast]

I don't think National Service is the answer . Why should we lumber our Armed Forces with a bunch of anti-Socail , pig-ignorant sickos ? The army has enough on its hands already.

The National Service of pre 1960 was done by the general population , not just the scum.

However , our attempts , using , "soft " methods , over the past 30-40 years , has failed spectacularly so , what can be done ?

Well , during National Service times [ and perhaps still today ?] , the Army had what were nick-named , "Glasshouses " , for those soldiers who had committed serious offences of various kinds. There was a well known one at Shepton Mallet and one at Aldershot.These were extremely tough places , reputedly much stricter in every way than ordinary prisons.

Surely , a scheme of re-introducing places similar to the Glasshouses could be introduced with no luxuries of any description and no date of release until the authorities were satisfied that a thug had learned his /her lesson.

The cost ? Well , considering what thuggery costs us now , Society might even make a profit on setting scumbags to work and if it did cost money , well , we manage to find it for almost everything else , these days.

But , please , let's not infect the army with these Deadheads !

[Longcol]

Hels,

 

Would your version of National Service be compulsory to all (say) 17 - 18 year olds?

 

If not - how would you decide who did NS and who didn't?

 

Are we talking here of the "state" as being the employer of the last resort - eg. if a kid leaving school can't get a "proper" job then instead of getting "dole" then they should have to do something useful - eg gardening for OAP's, cleaning the streets.

 

I can agree with that.

[Hels]

Hi Longcol

 

I suppose the State would be the 'employer'. As it is, if young people don't work or do training/FE/HE I'm not sure if they are aged 16-18 how much (or if) they get in benefits but every young person should be doing something 'constructive'. If they don't learn at this age, when are they going to learn?

 

We must have some way of encouraging young people to be responsible and have respect for themselves and others.

 

I suppose Bad Lads Army had quite a big impression on me, some of them didn't last the time, but some of those that did made huge leaps in terms of how they felt about themselves and others. Some of them joined up for the regular army and I think that is a benefit for them and for the army.

 

Each individual will benefit from different types of intervention and I feel some of the more hardened or most disaffected young people would benefit from the harsh realities that a form of national service offers. It gives them the structure that they may not have had before and if it only benefits 30% of the young people, then that's 30% more than we currently see.

 

Of course, as I have said earlier, the majority of young people do not need this type of intervention, it is the minority. But those minority still have something to offer society and I feel it is our duty as an inclusive society to find some way of tapping into that potential. Harsh though it may seem to some.

 

My dad was called up for National Service, he's talked a lot about it and so, though I have not been through it myself I do have some understanding. Personally, I wanted to join the army but was too young when I left school, then when I went back much later I was told I was too old

[rothschild]

I agree with ADC-28. My other half was army trained and he says the last thing the army needs is a load of beligerent youth,s that don't want to be there. The army is our first line of defence not a load of trained "nannies".

In the days of National Service it was an accepted thing and all the youngsters knew it was going to happen. They also had different attitudes to the youth of today. There were no benefit payments for those that chose to leave school and take to their beds........that's assuming they even bothered with school to start with!

However......something along the lines of "national service" is needed. Perhaps the word we are all avoiding is Boot Camps?

For some of em the salt mines would not go amiss!!

Seriously I do think that the time has come to make up the minds of our youth. They have been given free reign to plan their own futures. Many of them have made sensible decisions and gone onto higher education etc, but there is also a large elemant that have no intentions of either higher ed. or working for a living. These are the ones that need the decisions making for them. They must realise that spending their time either doing nothing, or doing wrong is just not an option any longer.

[DragonofAna]

"What sets the British Army above the rest is that it is a volunteer army." I think I read that somewhere.

 

These days the army is subject so much to human rights and anti-bullying if a NCO or such shouts at a conscript they may get into very serious trouble. Yeah right!

 

Forget the army. Need something more diciplined, and for those who get out of hand - hmmmm - maybe something even more diciplined - I mean - where do we stop?

 

The trouble with kids these days starts at home. Parents who do not teach their kids to repect others and have few moral values. It seems that the parents themselves need some sort of initiative to raise their kids in a law abiding, non-desruptive manner. Ah! But thanks to the die hard liberals we are losing more and more parental rights while at the same time being held more and more accountable for the actions of our children.

 

So - the army is not the answer - what then? We simply going to watch our country decline further and further?

I doubt that telling these morons they are being naughty and not to be naughty again will have much effect.

 

Dragon

[PopT]

If the recent bombers had been doing National Service they wouldn't have bombed London.

 

With the trainig they received they would soon realise which side their bread was buttered and where their futures were.

 

In my opinion it would be make your mind up time for them or anyone else who were living with mixed loyalties particularly if they had to serve in Afganistan or Iraq.

 

What do any other forumers think about this point of view?

 

 

Happy Days

[Phanerothyme]

Originally posted by PopT

If the recent bombers had been doing National Service they wouldn't have bombed London.

 

No, they would have made off with a truckload of military hardware instead.

 

I think your point of view is quite simplistic.