National Service Pros and Cons

[flynavy]

Hello

am part of a debate about to happen later on, can anyone embellish me with some quick facts about national service ie the pros and the cons so i can pitch some good questions!

 

[chieftiff]

Hello

am part of a debate about to happen later on, can anyone embellish me with some quick facts about national service ie the pros and the cons so i can pitch some good questions!

For:
A neverending supply of manpower.
Brings the Armed Forces into the public eye- amazing how support for the AF rises when your kids are in the firing line!
Children get an opportunity to become disciplined adults via a recognisable training regime.
Citizenship- you want to live here? do something positive for your country!
Criminals- minor first time offenders could be offered an option of extended National Service instead of Prison.

Against:
Kids who don't want to be there! Could we discipline them appropriately in todays liberal climate?
Poor pay- we couldn't pay them all well.
Bloody pacifists- they would drip like septic areseholes
Liberal do gooders- ditto
Human rights lawyers-ditto

That should do to start you off.

 

[Passed-over_Loggie]

The Forces have enough problems without being tasked to cure the ills of a liberal, feckless, consumerist and litigation prone society.

 

[Maxi_77]

I agree, professional forces and national service are not compatible. That of course does not mean that a 'really useful' gap year for the youf is not a bad idea, they just need to do it somewhere else, and on some one elses budget. It would need to be obligatory otherwise those that need it most would not take part. Also joining the forces or emergency services and perhaps a few other worthwhile jobs could gain one exemption from our new citizen making organisation, which should actualy achieve something for the benefit of mankind to give the little scrotes a sense of achievement at the end, and justify the exorbitant cost.

 

[Jack77]

As a general rule I don't believe in national service. As Maxi 77 has said, a professional defence force is not compatible with a relatively short period of national service - can you get 'value for money' from a nasho given that military training is far more complex and time consuming than in the past.

However, if you are going to have national service, then it is for everyone. No exceptions. No lotteries, exemptions for students, married, looking after your grannies cat etc. If you meet the physical and psychological standards then you are in. If you do not meet the standards then you will be found some other sort of public service to do.

 

[Jack_McHammocklashing]

Hello

am part of a debate about to happen later on, can anyone embellish me with some quick facts about national service ie the pros and the cons so i can pitch some good questions!

It depends on wether you mean national service in the past OR proposed national service in the future

IMHO

In the future it could not happen, as no dicipline would be allowed, so those that did not want to be there, thieves, and dirty people, would create caous to those that accepted and put up with it, and disaster to regulars
Though if included in new National Service was a return to real discipline, then it would be good, though pointless having an unlimited supply of sailors, with no ships to put them on

In the past it was an asset for man power for a huge fleet, that needed men of all trades to keep it running, and let the regulars get on with advancement and trade, though not well liked towards the end, as even with discipline available you still had an intake of thieves and unwilling

Unless the national service is pongo only then unlimited supply of cannon fodder for mr Bliar would be an asset

 

[dunkers]

Some European countries have compulsory national service but this does not necessarily mean military service. It can be some other kind of civic duty. Perhaps the same could work here.

There are of course potential discipline issues but they managed it in 1947-63 or whenever it was. They might not enjoy it at the time but it would do them good. Also not everyone of the affected age group would be unwilling, I would be quite happy to do it!

 

[Greenie]

As a general rule I don't believe in national service. As Maxi 77 has said, a professional defence force is not compatible with a relatively short period of national service - can you get 'value for money' from a nasho given that military training is far more complex and time consuming than in the past.

However, if you are going to have national service, then it is for everyone. No exceptions. No lotteries, exemptions for students, married, looking after your grannies cat etc. If you meet the physical and psychological standards then you are in. If you do not meet the standards then you will be found some other sort of public service to do.

Not sure about the Military training being 'more complex' todays headlines have been harping on about serving soldiers under age 18 being sent to war zones --well I think the joining age is over 16 so how long is the complex training!

Am a great believer in the 'National Service' idea. As for the dodgers and crims etc etc well it isn't something thats new--it happened in the old days
and was overcome. In fact it backfired on a lot of 'dodgers ' because the ones that did their time became a sort of elite on return to civvie street.
Also most of the old guys I have spoken to have never regretted it and are still proud that they did it.

 

[Confused_Andy]

one Big CON. Crims with weapon knowledge and training.... its bad enough with em not knowing what they're doing, give them the knowledge to look after and clean the weapons and ther'll be a rise in gun crime - and Many more shootings/deaths