|
crankedup
Original Poster
9,237 posts
112 months
|
Give this another go to see what PH makes of it this year. Loads of positives to be had from conscription for the Country and individual. Whats not to like?
|
|
|
Eric Mc
67,253 posts
134 months
|
Are you talking about military service or general social service?
|
|
|
Derek Smith
16,015 posts
117 months
|
And the money is coming from where?
|
|
|
B Huey
4,881 posts
68 months
|
crankedup said: Give this another go to see what PH makes of it this year. Loads of positives to be had from conscription for the Country and individual. Whats not to like? You might have enjoyed it, I wouldn't.
|
|
|
LordHaveMurci
3,115 posts
38 months
|
Derek Smith said: And the money is coming from where? Surely it would pay for itself if the conscripts were unemployed and/or minor offenders?
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Bluebarge
2,103 posts
47 months
|
LordHaveMurci said: Surely it would pay for itself if the conscripts were unemployed and/or minor offenders? You still have to pay them, house them, feed them, train them, transport them and kit them out. Or is the plan for a new Dads Army with potato peelers strapped to brrom handles?
|
|
|
LordHaveMurci
3,115 posts
38 months
|
Bluebarge said: LordHaveMurci said: Surely it would pay for itself if the conscripts were unemployed and/or minor offenders? You still have to pay them, house them, feed them, train them, transport them and kit them out. Or is the plan for a new Dads Army with potato peelers strapped to brrom handles? But we pay them, feed them & house them now & get feck all in return don't we? Plus the training may well put many of them on a different course in life that will save money & resources down the years.
|
|
|
rhinochopig
16,048 posts
67 months
|
Bluebarge said: LordHaveMurci said: Surely it would pay for itself if the conscripts were unemployed and/or minor offenders? You still have to pay them, house them, feed them, train them, transport them and kit them out. Or is the plan for a new Dads Army with potato peelers strapped to brrom handles? Yeah but they spend their cash on Buckfast from the local Tesco whereas the forces spend it on booze and hookers abroad.
|
|
|
LordHaveMurci
3,115 posts
38 months
|
rhinochopig said: Yeah but they spend their cash on Buckfast from the local Tesco whereas the forces spend it on booze and hookers abroad. Booze & hookers abroad? lol The only places our Forces get sent now have a noticeable deficit of either I suspect!
|
|
|
rhinochopig
16,048 posts
67 months
|
LordHaveMurci said: rhinochopig said: Yeah but they spend their cash on Buckfast from the local Tesco whereas the forces spend it on booze and hookers abroad. Booze & hookers abroad? lol The only places our Forces get sent now have a noticeable deficit of either I suspect! Well to be fair I did have the Navy - in particular submariners - when I posted that. That said, never underestimate the ability of your average PBI to sniff out some light recreation ANYWHERE in the world.
|
|
|
Asterix
16,362 posts
97 months
|
Why make scrotes part of the professional Forces we have - it could only dilute operational capability. Send them to a boot camp and give them a thorough seeing to, fine, those that like it could apply for the regulars, those that don't keep getting beasted and perform community works for the benefit of others.
You want the chavs we have now able to have access and training for firearms? We don't have the society for that anymore.
|
|
|
Derek Smith
16,015 posts
117 months
|
LordHaveMurci said: Derek Smith said: And the money is coming from where? Surely it would pay for itself if the conscripts were unemployed and/or minor offenders? I have the feeling that you mastered finances late in life. I'd rather have the money spent on a decent police service. Would this include those going to uni? They are, after all, very expensive with the loans and everything. What about the kids of the rich who haven't a job? Do we allow them to avoid conscription? I think that if this is a serious proposition then at the very least we need some sort of plan, with the costs and benefits weighed rather carefully. Conscription was very expensive and it was stopped because it couldn't be afforded rather than any other. It would, in fact, be much cheaper to drop the cost of uni and extend education until the age of 21.
|
|
|
rs1952
3,273 posts
128 months
|
This was touched upon in the "Common Sense party manifesto" thread. Here's what I posted there: Perhaps you are too young to know that one of the major reasons National Service was dispensed with was that the armed forces didn't want the buggers. They were a pain in the arse. Only there for a short period and most of them not the slightest bit interested in being there. They took up time and equipment for no clear advantage to a country that wasn't at war, and cost the country a bleedin' fortune whist they were wasting the armed forces' time. Another point worth bearing in mind is that the few that might be interested end up with a far better training in how to use guns properly on other people than those who haven't been in the services. Not sure that you'd like to meet many of 'em down a dark alley late at night  I can't personally see how young blokes today are going to be any less of a pain in the arse to the armed forces than were their grandfathers in the 1950s. In fact, they would probably be more of a headache for their "hosts" - after all, they've all got "ooman rights" now, as opposed to the last lot, who didn't, or at least weren't told that they did
|
|
|
Blue62
1,391 posts
21 months
|
Got to agree with that RS, the army neither wants nor can afford it. Was it really called National Conscription Service? I thought it was just national service.
|
|
|
LordHaveMurci
3,115 posts
38 months
|
Derek Smith said: LordHaveMurci said: Derek Smith said: And the money is coming from where? Surely it would pay for itself if the conscripts were unemployed and/or minor offenders? I have the feeling that you mastered finances late in life. I'd rather have the money spent on a decent police service. Would this include those going to uni? They are, after all, very expensive with the loans and everything. What about the kids of the rich who haven't a job? Do we allow them to avoid conscription? I think that if this is a serious proposition then at the very least we need some sort of plan, with the costs and benefits weighed rather carefully. Conscription was very expensive and it was stopped because it couldn't be afforded rather than any other. It would, in fact, be much cheaper to drop the cost of uni and extend education until the age of 21. Had I have mastered finances I'd be considerably wealthier than I am! And did you not notice my use of question marks? Some very interesting points & replies made though, enjoyable & educational 
|
|
|
crankedup
Original Poster
9,237 posts
112 months
|
Another idea down the toilet then, oh well lets keep paying out JSA then.
|
|
|
thinfourth2
23,507 posts
73 months
|
crankedup said: Another idea down the toilet then, oh well lets keep paying out JSA then. Or we stop paying JSA and use the army to clean up the mess caused by chav unable to afford the latest trainers
|
|
|
Taff107
128 posts
18 months
|
That ship sailed long ago. The Army is overstretched and undermanned as it is. All it needs on top, is to be burdened with trying to 'control' idiots who don't want to be there. Anyway, the UK will be fine come 2020 with the restructure and increase of TA. Hmmmmm...... 
|
|
|
Derek Smith
16,015 posts
117 months
|
Taff107 said: That ship sailed long ago. The Army is overstretched and undermanned as it is. All it needs on top, is to be burdened with trying to 'control' idiots who don't want to be there. Anyway, the UK will be fine come 2020 with the restructure and increase of TA. Hmmmmm...... The odd thing is that I've seen a costing for an increased size TA and a lowering of the numbers in the regulars. It would appear that it will cost more, and not an inconsiderable amount, to have a TA. On top of that, unless the law is changed there is, as I understand it, no way to enforce the TA to mobilse. What is also clear is that we would not have been able to run the Olympics without regulars.
|
|
|
Symbolica
8,860 posts
84 months
|
LordHaveMurci said: Derek Smith said: And the money is coming from where? Surely it would pay for itself if the conscripts were unemployed and/or minor offenders? The military might object for a start. They've got enough problems right now, why would they want to waste time trying to train up a bunch of f  king wasters?
|
|
