Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Prescience

Would You Serve?

Recommended Posts

OK: here's the deal.

The British government or more correctly, what passes for a government decide due to an emergency, they need to bring back conscription for a time.

Would you serve and if so why?

If not, also why?

Are there any causes you would fight for and risk your life and limbs?

If not why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As officer class, yes, I think that would suit me.

In fact I think I would start growing the moustache as soon as it started looking likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant really answer this one, it would really depend on the circumstances and what was going on.

Generally speaking i find most of what the governments say to be a lie. So probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As officer class, yes, I think that would suit me.

In fact I think I would start growing the moustache as soon as it started looking likely.

Take it from this moustache: The trick is to be SENIOR officer class. Junior officers generally have a higher casualty rate than grunts. All to do with leading in dangerous situations, so I'm told. Not that I'd know anything about dangerous situations, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK: here's the deal.

The British government or more correctly, what passes for a government decide due to an emergency, they need to bring back conscription for a time.

Would you serve and if so why?

If not, also why?

Are there any causes you would fight for and risk your life and limbs?

If not why not?

If I was young again and unemployed I'd serve, because its the only time you're legally allowed to shoot people. And when you're not shooting people they pay for your beer. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK: here's the deal.

The British government or more correctly, what passes for a government decide due to an emergency, they need to bring back conscription for a time.

Would you serve and if so why?

If not, also why?

No, I would most certainly not serve. I would be willing to be sent to prison first.

I am a human being who shares the planet with loads of other human beings of similar need. I would not blindly "fight for my country" because our wretched, corrupt politicians have decided to go to war.

If our politicians, including the prime minister, were going to be fighting too, and our country was under direct attack, then maybe I would consider it.

That's why the recent "Armed Forces Day" was a total wash-out, the last few wars that Britain has been involved with have been total disasters, economically, politically and sociologically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Take it from this moustache: The trick is to be SENIOR officer class. Junior officers generally have a higher casualty rate than grunts. All to do with leading in dangerous situations, so I'm told. Not that I'd know anything about dangerous situations, of course.

Who said anything about front line?

Senior types need adjutants. Press palms get promoted, a token 3 week rotation on the nearly front lines and your in. I'll be pushing things across maps in no time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I was young again and unemployed I'd serve,

No: it's conscription: your choices if judged medically fit enough are:

i. To be conscripted and thus serve: no choice of regiment or what you will do:

ii. To agree to be a Non-Combatant only:

iii. To be a Conscientious Objector. Which means normally you are banged up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conscription is a legal requirement to serve in the armed forces, and in western democracies is usually only imposed for a specific purpose (usually when the country is attacked by another). This is distinct from national service, which is usually imposed for a set period of time in early adulthood and doesn't have to be military (though it can be and often is).

So there would have to be a very powerful reason to defy conscription, as to do so is a serious criminal offence. The armed forces don't want people who don't want to be there and don't believe in the reason for being there, as it reduces effectiveness and morale. So I can't imagine a scenario in which I'd defy conscription except in circumstances when a lot of other people would, too.

In practice I can only imagine it being introduced if this country was directly threatened militarily by a foreign aggressor. As any likely agressor would be able to attack us far more cheaply and far more effectively using economic rather than military methods, I can't see this happening any time soon. The only significant armed threat to this country in the short or medium term will come from terrorism, IMO; and the only effective way to defend against that is through a combination of competent and widespread intelligence services and tough legal action against the perpetrators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Conscription is a legal requirement to serve in the armed forces, and in western democracies is usually only imposed for a specific purpose (usually when the country is attacked by another). This is distinct from national service, which is usually imposed for a set period of time in early adulthood and doesn't have to be military (though it can be and often is).

So there would have to be a very powerful reason to defy conscription, as to do so is a serious criminal offence. The armed forces don't want people who don't want to be there and don't believe in the reason for being there, as it reduces effectiveness and morale. So I can't imagine a scenario in which I'd defy conscription except in circumstances when a lot of other people would, too.

In practice I can only imagine it being introduced if this country was directly threatened militarily by a foreign aggressor. As any likely agressor would be able to attack us far more cheaply and far more effectively using economic rather than military methods, I can't see this happening any time soon. The only significant armed threat to this country in the short or medium term will come from terrorism, IMO; and the only effective way to defend against that is through a combination of competent and widespread intelligence services and tough legal action against the perpetrators.

Damn you, bringing your logic and sense into this! :angry:

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I've tried to come up with a decent answer, and I can't. I guess it comes down to whether it involves the prospect of those I care about ending up on the receiving end of something nasty or not. In other words, in a WWII-type scenario, yes, I would certainly serve in a potentially violent* capacity.

Would I let my **** get dragged half way round the world to fight in some pointless political war a la Vietnam? Would I ******!

* I'm built for comfort, not for speed, so static defence would be the best bet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who sit in trenches being fired at eventually have a Damascus style moment when they realise they are putting their lives on the line for peanuts whilst all the people they know back home are out getting drunk, having curries, sh*gging and basically having a great time.

Even in WW2 many men away from home learnt of their wives, girlfriends and sisters lapping it up whilst they were being shot at in Burman, France and elsewhere.

What did Groucho Marx say - You go and fight for your country whilst I stay at home and think how foolish you are!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What did Groucho Marx say - You go and fight for your country whilst I stay at home and think how foolish you are!

Then groucho marx is a selfish ungratefull Kunt!

The alied forces on D-day didnt do anything for themselves or their own countries. Britain USA and Canda hadnt been invaded they did it to liberate France etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People who sit in trenches being fired at eventually have a Damascus style moment when they realise they are putting their lives on the line for peanuts whilst all the people they know back home are out getting drunk, having curries, sh*gging and basically having a great time.

Even in WW2 many men away from home learnt of their wives, girlfriends and sisters lapping it up whilst they were being shot at in Burman, France and elsewhere.

What did Groucho Marx say - You go and fight for your country whilst I stay at home and think how foolish you are!

+1

In order to have a sense of nationhood and a willingness to serve isn't it necessary to have a kinship with your fellow citizens.I don't see how that is possible when we live in a greedy top /down memememe society with communities that are swamped and divided by immigration.Every man for himself seems to be the attitude.So be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the situation, but if it matched my critieria I might take part.

Such as firing guns at aliens.

Having been through the selection process application, first interview, BARB test,

full medical, 2nd medical for childhood asthma check, travel warrent up to a first

weekend and grenade orientation day and first site interview, fitness test ,second interview.

I decided to quit on second interview because it was too long since being at school and more

importantly I couldn't bear the thought of killing someone. If it had been nearer to leaving school

I'd probably have joined and that seems a common problem. Get em at 16 is my advice to the army.

They marched us from the lecture room type place to the cafeteria, we couldn't go anywhere without

a good reason or somone with us. The methods of teaching are to instill obedience but when you know

that it's hard to do it. Also seeing how people get on outside the army it's hard to make it on the outside.

Just haven't got it in me to fight in a war which I imagine isn't about defending yourself constantly,

sometimes you have to be violently agressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just haven't got it in me to fight in a war which I imagine isn't about defending yourself constantly,

sometimes you have to be violently agressive.

I once mentioned to a bloke in the Marines that he must have done a lot of self defence, he said "nah, just attack"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would serve this country on the proviso that the leadership did the same.

given the utter corruption within our political faction,I personally wouldn't have a problem with muslim extremists taking out our illustrious leader because they thought he was the dajjal(but blair was way worse...sneakier in spades).The "cleaning up of their act ",is NOWHERE NEAR SUFFICIENT.

this present administration ARE pure evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest redwine
No: it's conscription: your choices if judged medically fit enough are:

i. To be conscripted and thus serve: no choice of regiment or what you will do:

ii. To agree to be a Non-Combatant only:

iii. To be a Conscientious Objector. Which means normally you are banged up.

Prescience

Pourqoui est ce que vos compliquéz tout ?

Did serve in the TA from 1981 to 1991 in the RCT 206 sqdrn and the Royal Engineers 105sqdrn

Good fun and i did do alot of good things and i learnt how to live and accept other people no matter what area they came from middle /working class

The english problem as George Orwell would have said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People who sit in trenches being fired at eventually have a Damascus style moment when they realise they are putting their lives on the line for peanuts whilst all the people they know back home are out getting drunk, having curries, sh*gging and basically having a great time.

Even in WW2 many men away from home learnt of their wives, girlfriends and sisters lapping it up whilst they were being shot at in Burman, France and elsewhere.

What did Groucho Marx say - You go and fight for your country whilst I stay at home and think how foolish you are!

No, this is wrong. I heard on Woman's Hour a couple of weeks ago that it was the "easy option" (<--- honestly, exact wording) going abroad to be killed or maimed, the hard work was all done on the home front by women. Everyone in the studio agreed.

I only bring it up because it was barking mad even by the standards of that programme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prescience

Pourqoui est ce que vos compliquéz tout ?

Did serve in the TA from 1981 to 1991 in the RCT 206 sqdrn and the Royal Engineers 105sqdrn

Good fun and i did do alot of good things and i learnt how to live and accept other people no matter what area they came from middle /working class

The english problem as George Orwell would have said

For the benefit of those non-French speakers Vin rouge;

The respondent said "If I was young again and unemployed I'd serve, because its the only time you're legally allowed to shoot people. And when you're not shooting people they pay for your beer. Sounds like a good deal to me. "

I was simply pointing out that with Conscription it is not a matter of choice: it's compunction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave

The only things ever worth fighting for are YOUR liberty and freedom.

This country has been hijacked by fascists. I'd never bear arms to defend them or their system....EVER

I would bear arms against the state to protect my freedom and liberty, should it ever come to that, and I suspect it will very soon.

I rather die fighting for that than being forced into even greater slavery than we already live in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest redwine
For the benefit of those non-French speakers Vin rouge;

The respondent said "If I was young again and unemployed I'd serve, because its the only time you're legally allowed to shoot people. And when you're not shooting people they pay for your beer. Sounds like a good deal to me. "

I was simply pointing out that with Conscription it is not a matter of choice: it's compunction.

Excusez -moi prescience

Its that bloody hot here that i am afraid too write something daft as i did last sunday night

I remember taking away for a weekend the so called "army cadets" they were just poor kids from the local council estate

There holiday was a few days "map reading " playing at soldiers etc

I had a full time job but the idea of going mountain climbing at the weekend applied to me

Having said that as you said the idea of Conscription and actually killing other human beings does not apeal to me but times have changed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   296 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.