[Ammi]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

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.

…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…

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Ammi

…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…

Tbf, many of our kind and caring nurses and NHS workers just upped sticks and buggered of back to where they came from when we left the EU...and we did that, not our government.

[Crimson Dynamo]

SIR – I was inspired to read about the Prime Minister’s plans for compulsory
National Service for 18-year-olds.

However, I think a similar scheme for MPs and other public servants would be
more useful.

Bill Galvin
Stockport, Cheshire

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

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.

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

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.

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.

[user104658]

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.

[Ammi]

…a modern day ‘war’ conflict would never be in any way about needing a National Service type system…the only reason for that to be adopted and to happen is because the government have squeezed the budgets of all of the country services and this is a form of forcing young people into those services that they’ve stripped within an inch of any type of effectiveness…I mean, is there no low that this government won’t go to…it seems not…they create the monster that becomes almost unfixable….

[Beso]

Originally Posted by DemRed

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

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

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

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.

As of now we are still wiping the arses of the nappy wearing 13-25 year olds.(perhaps national service might wake them up to life)...its karma coming collecting when we, get to frail.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by parmnion

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

You can't be anti-disabled?

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

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.

We (as a society) need to stop having such knee-jerk reactions towards words.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

You can't be anti-disabled?

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

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.

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

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by parmnion

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

I just feel that actions speak louder than words.

I've read some insanely hateful stuff about white men on the Internet over the last couple of years, but I'd never demand for them to be deleted.

1. Freedom of speech.

And 2. You get to know an individual's real views if they're allowed to express more negative opinions, rather than the fake hug a hoodie persona that some people do like to portray on the Internet.

Imo 2 is even more important than the freedom of speech argument, you've got to be extra careful if people are being real with you nowadays.

I feel thankfully that I'm safe on TIBB, but that's because I've known you all for a very long time.

You do have to be careful on YouTube or any Social Media platform.

[Vanessa]

That is something I approve on.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

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.

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

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

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

Right but that involves the armed forces upping recruitment of young people who can be trained in cyber warfare and tech (as I said - pilots, engineers). Fund it, and you'll get plenty of applicants.

It's not Jimmy Jackson who failed foundation maths, plonked in army fatigues, handed a rifle and sent into a trench.

A strong modern military is well funded and highly skilled - not overflowing with random kids who don't want to be there. It's just not the reality of modern warfare.

[user104658]

Anyway like I said the reality of it is unworkable. In terms of culture, in terms of infrastructure, in terms of Compliance ("they'll go to JAIL!" I have bad news folks, those are already fkn full!) and it simply won't happen.

You would maybe - MAYBE - get a small pilot programme going in a few specific areas in around 5 years, that would run for a few more years, then never be expanded.

Funnily enough though they have "more quietly" added in the "it won't necessarily be military..." part.

So if it is real, I think the actual intention is to use unpaid/very cheap young "national service" labour to fill out understaffed health services with carers, porters and support workers. IF it ever happens and you fast forward a couple of decades, that's what 90% will be doing. Conscripted care of the elderly. A whole different type of dystopia, but at least no ones getting shot.

[Zizu]

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

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Zizu

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

I mean even if not one bomb falls on the UK, if Europe gets nuked then the fallout means all of our crops die and we get riddled with cancer/starve so the air force won't be much use. Tee hee.

[user104658]

Sometimes I honestly wonder what people have been sniffing though. If Russia actually ever goes to war with NATO it's game over. Not "we need to get on a war footing" but we need to have as much fun as physically possible in the few years we have left before we all die (or worse). Prepping for a war between Russia and NATO. Stop kidding yourself!

[Ammi]

…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….

[Beso]

1st lesson.

How to iron clothes.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

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.

I'm not sure about that actually. Ukraine's army is massive - it always was huge but now with conscription the manpower factor is bigger. It's a real meat grinder of a war where both sides are losing huge numbers. Obviously technology and weaponry are important but troop numbers is also vital

[Livia]

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

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Ammi

…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….

Dead right.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Livia

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

A need for infantry and a need for conscription/national service are completely different things.

[DemRed]

Originally Posted by parmnion

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

Wow I didn't know you were part of the cancel culture