Would you join the British Armed Forces?

[sgtkate]

It doesn't matter that you don't understand why- the overiding point is that there are so many ex-serviceman on the streets.

 

Support networks are great for those who can access and use them.

 

Speaking from my autistic perspective, I can guarantee you that not everyone who leaves the army can find support appropriate for them.

 

Again, speaking from my autistic perspective, I can tell you that, over the past ten years, things have got way harder for me, due to increasing systematisation, depersonalisation and modernisation. Sad but true, but most 'support' out there is impossible for many to access, as it requires paperwork, dealing with absurd automated phone systems, complience with utter nonsense etc.

 

I suspect that a fair portion of those who enlisted 10 years ago, probably did so cos they couldn't really deal well with the world they were in.

 

Leaving ten years later, when things have gone (from their perspective) even more downhill, must be a real hard thing to deal with- too hard for some, hence they end up homeless.

 

Access them? You are still in Army when these courses are done! You'd get court martialled if you didn't attend! These aren't 'nice to have' options you can ignore if you like. They are pretty much mandatory to ensure when you leave you have some basic skills to help you. Of course there are some people who need more support, and if you'd read my post properly, I said that and these people should be getting more assistance quicker. I'd be interested to see stats around age groups of these ex-servicemen. I'd expect the younger numbers would be staggering lower than people over 40, as previously I don't think the Army/RAF/Navy did very much at all to resettle ex-soldiers, but things have changed massively.

 

---------- Post added 15-12-2015 at 10:55 ----------

 

What was the quote from Churchill, "There is nothing more exhilerating to being shot at without result" or similar.

 

 

I don't know to be honest. Sounds likely it was something he said. And without result would indeed be the best outcome. I was a Royal Engineer, I was never going to be shooting at anyone unless something had gone less to plan than we'd hoped. However, I did have a colleague who did almost an identical job to me who was shot and killed in Iraq while trying to rebuild a bridge. He'd never fired his rifle in anger. I doubt he'd have said being shot at was exhilarating. I agree with most posts on here. No signs up to kill others, at least only the ones who manage to lie through the tests, and they are few and far between. But you accept that you might have to one day, and you have to trust the government and your commanders that the fights you get sent to are justified and worth losing your life for. When I signed up I was naïve, looking for adventure and a wonderful life. I didn't even really think about what would happen if I was sent to a war I fundamentally disagreed with. Things have changed now, and while I'd probably still sign up again, I'd spend an awful lot more time thinking about what it might entail.

[NigelFargate]

Another thing which would put me off joining the British army is that I suspect it is still class-ridden, i.e. with the officer class still largely being drawn from the public schools (I hasten to add that I only suspect this, as I have not studied the demographics of our contemporary armed forces in any detail).

 

Gone are the days when upper class idiots with no military ability at all, such as Lord Lucan or Lord Cardigan. could buy their commissions, with disastrous effect. However, I wonder if the bias in selection which was endemic in the British armed services for centuries has entirely been eliminated, or is it still the case that British soldiers are lions led by plummy-voiced donkeys?

Edited December 15, 2015 by NigelFargate

[sgtkate]

Another thing which would put me off joining the British army is that I suspect it is still class-ridden, i.e. with the officer class still largely being drawn from the public schools (I hasten to add that I only suspect this, as I have not studied the demographics of our contemporary armed forces in any detail).

 

Gone are the days when upper class idiots with no military ability at all, such as Lord Lucan or Lord Cardigan. could buy their commissions, with disastrous effect. However, I wonder if the bias in selection which was endemic in the British armed services for centuries has entirely been eliminated, or is it still the case that British soldiers are lions led by plummy-voiced donkeys?

 

From my experience, the majority of infantry officers still come from traditional military families, but the majority of technical officers (REME, Royal Engineers, Logistics etc) do not. Welbeck Army College where a large number of technical officers come from have a heavy state schools bias on selection.

[NigelFargate]

From my experience, the majority of infantry officers still come from traditional military families, but the majority of technical officers (REME, Royal Engineers, Logistics etc) do not. Welbeck Army College where a large number of technical officers come from have a heavy state schools bias on selection.

 

This tends to support my suspicion that the top 'line' officers tend still to come from the upper classes, whereas the support staff (i.e. technicians) do not.

[sgtkate]

This tends to support my suspicion that the top 'line' officers tend still to come from the upper classes, whereas the support staff (i.e. technicians) do not.

 

I think you misunderstood. A Captain is a Captain whether they are in the infantry or engineers. I was saying that the engineering officers tend to come from state schools or non-military backgrounds, whereas the infantry ones come from public schools.

 

Not sure what you meant by 'top line' officers, perhaps you did mean the same as me, just worded it strangely.

[NigelFargate]

I think you misunderstood. A Captain is a Captain whether they are in the infantry or engineers. I was saying that the engineering officers tend to come from state schools or non-military backgrounds, whereas the infantry ones come from public schools.

 

Not sure what you meant by 'top line' officers, perhaps you did mean the same as me, just worded it strangely.

 

You are right, I need to brush up on my understanding of the ranking systems in the British army. I was using the terms 'line' and 'staff' in the traditional sense, i.e. that staff in this context meant support to the 'line', i.e. the soldiers actually doing the fighting (but to confuse matters further, the term 'General Staff' used to have a different meaning), but I bow to your knowledge and personal experience of army hierarchies, as I confess never to have worn the Queen's coat.

 

But what I was really getting at is whether or not the top jobs in the armed forces are still largely drawn from the public school elites.

[sgtkate]

You are right, I need to brush up on my understanding of the ranking systems in the British army. I was using the terms 'line' and 'staff' in the traditional sense, i.e. that staff in this context meant support to the 'line', i.e. the soldiers actually doing the fighting (but to confuse matters further, the term 'General Staff' used to have a different meaning), but I bow to your knowledge and personal experience of army hierarchies, as I confess never to have worn the Queen's coat.

 

But what I was really getting at is whether or not the top jobs in the armed forces are still largely drawn from the public school elites.

 

Probably yes. But then look at any big organisation. I doubt it's much worse.

 

Actually I'm wrong, from the Guardian:http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/28/elitism-in-britain-breakdown-by-profession

 

 

62% of all senior army officers come from private schools. I assume by senior they mean General or above.

[tinfoilhat]

Probably yes. But then look at any big organisation. I doubt it's much worse.

 

Actually I'm wrong, from the Guardian:http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/28/elitism-in-britain-breakdown-by-profession

 

 

62% of all senior army officers come from private schools. I assume by senior they mean General or above.

 

That's a very broad description from the guardian - they should narrow it down. I agree with your experiences, some regiments I'd suggest that the ratio of officers coming from public schools is way higher than 62% ! RAF and Navy I found harder to pick as there tends to be a bigger age range.

[buck]

Truth hurts Kate

 

I can't help you with that

Sergeant Kate needs no help from the likes of you. She comes from a brotherhood (sisterhood ) of some of the finest human beings ever conceived. we're called the NCOs of the Military. Mine was Chief Petty Officer in the RN, we're respected by Generals and Admirals, feared by cadets and midshipmen, and we tolerate privates and seamen and airmen. Very few of us kill for pleasure, the one's who do it when they have to sometimes have grief over it. Have you any idea what life for you would be if your ancestors had not been defended by people like us. Give it a rest!!