Dads army ?

Living in Portsmouth, I'm fairly sure that once the sirens start we're best off just standing in the garden and waiting for our instant, 6,000°C+ suntan.

With three autistic kids, we wouldn't have time to explain why Duck & Cover doesn't have a "just finishing this round on Fortnite/Roblox/Minecraft" exemption and that in the event of a genuine WW3 situation, complaints of "why is our Ping so high?" will be replaced with "why did my PC just go ffFffzzzZzzt!?"

Same reason I'd give every member of the family a nice, warm "tramadol-laced super-sleep-inducing Horlicks" if a Last-of-Us type zombie apocalypse breaks out. Telling my Wife or kids "Shhhoosh!" has always resulted in a triple-decibel response asking why...
 
adidan said:
That sounds like the origin story of the main loner protagonist in a zombie flick i'd watch.
Click to expand...
"Why does he seem so sad, yet simultaneously happy-go-lucky..?"

"...and why does his food stockpile consist solely of instant mash and puréed apple & pear pouches??""
 
I_M_Weasel said:
In a rather cold way, a country using their older population like this makes sense.

They've had their economically active time and are about to shift to being a burden on the country and are more likely to need health care; their reproductive period is over, they've done their bit for the population. To lose people from this group won't really have a long term effect on your country and in someways might help.
Click to expand...
dr-evil-how-about-no.gif


So the reward for serving your country - split from your family for up to 6 months at a time, is to be called up again? Done my time, done my duty, time for the yoof to step up while i sit in my Hugh Hefner smoking jacket, smoking my pipe and waiting for that golden pension to keep dropping in.
 
Last edited:
I_M_Weasel said:
In a rather cold way, a country using their older population like this makes sense.

They've had their economically active time and are about to shift to being a burden on the country and are more likely to need health care; their reproductive period is over, they've done their bit for the population. To lose people from this group won't really have a long term effect on your country and in someways might help.
Click to expand...
I_M_Weasel said:
On the other hand losing your youth to war means that they will never get to economically contribute or reproduce and that might have long lasting effects on the country - I think what ever happens in the years to come both Russia and Ukraine are going to feel the pain of this war - both had poor reproductive rates anyway before the war.

The British army plan for ww3 was to use its reservists (TA at the time) to absorb the initial soviet thrust - cannon fodder to spare the regular forces so that they would be available for the counter attack.

Ukraine as shown that barely trained reservists with effective weapons could stop the Russians - especially when fighting in their own towns and villages against invaders who were stuck on the main road.

Would I rather it be me or my child that ends up conscripted in to a trench? Pass me the Rifle.
Click to expand...
Men can reproduce into their 90's.

Nah send the youngsters, they may be lucky, their crooked necks from staring at screens all day may mean bullets fly over where there heads should be.
 
Last edited:
adidan said:
Men can reproduce into their 90's.
Click to expand...
Well yes,but it isn't usually the age that people usually think about settling down and starting a family.

Just to be clear - I also did my time and have that reserve liability so I'm not saying this as someone who wouldn't be effected.

And I don't think it is fair - but I can completly see how it makes sense to the government.
 
I_M_Weasel said:
Well yes,but it isn't usually the age that people usually think about settling down and starting a family.

Just to be clear - I also did my time and have that reserve liability so I'm not saying this as someone who wouldn't be effected.

And I don't think it is fair - but I can completly see how it makes sense to the government.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was only joking really.

I can understand the logic but also as you get older many people generally give less of a crap about, well, most things.

The younger ones have more to fight for, their futures.

I'd hate to be in my teens/early twenties nowadays. Don't envy them one bit.
 
adidan said:
Yeah, I was only joking really.

I can understand the logic but also as you get older many people generally give less of a crap about, well, most things.

The younger ones have more to fight for, their futures.

I'd hate to be in my teens/early twenties nowadays. Don't envy them one bit.
Click to expand...
Yes, interesting times.

I don't think that people feel that we are really under threat - the war is a long way away; I'm sure people would be much more intested in joining up if they felt the enemy was on the beeches.

As much as the youth of today are cast as not willing - 10,000 still join every year and many more apply but don't make it through for one reason or another.
 
I_M_Weasel said:
Yes, interesting times.

I don't think that people feel that we are really under threat - the war is a long way away; I'm sure people would be much more intested in joining up if they felt the enemy was on the beeches.

As much as the youth of today are cast as not willing - 10,000 still join every year and many more apply but don't make it through for one reason or another.
Click to expand...
We've been used to relative stability (from the point of view of the general public that is) for a long time.

Wars happen elsewhere or to our parents, grandparents or great great grandparents.

Even the Falklands war isn't in the living memory of many and even though that was a serious conflict for us it didn't actively affect the whole population.

I think particularly if you're in, been in or have family who have been in the military you know how things could change drastically and quickly.
 
Penfold101 said:
Capita, I believe.
Click to expand...
Much maligned - the real problem is that the army have a huge number of areas that need to be just right and if you don't tick the box, you can't join. The army is incredibly risk adverse medically (perhaps with good reason), it is really hard to get through that step.
 
I've documented my attempt to join the army reserves at 48 elsewhere in these mighty fine forums (search for it if you really want to know), and although I'm even less fit now, I'd still put myself forward for this.
 
Actually, I'm not a reservist but if there's a free trip to Greenland I may be tempted to volunteer
 
aVdub said:
Looks exciting

www.theguardian.com

21st-century trench warfare – the Ukrainian frontline in pictures

EPA photographer Oleg Petrasyuk’s photos from eastern and southern frontlines offer an insight into Ukrainian soldiers’ daily lives between drone and artillery duels with Russian occupiers
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

If things do go south I don't think people in this country will spend much time in combat in conditions like Ukraine actually, and probably a good thing because I don't think most people can conceptualise the brutal reality of what the real front lines are like, especially in a situation where there isn't the support that it is possible to be lent by countries who aren't directly involved in the conflict which is helping to give Ukraine a fighting chance.
 
ivrytwr3 said:
This latest idea — recalling veterans up to 65 — isn’t policy. It’s panic. It’s what happens when a government realises too late that nobody believes in it, and instead of asking why, it reaches for the nearest generation that still remembers duty.

Let’s strip away the spin.

If young people won’t fight for you, that isn’t a failure of youth — it’s a damning indictment of leadership. You’ve spent years telling them Britain is broken, shameful, historically suspect, and morally inferior. You’ve taught them that patriotism is cringe, borders are optional, and the country itself is something to be managed, not loved.

And now you’re surprised they won’t bleed for it?

So your answer is to turn around and say to the old hands:
“Go on then, one more time.”

Men and women who already served.
Who already paid the price.
Who already carried the weight — physically and mentally — long after the uniforms came off.

Here’s the bit you fundamentally don’t understand, Keef:
they didn’t fight for politicians.
They didn’t fight for slogans, diversity statements, or focus-grouped values.
They fought for their mates, their families, their homes — for a country that meant something.

That country has been chipped away, mocked, diluted, apologised for, and managed into mediocrity by people like you. And now, when the cupboard is bare, you think you can knock on the door of the very people you helped discard, and demand loyalty on command.

You can’t conscript belief.
You can’t recall pride.
And you sure as hell can’t outsource courage to men with replaced knees and broken backs because your government inspires none.

This isn’t strength.
It’s institutional cowardice — hiding behind past generations because you’ve failed the present one.

So let’s be crystal clear:

If the young won’t fight for you —
the old won’t either.

They already gave enough.
And they won’t be guilt-tripped into propping up a government that has no idea what Britain is, what it stands for, or why anyone should defend it.

You don’t have a recruitment problem.
You have a legitimacy problem.

And no amount grey hair, or nostalgic press releases will fix that.

Quite like this!
Click to expand...

Since the criteria for activation has been dropped to war preparedness (rather than outright war) I suspect the reasoning is here is that the old hands will be called up to train the younger soldiers. From my understanding given by recently ex-mil colleagues that is one of the big issues facing the modern military (for flying roles the training pipeline can be up to 12 years - due to lack of capacity as the trainers are being utilised for operational jobs).

I suspect the rest of what you've written (or copied) could have been written by the older generation about the younger generation and the state of society at any point in the last few hundred years. I also think you have a rose tinted view of the cohesion of society in the past. In the 1970's as a child, I lived on a council estate in Wales - I'm not sure I recall the UK being the land of milk and honey you seem to think it was. In fact I'll go as far as to say I think things are a damn sight better for most people today than they were back then.

Things change and if push comes to shove I have no doubt the younger generation will fight just as yours did, or the one before or the one before that. I rather hope that the people pulling the strings (i.e. your and my generation) can somehow figure out a way for it not to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom