Poll: Mandatory national service, yey or nay
- Thread starter Things change I've changed
- Start date
Yes definitely. Would teach some of the brats in this country some discipline. I think the generation before mine is the problem though. No family unity nowadays and the breakdown of marriages with scattered families is partly to blame for the bad kids nowadays.
Ah, as long as it would teach the minority of brats to fight it's all gravy. I see your point...
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,772
I don't think you could discipline a national service recruit who didn't want to be there today. When we had national service if you didn't do as you were told you'd soon know about it. Now you can't even touch a recruit, volunteers want to be there so they're easier to discipline. A national service guy who didn't want to do as he's told won't do anything for you and there wont be much you can do about it.
Yes essentially a vocational college, something akin to the military colleges in America.
Why would it be useless? You will essentially be doing a minimum of 6 months, which tbh is probably long enough for most people, shorter periods would be suitable for those going to university/college where they would then come back for another period during the next summer and those that would really benefit from it (those young offenders and those that got no qualifications from it) staying longer, up to a year or two.
Why would it be inefficient? It couldn't be any less inefficient than school normally is. You would pretty much be using the resources we already have (old army camps, military inctructors and apprenticeship) but combining them. This sort of think may even save money as there would probably be a fair few that would decide they don't want to go to university but carry on with the company/army they were assigned to in their national service.
Do you remember school?
Did you have sets for English maths science etc?
Did you ever attend the lower sets and see how little work as done with time spent trying to control the kids that dint want to work?
You're going to have that issue again.
Combined with the fact that a large number will have left school at 16 and gotten jobs and you're now going to say 2 years into work they are going to have to quit and go on a course for 6 months.
Which basically makes anyone 16-18 unemployable for anything other than part time/short time work work.
Did you have sets for English maths science etc?
Did you ever attend the lower sets and see how little work as done with time spent trying to control the kids that dint want to work?
You're going to have that issue again.
Combined with the fact that a large number will have left school at 16 and gotten jobs and you're now going to say 2 years into work they are going to have to quit and go on a course for 6 months.
Which basically makes anyone 16-18 unemployable for anything other than part time/short time work work.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 4,325
I aint doing national service. Why should I fight wars for americans.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 574
- Location
- GL52
BIG yey, can this be made a vote?
I don't think the work should be considered fighting or attacking as many have mentioned.
But more of a national guard, or even as an international service to provide facilities abroad.
I.e. like those pointless trips to Africa where you pay a bundle to do manual labour building schools and water pumps.
I don't think the work should be considered fighting or attacking as many have mentioned.
But more of a national guard, or even as an international service to provide facilities abroad.
I.e. like those pointless trips to Africa where you pay a bundle to do manual labour building schools and water pumps.
Sounds about right.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
It should start with proper discipline and morals from family and school. That's probably harder than national service, so, yes.
And this goes for every human being? Going by your logic the people in the army will have no morals or discipline... so how could they possibly teach others??
Yes, which is why I suggested officer material and grneral work. Those that were interested in doing something would be grouped together and learn together/sent off to work with out of the "camp", say with a RE company. Those that were being little ***** would spend their time running around the fields and lugging heavy weights until they decided they wanted to put some effort in learning something useful. With the variety you would have less people being little ***** than at school, just look at some of the biggest ***** in school, they go out and get a job and most settle down nicely, for a lot of them it is more they are forced to learn something they dont want to(the government is already trying to sort this out by providing more vocational courses in school). Those that still don't decide to learn get to shovel **** or empty ditches for two years...
I have to admit I didn't think of that, however that is something that all national service nations must face, so it would be interesting to see how they handle it. My suggestion was to work with companies though, so it could very well turn out to be the case that a lot of companies find it beneficial, they can get their employee trained for free in something that may benefit them, or even work with the national service group so the person could at least work part time with them and have that taken as part of their training. That's the beauty of having a flexible system. You don't just take all 18 year olds, teach them to shoot and then send them off somewhere random but do something that will further them, working with companies to help everyone.
Yeah, obviously there would be issues and problems but there are in every idea, including the general mandatory national service. I think however something like I suggested would be far better. TBH I'd love to do something like that (especially now at 23 and sat at home unemployed after uni, I can't even give my time awat at the moment!) and I think a lot of others would too as they could do things that at the moment they have to pay for for free...
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 1,873
for the unemployed ,yes .
Nay, I mean at what age would it be imposed? Would you get to opt out if attending university or other further education?
It would ruin the lives of some of the more talented people in the country, whilst possibly forcing some of the little scrotes to grow up a bit.
So Nay
It would ruin the lives of some of the more talented people in the country, whilst possibly forcing some of the little scrotes to grow up a bit.
So Nay
Very similar to what my view is.
2 years is far to long, as is 1 year. 6 months is just about right and if can be split into two 3 month periods doesn't seem all that much, but is definatley enough to throw in some discipline and key life skills.
Also, any longer and said youths will become a major liability to the armed forces. Why train someone for a year or two years without ever being able to deploy them?
Or from a politicians view 'We can't forcibly send them to a war that is highly unpopular!'
I know many people who would benefit from this greatly. Myself included.
As to the statement of service being 'mandatory punishment', it's no different to school. You learn and get fit. The cons being...you replace 6 months of nothing to 6 months of improving your character.
Around me, when this issue comes up, the main reason that people don't want to is because their afraid of anything military-ish and being ragged around a field. Nanny state must be there to help shield them from all the sharp edges in the world
Last edited:
I don't think Pyro would say the same somehow.
Absolutely not, it's a very draconian policy and has no place in civilised countries. And anyone with an anxiety disorder would be totally ******.
Didn’t seem to do much good in our school the same people got caned over and over again.
