Bring back NATIONAL SERVICE: Yes or No?

[Mr T.]

Originally Posted by alunharford

I'm not a conscientious objector.
I just don't trust governments to tell me who to kill.

They train you do it properly, and it's more commonly referred to as 'defence'. There will always be war(s) - any other wish-list is naivety.

Originally Posted by alunharford

Grab yourself a copy of Lewis Richardson's "Arms and Insecurity" and "Statistics of Deadly Quarrels" (although it is a little strong on the maths, the statistics quite clearly show that the more you spend on your military, the worse off your military position is - and as somebody who is quite strong with statistics, I can say for a fact he's not doing a "you can show anything you want with statistics" case)

Read them - and some of the most biased, poorest and woolly thinking I've come across on the subject.

Spending (or inability to continue same) was what killed the USSR - it simply couldn't keep up without going into a meltdown which would have seen the 1917/18 Revolution look like a Friday night pub ruck.

The US, on the other hand, whilst not having unlimited funds, spent as freely as it could and still managed to maintain a 'healthy' economy - albeit with a hightened national debt.

All that spending and lack of involvement in conflict (i.e. direct deployment of military forces to ANY theatre on a long term basis - outside of Japan, where General MacArthur was 'Governor General, after writing their constitution for them; the same one which insisted it maintain a force able only to defend itself against attack of to meet civil unrest/home-grown war) achieved two things for the US:

1. it provided and unparalleled deterent to any would be conventional attacker.

2. it provided employment (wage-earner's tax dollars and expendable income being put back into the economy to keep it buoyant) for millions of Americans - both directly and indirectly, when you consider those in uniform (a massive number of whom were on college programmes - paid for by the US Gov't - which bettered their chances of civilian employment on leaving the mob) AND those in the allied and defence manufacturing industries making everything from MREs, to field-dressings to munitions.


And as far as statistics go - "there are lies, damned lies...and statistics."

My proffering Berlin's work was to allow you read someone who'd come from an émigré background, known both privation and pogrom and still had no axe to grind or political agenda - as do the two you suggest.

[tom]

Originally Posted by Bren Tierney

"there are lies, damned lies...and statistics."

Which reminds me, I have work to do!

[alunharford]

Originally Posted by John Holmes

If the armed forces are too much for you to stomach, then how about the police

Tend to be a bunch of utter b***tards, particularly if they don't actually want to be in the job.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

paramedics, fire service

Fine. Big investment in training though so not typical national service.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

or even Medecins sans Frontieres??

Yeah. Definately no problem, but who would decide which organisations it was acceptable to work for.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

Or the RNLI even?!

Training issue again.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

You mention the "humanitarian" agencies not wanting troops in their way.

I didn't actually - I said that they don't generally need foreign volunteers in conflict zones and areas of crisis - it's better to use local people who know what's going on where at all possible.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

Is this why the shite UN ordered its troops to lay down their weapons and allowed 7000 muslim men and boys under their care to be taken away and machine gunned into the burial pits at Srebrenica? With the consequent resignation of the whole Dutch government a couple of years back because a Dutch general was in charge?

You're blurring the line between UN military organisations/the security council (which is formed by the same politicians who are the threat to peace), and the humanitarian agencies/NGOs.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

That same UN who today wrings its hands and bleats about more time for the Sudanese government to sort out the genocide and ethnic cleansing in Dhafur? Oh I do beg your pardon, they've just sent in 150 RWANDAN!! troops to keep order and protect the villagers! The mind boggles.

This in particular demonstates that the last thing we need are a bunch of uninformed members of the public deciding on security affairs for IDPs.
Speaking as somebody who has studied the situation in Sudan as part of my reseach on the LRA in the south, and as somebody who studied the effect of UN sanctions in Iraq, I can confidently say that the very last thing that's needed here is the deployment of a considerable military force. Well... maybe not... the worst thing that could happen is non-military sanctions on Sudan in general.
The reason people support this is that the press does not even try to reflect the current, very complex, situation in Sudan at the moment. Various cracks are appearing within the 'government' forces following the peace agreement with the SPLA, as that war was about the only thing that held them together. The government in Khartoum is only there because no significant element wants a coup at the moment.
Somebody within the military in Sudan is supplying the Janjaweed, and also the Lord's Resistance Army in the South - but they're a 'Christian' group (at least as far as our media is concerned) so we don't talk about that. It's unlikely to be Khartoum as they need everything they've got to defend the capital.

The correct move is to provide a fall back point along the border with Chad, supply the refugees and let the resulting gorilla war retake the area. It's not like weapons to form an armed force are in short supply in that part of the world.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

And what may I ask you is the "mission" that the humanitarian agencies don't want messed up? There are so many instances where nothing is being done I've lost count. Just glad I wasn't in the UN refugee camp that was raided the other night!

Well the WFP want to get food to people for a start, which is a pretty big priority at the moment. Using the local population to distribute the food prevents making the agency look like it's taking sides (which is up to the security council, not the WFP), and so allows the WFP to act with far less fear of being attacked.
And, by the way, no refugee camps have been attacked in the area. IDP camps (that are little more than an attempt to get all the people into one place where they can be killed more efficiently) get attacked, not refugee camps.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

The British Army has engineer/pioneer regiments who could help many nations improve the lot of their people, by sinking wells, laying water pipes and sanitation systems and a host of other things. If only the governments concerned would request the help rather than cling on to power by keeping their people hungry and impoverished.

Or, more sensibly, we could stop being a bunch of protectionist a***holes and end the EU CAP.

Originally Posted by John Holmes

Final question for you Alun, where did the majority of the helicopter pilots saving people's lives last night in the flash floods in Bocastle come from??

They had to come from the military because we can't afford to set up dedicated civilian groups to solve these problems (because, for example, we've spent £billions on Eurofighter).

[Conor]

Erm, a Social Scientist.

I'd be interested to hear your thesis of how to remove the military from the current world scene, without loss of life greater than anything we have seen so far.

[alunharford]

Originally Posted by camdiver

Erm, a Social Scientist.

I'd be interested to hear your thesis of how to remove the military from the current world scene, without loss of life greater than anything we have seen so far.

As is very clear (particularly from this thread!), there isn't the political will to do so.
It doesn't make murder right though ("because a politician told me to" is not a valid reason to kill somebody)

[divegyrl]

Originally Posted by Andy the Commie 2

This was not about all slagging everyone down etc etc going the way of BSAC & D-Net forums ....

National service was mentioned alot this weekend , coz of the tele prog BAD LADS ARMY, after a little quote was used ........

MORE of a freindly banter toward s one of OUR own , DIGGER...

Who until he stayed at my house , thought that the 24 hour system was a different time zone.

yes 0500 is early to some , but in fact i find it to be the best part of the day.

Poor old Digger thought that 5 o'clock was the time to turn the tele over from Blue Peter to neighbours

Quote " A good student can sleep all afternoon though BOTH episodes of Neighbours "

I'm with Andy on this, this thread started as a joke & has now been taken over.........
so in good old fashioned YD terms........
I DEMAND AN APOLOGY (on behalf of A the C2)

Blanaid

[Mr T.]

Originally Posted by camdiver

Erm, a Social Scientist.

I'd be interested to hear your thesis of how to remove the military from the current world scene, without loss of life greater than anything we have seen so far.

'Social scientist...' and then some. Wandering out with such a raw set of unworkable, ill-thoughtout, ill-principled - yet wholly unrealistic - and wonton voodoo is staggering. Alun, your overt line in what is obviously anti-US rhetoric destroys any case you might attempt to make.

The LRA a 'Christian' group?! Dude, I'll have a bag of what you're smoking. Their very actions set them apart from every precept know to Christianity - rather like being a member of the PIRA/IRA/INLA (or any of those bigoted wankers) automatically excommunicates you from the Catholic Church.

So you're solution would be to leave them to it and for the Janjaweed to continue its wholesale butchery?

Originally Posted by alunharford

The correct move is to provide a fall back point along the border with Chad, supply the refugees and let the resulting gorilla war retake the area. It's not like weapons to form an armed force are in short supply in that part of the world.

Supply the refugees? And precisely how would you suggest we do that, safely? And presumably WITHOUT troops? And what's to prevent (as in Mogadishu) the Janjaweed from simply killing the UN/Aid Agency workers, continue to butcher and rape the populace and then use the aid/food as a tool to repress that same populace? By the way, this is already happening.

Under your plan we surrender the day to the terrorist (Janjaweed et al) and simply leave the poorest elements of that benighted country to their fate.

Social scientist? Tasked with prognosticating on everything whilst achieving nothing.

Alun, I'll take fries with that - to go. You really must give your thoughts on 'Dog Yoga' and 'Doll Hospitals'.

[Angus]

Speaking as a member of the Association of Professional Murders I wouldn't want to see National Servicemen (or women) back within the forces, we have an enough trouble with the volunteers to be honest.

Some kind of 'Community National Service' though should be in order - I can just see Digger in a Land Girls uniform!!

As for the prick who called the forces 'Professional Murders' - bloody right we're professional, I wouldn't do it for free!!!

ATB

[Helen F H]

Originally Posted by divegyrl

I'm with Andy on this, this thread started as a joke & has now been taken over.........
so in good old fashioned YD terms........
I DEMAND AN APOLOGY (on behalf of A the C2)

Blanaid

Me too.

WE DEMAND AN APOLOGY

And photographic evidence of Digger awake (if that is the right term) at 5am!

[divegyrl]

Originally Posted by Angus

Some kind of 'Community National Service' though should be in order - I can just see Digger in a Land Girls uniform!!

there is a picture somewhere of Digger in a dress! he was in stockings at the weekend! Juz has pictures of that!

although the only way he could get the uniform would be to sweet talk the girl out of it!

Blanaid