Hypothetical question - If we had conscription…
Discussion
Read an article on line this morning, that the Government are not considering conscription, with the usual caveat, got me thinking, last time we had conscription, as far as I am aware, would have been during WW2, and in the 70 or so years since, the world has changed massively, who would be required to conscript, given that women are no longer regarded as “the weaker” sex, would they be called up. What about trans people, etc etc, it’s a minefield (no pun intended).
I think they should actually bring back some sort of paid conscription, not necessarily military. Military service could be one option people could choose, but also other civil/community/ healthcare roles that directly contribute to society and certain volunteer type roles that could be done part time, depending on circumstances. That way everyone would be suited to something. It should also be included that immigrants, of any kind should be included and contribute in some way as a condition of being allowed to be here. Also those that are out of work for a certain period of time should be automatically enrolled onto a scheme until they find full time work.
Think conscription should be limited to those over 50.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
valiant said:
Think conscription should be limited to those over 50.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
I think if they decided to bring an kind of national service back, I think everyone under retirement age should have some sort of role to play. Obviously not as a grunt in the army, but hours spend doing something that contributes to society. I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
About the only place I can think of where conscription actually works is Israel. They have have multiple potential existential threats on all of their borders & survival of the Jewish state is drummed into kids from an early age. Even then, there is pre-conscription testing to weed out the wrong-uns, as it costs serious money to retain people with issues.
As for it working here: not a chance! Apart from the ££billions required to set up training camps, food, uniforms, etc, can you imagine giving Ugg & Ugg from a sink estate live ammo??
Anyway, it's pretty unlikely we'll be attacked by our neighbours.
As for it working here: not a chance! Apart from the ££billions required to set up training camps, food, uniforms, etc, can you imagine giving Ugg & Ugg from a sink estate live ammo??
Anyway, it's pretty unlikely we'll be attacked by our neighbours.
valiant said:
Think conscription should be limited to those over 50.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
valiant said:
Think conscription should be limited to those over 50.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
I think upper age in Ukraine at the moment for those not allowed to leave the country is 70 (?).I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
There's a fair few on the front lines in their 40s & 50s.
From what I understand, it is seriously expensive.
There's plenty of threads highlighting either the lack of public spending or too much tax, or both.
Anyone not talking about those two things is talking about too much waste in the public sector. Putting society through military training would be wasteful to the point of ridiculousness. What role would they serve? What signal would it t send?
I recall a significant proportion of casualties in ww2 was either military vehicle collisions or accidental discharged (or VD). God only knows what damage they'd do, as I suspect we haven't got enough professional soldiers to even train them.
My bil is in the RAF - accommodation is crap (not just the hotels) so we'd need a whole new estate infrastructure.
The swiss / Finnish etc who have mandatory military training are a fundamentally different society to ours.
People who want to contribute would be better f paying an extra 5% income tax, or lending money to an interest free war bond affair.
I mentally file constriptition with the "bring back corporal punishment" crowd - life was worse back then "but we were happy" etc.
There's plenty of threads highlighting either the lack of public spending or too much tax, or both.
Anyone not talking about those two things is talking about too much waste in the public sector. Putting society through military training would be wasteful to the point of ridiculousness. What role would they serve? What signal would it t send?
I recall a significant proportion of casualties in ww2 was either military vehicle collisions or accidental discharged (or VD). God only knows what damage they'd do, as I suspect we haven't got enough professional soldiers to even train them.
My bil is in the RAF - accommodation is crap (not just the hotels) so we'd need a whole new estate infrastructure.
The swiss / Finnish etc who have mandatory military training are a fundamentally different society to ours.
People who want to contribute would be better f paying an extra 5% income tax, or lending money to an interest free war bond affair.
I mentally file constriptition with the "bring back corporal punishment" crowd - life was worse back then "but we were happy" etc.
To answer your question OP this issue was subject of a survey in January this year by you gov. It showed that 72% of the public think yes, women should be conscripted with 42% of them thinking it should be in the same basis as men and 30% thinking there should be some restrictions on what they do.
On the question of refusing to serve even if conscripted 32% of men aged 18-40 and 43% of women aged 18-40 said they would not serve.
Only 12% of men and 3% of women (18-&0) said they would volunteer for military service.
One of the opinions pieces in the Telegraph last week highlighted the survey stating that the biggest threat to the Government of being able to fight a war was the fact few people (the author just mentioned men, obvioulsy disregarding the fact that women would be considered for conscripted too) would be willing to fight.
I don’t think we can say categorically that conscription will or will not happen, it really depends upon the situation but it’s already been announced by Poland and one of the Baltic states too.
Personally I believe if men are conscripted so should women be, unless of course women want to argue that they didn’t mean that type of equality!
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/48473-more-...
On the question of refusing to serve even if conscripted 32% of men aged 18-40 and 43% of women aged 18-40 said they would not serve.
Only 12% of men and 3% of women (18-&0) said they would volunteer for military service.
One of the opinions pieces in the Telegraph last week highlighted the survey stating that the biggest threat to the Government of being able to fight a war was the fact few people (the author just mentioned men, obvioulsy disregarding the fact that women would be considered for conscripted too) would be willing to fight.
I don’t think we can say categorically that conscription will or will not happen, it really depends upon the situation but it’s already been announced by Poland and one of the Baltic states too.
Personally I believe if men are conscripted so should women be, unless of course women want to argue that they didn’t mean that type of equality!
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/48473-more-...
valiant said:
Think conscription should be limited to those over 50.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
You jest but I agree and really do think that conscription should be held back until all those promoting it volunteer first and put them on the front line, not office jobs. If they're too old, put their children there. Then ask them their opinion, because until then it didn't really matter.I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
I want them kicking in a potentially booby trapped door with a gunner in the room in a third world s
thole before they decide to send me to war. It's a small ask lol.If the UK wants to increase its armed forces conscription is not the way to do it and I don't think it's necessary.
borcy said:
I think Cameron mentioned some form of national service (not necessarily military) and sunak mentioned national service.
Both times they ended up as a figure of fun for mentioning it. Common in Europe, but cultural its a step too far here.
I don't think we'll ever see it again.
A bold prediction.Both times they ended up as a figure of fun for mentioning it. Common in Europe, but cultural its a step too far here.
I don't think we'll ever see it again.
valiant said:
Think conscription should be limited to those over 50.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
Er, 53 year old here. And no, I certainly do not call for the young to be called up! Far from it.I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
If we're thinking about Ukraine, then there is not a chance hell my Son will be going there to fight as a result of Sir Keirs war mongering. Absolutely no chance.
Gordon Hill said:
It would have to be done properly, by providing safe spaces for the conscripts if Sergeant Major hurt feelings.
When I was there you'd get a punch in the face when you did something wrong, thankfully that has largely been eradicated but yes it is much easier than it used to be from what I've heard but then most of the stuff you did was pointless.valiant said:
Think conscription should be limited to those over 50.
I’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
That'll do me, spend the 15 years before retirement in a secure job that I know I can't fI’m sure the armed services will find something for them to do for a year or two without sending them to the front line.
It’s always this age group calling for the young to be called up knowing they’re perfectly safe shouting from the sidelines. Let’s see how enthusiastic they’d be if they were the first to be called up.
kup as long as I do as I'm told, count me in. truth be told the army doesn't want conscription or at least didn't when I was there, who wants to babysit a load of people that don't want to be there, It would be a nightmare getting them do do anything meaningful.Sheets Tabuer said:
That'll do me, spend the 15 years before retirement in a secure job that I know I can't fkup as long as I do as I'm told, count me in. truth be told the army doesn't want conscription or at least didn't when I was there, who wants to babysit a load of people that don't want to be there, It would be a nightmare getting them do do anything meaningful.
Precisely, but that's politics. You'll get those conscripts whether you want them or not.kup as long as I do as I'm told, count me in. truth be told the army doesn't want conscription or at least didn't when I was there, who wants to babysit a load of people that don't want to be there, It would be a nightmare getting them do do anything meaningful.It's not going to happen but it's good to air all the reasons why it's a stupid idea.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff