[News] Should we Bring Back National Service?

[sparkie]

I think there are a couple of questions that sit before this poll:

do you foresee this country being under direct threat from a foreign power in the next 5-10 years?
if so, should the country defend itself, way of life and values?
If yes, then how best do we best prepare for this?
If no, we dont need to do anything.

Yes. Moderately likely but not totally guaranteed. No Fate etc.

Yes. Defend for sure.

Best prepare by listening to the experts.

 

[beorhthelm]

It’d be hard to take seriously any Government seeking to conscript a citizen soldiery which has simultaneously failed to take action to take key industries back from privatisation and usually into foreign ownership (railways, steel manufacture, weapons development, communications networks).

You can’t cosplay as Churchill with conscription without also rolling back Thatcherism.

rail and industry was all privately owned until late 40's. the decline of our industry happened under nationalisation.

not necessarily because of, but it evidently didn't help.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Technology.... that's where it will be at.... flying and shielding against small battlefield drones... IT espionage.....

If there was a large scale war, the satellites would be the first thing to be disabled. The RN is fully reliant on the internet for communications now, and very few know morse code now, except for replenishment at sea, which is more reliant on semaphore.
Elon Musk would bring his Starlink down without hesitation if Putin paid him enough!!

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

rail and industry was all privately owned until late 40's. the decline of our industry happened under nationalisation.

British industry had been declining compared to other countries for decades by the 1940s.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

This is one of the rare occasions trump is right when he says NATO counties need to start paying what they have signed up to.

There is no excuse for countries not to spend the required amount currently to try and keep Europe safe.

Britain is one of those failing to spend the 2% of GDP thanks to the Tories wasting money on their cronies and donors. The little they do pay is on white elephants like the two newish carriers which don’t work properly.
Iceland doesn’t have to pay as they don’t have a defence force.

As ever, Trump talks in headlines, rather than details.

rhttps://www.forces.net/news/world/nato-which-countries-pay-their-share-defence

 

[Thunder Bolt]

rail and industry was all privately owned until late 40's. the decline of our industry happened under nationalisation.

not necessarily because of, but it evidently didn't help.

Industry in Britain declined because of technology in the Far East.
Our railways had little investment from successive governments resulting in many lines being closed instead of electrified.

 

[beorhthelm]

not sure why we need debate about national service, when the basic premise "we need more armed forces" is answered by enlarging the armed forces. pay more, better kit, better accomodation, etc. you'd have to pay for that if you had national service anyway.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Britain is one of those failing to spend the 2% of GDP thanks to the Tories wasting money on their cronies and donors. The little they do pay is on white elephants like the two newish carriers which don’t work properly.
Iceland doesn’t have to pay as they don’t have a defence force.

As ever, Trump talks in headlines, rather than details.

rhttps://www.forces.net/news/world/nato-which-countries-pay-their-share-defence

Britain is one of those failing to spend the 2% of GDP thanks to the Tories wasting money on their cronies and donors. The little they do pay is on white elephants like the two newish carriers which don’t work properly.
Iceland doesn’t have to pay as they don’t have a defence force.

As ever, Trump talks in headlines, rather than details.

rhttps://www.forces.net/news/world/nato-which-countries-pay-their-share-defence

Link doesn't work

Headlines or not, he's right, we are relying on the States swooping in to rescue Europe as we are so under prepared and can't even keep NATO funded as agreed

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Link doesn't work

Headlines or not, he's right, we are relying on the States swooping in to rescue Europe as we are so under prepared and can't even keep NATO funded as agreed

NATO isn’t funded as such. Countries in NATO are expected to spend 2% of the GDP on defence. There is a difference.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

NATO isn’t funded as such. Countries in NATO are expected to spend 2% of the GDP on defence. There is a difference.

Same thing, funding our armed force to meet nato agreement.

Nato: Which countries are paying their fair share on defence?

The alliance expects each member nation to spend at least 2% of its gross domestic product on defence, but plenty are falling short.

www.forces.net

Lots of big hitters here that don't, UK is just over the 2%

Chart is from 2023, so could be slightly out of date.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Same thing, funding our armed force to meet nato agreement.

Nato: Which countries are paying their fair share on defence?

The alliance expects each member nation to spend at least 2% of its gross domestic product on defence, but plenty are falling short.

www.forces.net

Lots of big hitters here that don't, UK is just over the 2%

Chart is from 2023, so could be slightly out of date.

How are we relying on the USA to swoop in, as you quoted?
In two world wars, the USA only got involved when it suited them, not from any altruistic point of view. I know many Yanks think they are the saviours of the world, but contrary to what Hollywood says, is Europeans managed reasonably well.
Trump is using figures for propaganda. He doesn’t really care about Europe nor even know who owns what. He had a tantrum when he found out Denmark wouldn’t sell Greenland.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

Voluntary military service with a very large incentive to do it doesn't seem a bad idea to me.

When I went to Cuba a good while back, while I was there I got talking to a local.
One of the many things he shared was their National Service policy.
1 year compulsory at 17/18 - if you then go on to do a 2nd year voluntarily, you get the option to go on to university after.

 

[Wardy's twin]

if we turn the question around 180 degrees ...

Would you fight if Russia (or another country) invaded and if so have you got military training ?

The whole subject came up because this country military forces are currently too small to do the job asked of it let alone fight a major war.

To me the answer is firstly to make conditions much better for existing service people , to keep what we have and encourage more recruits , secondly we should look at compulsory military training e.g. a couple of months basic stuff but fall short of military service.

 

[BadFish]

Yes, when we had national service before no-one did anything wrong because of discipline. The bloody youth of today could do with being yelled at and forced into doing stuff that I (never) had to do.

to sum up, grrr, young people, woke, in my my day, never did me any harm etc.

Or to put it another way . . . . No

 

[Bakero]

A voluntary year...between 16-18 years old. I don't mean the type of basic training a lot of us went through whilst serving in the armed forces, but a scheme which could help the youngsters integrate better into adulthood. At that age, they would be exempt from active duty, so their mummies and daddies wouldn't have to worry about their little darlings being blown up

That's a weird dig

 

[BadFish]

That's a weird dig

Bloody snowflakes, those parents worrying about their kids on active duty.

They really need to grow a pair.

 

[BadFish]

A voluntary year...between 16-18 years old. I don't mean the type of basic training a lot of us went through whilst serving in the armed forces, but a scheme which could help the youngsters integrate better into adulthood. At that age, they would be exempt from active duty, so their mummies and daddies wouldn't have to worry about their little darlings being blown up

Out of interest, what are the skills that they could teach to help youngsters integrate into adulthood better?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

if we turn the question around 180 degrees ...

Would you fight if Russia (or another country) invaded and if so have you got military training ?

The whole subject came up because this country military forces are currently too small to do the job asked of it let alone fight a major war.

To me the answer is firstly to make conditions much better for existing service people , to keep what we have and encourage more recruits , secondly we should look at compulsory military training e.g. a couple of months basic stuff but fall short of military service.

That would involve government spending, which is an anathema to the current lot.

 

[Justice]

What I would like to see is a return to proper apprenticeships. We need builders, sparks, plumbers etc.

Don’t believe this myth, if you are a tradesman and choose to work for a biggish company the wages offered are bang average which isn’t screaming a shortage of tradesman. I’ve seen it way busier than what it currently is.

 

[zefarelly]

Out of interest, what are the skills that they could teach to help youngsters integrate into adulthood better?

A little respect Would be a good start. Not for authority per se ( they've proved themselves to be well worthy of disrespect) but for your fellow man.

If you're in your mid teens and delivering all the hallmarks of being a weapons grade scrote, planning on leaving school with no perceivable qualifications to be a professional drain and irritant then some form of additional training must be a good thing. . . Teaching them to kill people wouldn't be on my list, but you get the jist.