Originally Posted by bitontheslide (Post 11456249)

there are several things going on here. First, the tories view the reform party as a threat in the election that could suck away tory voters. Suggesting national service, takes away some of their thunder.

Second, if things deteriorate further in europe, we may need to introduce some training to ready everybody for worst case scenarios going forward, however, the only reason to mention it in the run up to an election, is to try and unsettle labour, and force them into making a mis statement on defence. That to me is the main purpose of bringing it up, because they have absolutely no need to mention it. If, in the future, our families are at risk of death from war, there will be plenty volunteers.

Originally Posted by Ammi (Post 11456251)

…any ‘deterioration’ of anything is because of our own government and how they’ve approached, well basically anything on any level…policing, fire services/health services etc…remove the budgeting and then ‘draft in’ free or cheap work power under the guise of ‘National Service’ and for the greater good of the Tory party …pffffftttt….theyre beyond outrageous…

Originally Posted by bitontheslide (Post 11456249)

there are several things going on here. First, the tories view the reform party as a threat in the election that could suck away tory voters. Suggesting national service, takes away some of their thunder.

Originally Posted by DemRed (Post 11455997)

Oh I don't know. I think some people on here likely did, going by their attitude.

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy (Post 11456272)

What we do have though is a rapidly aging population and if we do ever need to introduce compulsory national service, it'll be as carers not soldiers. Armed with wet wipes not guns.

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 11456279)

Why isnt this deleted..age falls under the same discriminatory laws as disability and gender.

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11456287)

You can't be anti-disabled?:bawling:

Whatever happened to the good old days where you could mock people in wheelchairs?:nono:

But being serious, I think everyone would probably be banned off of the Internet if we're punishing people for prejudiced comments, especially ageist comments.

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 11456288)

Deleting a comment an ageism comment isnt punishing someone. Its protecting someone from feeling punished for being old.

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy (Post 11456271)

This part is correct the plan is written on sugar paper and will dissolve as soon as the election is over, either way.

Just nonsense, when there's talk of increasing defense spending it's for equipment, R&D and increased recruitment of professionals.

Bombs, missiles, planes, boats, pilots, engineers. Not feet in boots.

The UK has no need of a militia because we're an island - if enemy combatants are on the ground on UK soil the war is OVER. This was true in WW2 and it's true today.

A modern military like the UK's has no use for barely trained grunts with a rifle in hand. That's just not modern warfare. One attack helicopter is worth thousands of conscripts. War is won by $$$ not numbers.

If you want proof you need ONLY look at Ukraine, where Russian numbers have been bashing up against Western money and resources for well over a year now and making little progress. Ukraine is vastly outnumbered. It's not because of teenagers with peashooters it's because of US/Europe funded and supplied drones, ammunition and tech.

Originally Posted by bitontheslide (Post 11456307)

i don't think you understand our commitment to NATO. I'm not suggesting there will be an invasion on our home soil, but there could easily be one in any of the NATO countries bordering Russia. Who do you think guards and defends those borders? We will, as part of NATO, that's the whole point of it

Russian numbers aren't even an issue yet. They haven't done a proper mobilisation yet.

The biggest issue any country has is replenishing ammo, armour and aircraft and Russia have converted over to a war economy. Unless we move to a similar footing, we will get beaten and the first step of that is getting people trained and prepared. Not just to fight on the front line, but to up our game in intelligence and cyber warfare., drone technology etc etc etc

Preparation for war is as much a state of mind as anything else

Originally Posted by Zizu (Post 11456332)

Maybe we should just worry about defending ourselves ONLY ??

Is that possible ??

Then we could concentrate on having an amazing air force … stationed the length and breadth of the island .. and ground defence systems around the perimeter of our island/s


I can dream ..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy (Post 11456271)

This part is correct the plan is written on sugar paper and will dissolve as soon as the election is over, either way.

Just nonsense, when there's talk of increasing defense spending it's for equipment, R&D and increased recruitment of professionals.

Bombs, missiles, planes, boats, pilots, engineers. Not feet in boots.

The UK has no need of a militia because we're an island - if enemy combatants are on the ground on UK soil the war is OVER. This was true in WW2 and it's true today.

A modern military like the UK's has no use for barely trained grunts with a rifle in hand. That's just not modern warfare. One attack helicopter is worth thousands of conscripts. War is won by $$$ not numbers.

If you want proof you need ONLY look at Ukraine, where Russian numbers have been bashing up against Western money and resources for well over a year now and making little progress. Ukraine is vastly outnumbered. It's not because of teenagers with peashooters it's because of US/Europe funded and supplied drones, ammunition and tech.

Originally Posted by Ammi (Post 11456338)

…just to add to this being about trying to think of solutions to pad out essential services that this government has destroyed with lack of funding…(…and rather than just put the funding back in…) …there is no one left to train young people because the services are so bare and minimum and barely getting through their own days, let alone what the training of inexperience would involve…the whole concept is without any logic whatsoever….

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 11456357)

No matter how technological war becomes there will always be a need for infantry.

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 11456279)

Why isnt this deleted..age falls under the same discriminatory laws as disability and gender.