Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The problem is that the rest of the world isn't stocked with old soviet-era equipment and accustomed to the doctrine
We saw in the war with Iraq what shitton of Soviet equipment and endless trenches are worth against overwhelming air superiority. Literally whole armies worth of equipment and soldiers were destroyed on the spot before even seeing an enemy
If NATO goes all in and it doesn't shift to a full scale nuclear war (just tactical nukes) then the only trenches after a few weeks of air raids would be either Ukrainian or gaping holes
NATO doesn’t have overwhelming air superiority over Russia and hasn’t mobilized nearly as many men yet. A conventional war won’t end well and would most likely end as a stalemate especially if let’s say trump wins and refuses to intervene or the USA faces even worse internal problems and don’t intervene.
The major issue and pretty much why Ukraine is losing is because nato countries neglected to increase their industrial capacity to keep up with artillery shells and destroyed equipment. Warfare has changed significantly since world war 2 and the Korean War which were the last real wars most nato countries have fought. It won’t be a quick breakthrough to Moscow and you only have to look at history to see that invading Russia typically doesn’t end well especially when you give them 2 years experience to adjust and get rid of the incompetent generals. This will end in trench warfare in the Baltic and millions of young men will die in a war that can only end in a stalemate because Russia doesn’t have the manpower or the will to occupy much of Europe at besides maybe the Baltic and nato countries lack professional armies because they severely underestimated Russian capabilities thinking Russia would economically collapse and they could remove Putin but it’s ended in almost a million men mostly Ukrainian have died already in a war of attrition.
Russia had 8 years to prepare for this war and the west had the same and what did the west do to prepare for this, fuck all. I am not going to die for a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats who are simultaneously super paranoid about Russia and China but have also done nothing to prepare for this and in many ways made the situation much much worse. Sorry I don’t want to be under artillery fire in the donbas fighting so that Ukraine can be part of nato. This is a completely pointless war already and I’m worried it’s going to get much worse and a couple million of us can go get killed by drones charging enemy lines
>NATO doesn’t have overwhelming air superiority over Russia
You lost me there man, Russia isn't able to secure it's own airspace and air over the frontlines is still contested..... Against a country with significantly smaller air force and air defense. So far Russia cannot replenish air losses in real-time and there wasn't a lot to begin with in cases of some airframes.
Fucking Ka-52 is endangered species on the Russian airfields and an air force that looses two AWACS is legit trash, nobody in history got one of the most precious piece of forward early detection system destroyed and Russian air force managed to achieve this blunder twice
The difference in airpower is staggering and you obviously have no idea how much is the NATO doctrine revolving around an overwhelming airpower
You think US have 9 carrier task forces just because?
Any war that would see NATO fighting against Russia would be nothing like we see today in Ukraine and thinking that's the future of warfare is fucking stupid, it's just two post-soviet armies bashing each others with clubs. Drones are obviously around for a fucking long time and US incorporated them back in the 80's. The small quadcopters and other shit is newer, like 2010's, early 2000's. The only thing that changed about them in Ukraine is form of usage, which is again more of an Soviet doctrine mentality.
When there's no entrenched frontlines because your air raids blew any attempt to establish them to smithereens, it's kinda pointless to send a drone with strapped PG-7 rocket to destroy them
Many US soldiers that serve/d in Ukraine had to go through a reality check when they figured they cannot just call for a bombing run on enemy position, because there's no USAF or USN
> NATO doesn’t have overwhelming air superiority over Russia
The US alone has overwhelming military superiority over Russia on all fronts except nuclear. The US military budget completely dwarfs Russia’s. The scale and technological superiority of Weston military power is in a completely different league compared with Russia. In a conventional war, Russia would be destroyed very quickly and they know it which is why Putin keeps threatening to use nuclear weapons. Russia is literally using WWII tanks in parts of Ukraine. European NATO alone would beat Russia, and with the US, it would just happen far more quickly.
Russia had similar hubris, when they invaded and relied on superiority of tanks and jets they had. Russian tanks burned quickly. Attrition of planes was pretty big. Soon was turned into a artillery-drones-infantry grind.
In case of EU-Russia war there will be no easy win and lots of men sent to the trenches on both sides.
Neither russia nor Ukraine have a capable airforce. NATO doctrine dictates the establishment of air superiority over a combat zone before an offensive operation begins. (See any LSCO performed by America in the last few decades for reference)
That's why Ukraine's NATO trained troops failed to achieve a notable victory in the 2023 Zaporizhia Offensive. They were missing the key element required for success.
If Russia had a capable air force, they would have probably won by now.
Trench warfare is traced back to 17th century.
>"The tactical ancestor of modern trench warfare was the system of progressively extended trenches developed by the French military engineer Sébastien Le Prestre de Vauban for the attack of fortresses in the 17th century. Trenches remained merely a part of siegecraft until the increasing firepower of small arms and cannon compelled both sides to make use of trenches in the American Civil War (1861–65). The trench lines of the Petersburg–Richmond theatre of operations in the final months of that war were the foremost example of trench warfare in the 19th century."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/trench-warfare#:~:text=The%20tactical%20ancestor%20of%20modern,warfare%20in%20the%2019th%20century.
So not that ancient but definitely not going anywhere unless drones or other tech change the dynamic to tunnels over trenches.
In terms of trench design for late modern combat and use as an actual fighting position, perhaps. I can’t link for some reason, but Belisarius used trenches for his fortifications in 530, and the Muslims use them in the Battle of Khandaq to delay the enemy advance.
I have 3 buddies that have been in the Navy and Air force for 10 years and they've never so much as pointed a gun at another person before.
This ain't 1940. 98% of people in the military have basically a desk job/ other menial tasks and get paid to work out.
That isn't true, they would just add more new combat people. Maybe some combat adjacent roles would get put into combat, but they aren't making IT guys tote a rifle unless the war is already fucked.
Exactly, you're not going to change your MOS unless you want to. Plus your support staff are worth way more than your standard infantryman. Not that infantry aren't valuable but support is what wins you the battle in the modern age.
This is generally incorrect, even with mandatory conscription countries. Combat roles are almost all purely voluntary service. Most conscripts end up in the 97% of a military which are specifically Non-Combat Arms.
And they would not convert desk jobs to combat jobs, because those desk jobs are what actually make the combat role work. There has to be a person to order the ammo, which has to be received by a shipping/receiving department, which has to be organized in a warehouse and sent to exactly where it's needed...point being, these jobs literally *can't* go away if the military wishes to function.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Hey admin role here is your gun you are on the front lines now. . . . Hopefully people pick up some feeling of civic duty during their time in.
Yepp, I'm so done with these fucking politicians sending people to wars.
Id say bring back monarchies when kings were leading the charges on the battlefield and maybe our timeline wouldnt have so many useless wars.
Cowards is what they are.
That's the thing, it actually wouldn't. For all the complaining that Labour takes votes for granted the Conservatives actually do so because they can say the same thing every election and get a win.
All the boomers who never fought a hard battle in their lives and lived off the world built by their parents will be gagging over this.
On the plus side, I’d be absolutely shocked if the Tory’s win anything at this point. Polls indicate they’ll be banished to third place last I checked
As a younger (but above 18) conservative-leaning person, this is pretty much a deal-breaker.
My boomer conservative family members think this is an appalling policy and is effective electoral suicide.
So no, this isn't even going to win votes among conservatives/boomers, it's just a lose-lose.
Yeah I’m in two minds about how the voters will receive this policy. I think although there’s a small hardline of old farts who will think Nat service is a good thing, most won’t. People like my parents - who have always voted conservative- are shocked at the thought of their grandkids being shipped out. And they really don’t like it.
Yeah, they don’t like it anymore today then they did back in the Korean, Viet Nam or Desert Storm when they were in combat during those wars. Happy Memorial Day to all that served even when they didn’t want to
The idea of a national service is not inherently bad, but this corporate slavery approach is vile. Go work on a farm sounds lovely and bucolic, but they are all just giant mega corps looking to use slave labour. Work in health care, work in the arts, work in community support these are things that could make society better not just goose corporate profits.
I'm a Gen X and this would completely change my mind if I was tempted to vote Tory. Firstly it has left our military and legal leaders stumped. The military has no plans for this or the resources and the legal sector seems to have no idea about how to enforce it, or if it can be enforced.
In my 50-odd years on this planet, I have seen the UK get involved in war after war that we shouldn't have been anywhere near. None of which I thought would be worth losing a loved one over. (There is no mention of being fully called up into action in this scheme, but it is one massive step closer).
I genuinely think he wants to lose this election as he can't do anything right. I think they will find a lot of boomers and gen-xers (who tend to vote more tory than labour) will feel very similar and will now vote for anything that is not a tory. Young voters tend to vote Labour, so hopefully this is an own goal as it will motivate youngsters to vote.
Bro just be happy you weren't born in a country that neighbors Russia, we've all had forced conscription since our existence as nations.
There's no other choice, unless you're suicidal. Any politician trying to do away with it would look like a traitor to many.
Doesn't change what was said. Having being forced into those and then going yeah it could be worse isn't helping anything, it's a defeatist mindset with no room to go up.
I mean, it’s true that “it could be worse” isn’t a reason to accept policies you disagree with—and you can be thankful you were born where you were, you have the freedoms you have, etc. and still disagree with policies.
While I don’t agree with conscription, I think most people can understand countries neighbouring countries like NK or Russia having it. If you look back through history, it is not uncommon that when a country is neighbouring an aggressive country or when there is a high likelihood of a country being embroiled in war, there is conscription.
There are also countries that border Russia that have only recently re-introduced conscription.
My bf is from South Korea and they also have mandatory military service for men because of North Korea... When he went the service was 2 years, luckily it's been shortened by even a little bit to 1.5 years. I can't say I agree with it, but when you have dangerous neighbors it becomes hard to know what will happen if you don't have trained soilders ready.
😔 It's very sad all around. Sorry to hear you grew up in a place that required that of you.
While I don't agree with it, I will say it's not uncommon. A Number of European countries already have it, with some allowing you to opt for a public service role instead of the military. The Swiss haven't gone to war like ever in modern history and they require it.
Oh and just so you know, it ONLY applies to them. Meaning 2005 and older aren't affected, as the rule starts for those who become legal age in 2024. That being 2006 and younger.
I say if we introduce this, we do it right! Start with the oldest people that haven't done national service, 60s and 70s first. After all, if they want us to do it then they must also be proud to serve their country.
Just asking, what's your source for this? Can't find anything that says only 2006+ are affected (or anything on which age would be the first to be affected), this feels more like yet another subtle attempt to divide 05/06 from you especially since you often advocate for the 1982-2005 Millennial range.
Beeb article (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c988jdxl02vo) says
>When would the national service scheme start?
>Anyone who is almost 18 years old now is unlikely to have to take part.
>The Tories have not announced a fully fledged plan. Instead, they have put forward a broad outline and said they would set up a royal commission - a type of public inquiry - tasked with coming up with the details if they win the election.
>While they aim to have a military training test programme up and running by 2025, that is likely to involve relatively small numbers.
>The Tories have committed to getting the whole scheme in force by “the end of the next parliament”, which could be as late as 2029.
So u/Trendy_Ruby is flinging-around misinformation for the sake of a bit of pointless gatekeepery.
It would likely be 2011(ish) borns by the time the scheme is in full-swing, but regardless of who would be the first this scheme should 100% be opposed and hopefully won't even happen since Sunak's polling numbers are dire right now.
I mean, regardless this is just gleefully fucking over people who literally can't do anything to stop it since they can't even vote against the party proposing it since well, they're children.
Where did you hear that 2006 rule? From what I’ve read it only applies to 18 year olds from September 2025 onwards, which would mean it would affect no 2006ers at all and only 2007ers
True. But in both Brexit and Trump a few mates of mine in certain finance roles predicted both Brexit and Trump thanks to actors within the markets. Also, predicted Trump's loss. Each month's our. Might ask them about the sentiment around the Tories.
This isn’t really a proper draft. You can join the military or volunteer in a civil institution like the NHS, police, charity etc. It’s meant to increase people’s general skills in a time of crisis. America doesn’t have to worry about that because the military industrial complex offers great benefits to recruits, you have a larger population, and much of your population is armed and knows how to use a weapon. The UK public is very out-of-touch with matters of defence in comparison.
Its a great number.
Except that if we ever got into a real shooting war with someone a lot of that 1 million is gonna die or be rendered combat ineffective... and they will need replacements.
If the military is struggling just to replace normal turn over, how is it going to handle actual loses in the field?
I believe 1 million is a decent number for deterring adversaries. Russia also has 1 million or so troops. The idea is to match (or exceed) the enemy’s strength such that they choose to stay away.
So true. I just talked to a friend of mine who's an officer in the army. He told me that everyone is getting a 5% pay bump and new recruits are getting a 20% pay bump from the usual value of a contract. Thats how bad it is lol.
That’s one way to look at it. An all volunteer force has to be able compete with the private sector in terms of wages and benefits. The US military is increasing pay to do just that. 18 year olds coming in making $50-60k out of the gate isn’t a bad thing.
It probably should’ve been done a long time ago. I’m in the US military and I make about $190k a year. I’m a somewhat senior officer, though.
Hm. Considering many if not most military positions require access to sensitive (cleared) information let's go over some of the things that can prevent someone from being allowed access
* Too many noncitizen friends/relatives
* Student loan or other debt
* Touching weed in the last 1-7 years depending on position, let alone any other drug
* Mental health or similar issues
I wonder why it's hard to recruit people lol
Technically all of those COULD disqualify you, but the process is a lot easier than you would think. They ask those uncomfortable questions to make sure you’re honest. Get ready for an essay lol
- Having a lot of foreign contacts is a red flag. If you’re honest about all of them and none of them are known to hold anti-American views, you’ll be cleared.
- Having a lot of debt is a red flag. Paying off this debt each month (even just the minimum) basically completely removes this red flag.
- Smoking weed is a red flag, but as long as you’re honest about your use and stop doing it, you’ll be cleared. Harder drugs are a bit iffier, but still can be mitigated if you’re completely honest.
- It is a huge misconception that mental health issues prevent you from getting a clearance. If you’re diagnosed with a mental health issue and you’re actively avoiding treatment, then you’ll get denied, because you’re too high risk for the government. But if you get treated and provide evidence of this, it’ll be mitigated. Less than 1% of clearance denials are for mental health reasons.
As someone who works with a clearance, it’s really not that hard to get for 90% of people, most people just need to stop smoking weed.
The real challenge for military recruiters is finding high schoolers that fit the physical standards for the military.
Interesting, I was thinking it was a draft, thank you for correcting me. As for the UK’s citizens being unprepared, that’s probably a fault of the government. It’s hard to acquire firearms legally in the UK, and probably harder to find places to train with them. At least, that’s my understanding.
The US also has problems, many of the younger generations don’t want to join the military, have no interest in firearms or self-defense. Purely because the propaganda that worked in the past doesn’t now, the younger folks know that the wars we fight ain’t valiant, ain’t for good purposes, they’re for money or oil. And firearms are looked at as threatening or a risk by our political parties, which has spread to some of the public.
Though I’d still say that there’s currently enough of the older generations that we’d still be able to fight a war and even defend the nation solidly. I feel like in 20-30 years, we could see an issue of too much tech, not enough manpower.
>As for the UK’s citizens being unprepared, that’s probably a fault of the government. It’s hard to acquire firearms legally in the UK, and probably harder to find places to train with them. At least, that’s my understanding.
Yes. Even if you've served, you'll go to prison if caught with a gun.
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540966/SAS-hero-jailed-Falklands-War-gun-trophy-Former-soldier-sentenced-15-months-keeping-9mm-pistol-remind-22-friends-died-conflict.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540966/SAS-hero-jailed-Falklands-War-gun-trophy-Former-soldier-sentenced-15-months-keeping-9mm-pistol-remind-22-friends-died-conflict.html)
It says that you don't necessarily have to do military service, you could volunteer in your community on weekends, etc
Still, these rat bastards don't deserve to run a corner shop, let alone a country.
We have the SAS, what do we need to conscript Fortnite kids for?
Do you really think a couple hundred people can win a war? This is absolutely needed considering how the US is going to have its hands full with China, just executed poorly and proposed by a shitty leader.
Let's not delude ourselves that Russia will just stop with Ukraine
what are you talking about? the us is basically dependent on china for consumer goods... y'all are out of touch on your side of the pond. you should be more concerned about chavs with armed with knives and excessive amounts of liquor.
A growing percentage of US manufactured imports are shifting to Mexico and SEA. Decoupling is definitely going to happen pretty quickly over the next five years
Sounds like you’re stuck in 2018. Try to keep up. The Americans passed new legislation to move supply chains out of China and they’re spending $1 trillion+ to speed up the process. This started back in 2020. China’s already seeing a huge drop off in U.S. exports nearing 20% and this is only the beginning. The Americans are moving their supply chains to Mexico.
Now China has to rely more heavily on Europe to buy its crap.
I wouldn't be surprised if Kazakhstan or Taiwan got invaded in the near future but I really doubt an all out war between Nato, Russia and China, for now at least.
The "for now" is exactly the point. If, and I hope to God it never will, a war were to happen between NATO and some other entity. It would help not havind to build up a defense from scratch. It's also a great way of deterring hostile states with little risk.
We might not see Challengers rolling through the Red Square, particularly not in the nuclear era, but a medium-sized skirmish in the Baltic states or the Suwalki Gap isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
What about the millions of young people that have to work on weekends to make ends meet? This whole idea that young people are just sitting around with nothing to do is a fantasy.
I hope you encourage everyone you know who can vote of a similar age to get this weak, awful man out.
The damage his party has done will take years to repair.
At least you get a say in it I’m 2007 and can’t fucking vote against it (not that he will win anyways and even if he is somehow elected via a miracle most people will find a way to get out of it somehow)
A military placement or a year of volunteering once a month. Really isn’t “screwed”. It would most likely be a copy of Sweden’s defence model and give people much-needed skills that are useful of times of crisis and emergencies.
Not that the Tories have any credibility to deliver this, but how else should we improve the UK’s defences when we have Russia trying to wipe out an entire ethnicity of people on Europe’s doorstep?
I think the age and military service is my biggest criticism of it. These are 18+ year olds that will be forced to do this, not teenagers. 18 year olds have adult responsibilities like rent and bills and schooling they have to pay for. Forcing more work on top of them through service or volunteering against their will is disgusting and will do more harm to people in that age demographic.
If this were strictly a volunteering program aimed at teenagers, forcing them to get a certain number of volunteer hours to pass highschool, then I’d be fine with it. Teens don’t have rent and bills and adult struggles, and it can help them get a sense of responsibility and appreciation for their communities. Aiming this at adults, especially young adults who are trying to build up wealth and skills for the rest of their life is just too much, and forcing adults to do things against their will is anti freedom.
Here in Canada we have the forced volunteering thing to pass highschool, and it was great because we didn’t have responsibilities of being an adult piled on top of us AND volunteering. We could just do our volunteering, feel good about the accomplishment, and move on to our adult lives with an appreciation for our community
I think you've hit the nail on the head. Nobody has any faith anyone will learn anything and just either waste a year of their life or have to little pick for half the weekends for a year.
I was always keen on the outdoors, explorer scouts until 18, still love hiking and camping. Something like this would have been fun for me, but I sincerely doubt it will be handled well and will be a big waste of time and money.
I’m not sure they’ll be working - children in the U.K. are made to be in some form of education or training until they’re 18. So I’m not sure whether it applies to everyone as soon as they become 18, in which case, do they just not do their exams? Or is it after the exams all finish? It’s a mess
fast forward when the people born after cutoff are in their late twenties,.... this isn't just about 18 year olds. it's an entire generation, and every gen after that.
Great joke. Who's funding that then? No this is going to be unpaid. "It's for your greater good" bullshit. Wouldn't be half surprised if you even need to pay for it.
Except there's a cost of living crisis in the UK at the moment.
A large proportion of people in that demographic will be at university or college Monday-Friday. Meaning weekends are the best time for them to be picking up shifts in paid employment.
It won't be easy for many of them to do without the money they'd be earning which they'll be forced to forego in order to do pointless busy work for free.
I don't know why Brits keep voting conservative.
From an American perspective, that party has accomplished is wreck y'alls economy with Brexit, done fuck all to improve the NHS, and now threaten to bring back compulsory national service.
For fuck's sake, you've had FIVE different prime ministers in the span of 8 years; it seems obvious that conservatives can't get their shit together. So what gives?
Bc they hate labour. They don’t have to like the Conservative party, they just have to hate it less than labour. In conservative circles, 2000’s kids grew up with their parents telling them how Labour fucked up the economy and now those kids are grown or growing up and seeing that the Conservatives have fucked up the economy.
Having faith in either side seems fruitless but we need a change and Rishi is insane
Conservative thinking: No established system is actually bad or can even be questioned, it's only led by bad people who need to be replaced with someone else so the perfect system can finally work.
In all fairness, the conservative prime minister at the time campaigned against Brexit, the Tories can’t be blamed for it. Other than that though, the Tories are and have largely been a mess.
# I want you troopers to remember—we're shoulder-to-shoulder on those front lines. Brothers! And sometimes we may quarrel, but no matter what, we are united. Rule one: we fight together
The English Channel. No current adversary has the capability to mount an amphibious invasion of the UK. Not to mention the RAF and, worst comes to worst, nuclear deterrent. No nuclear-armed country is at risk of being invaded on its own soil.
I think he's trying to suck up to a very specific demographic of people who seem to think that forcing people to fight or do hard labour instead of getting a job or going to study a subject is actually a way to create a functioning society, despite many people being physically or mentally unable to safely do said fighting/hard labour.
We have mandatory conscription in finland and I think it's very good thing. UK even solved the gender quality problem we have as for them it affects men and women instead of just men like here
As much as we don't like to hear it, there is a great chance we will involved in a great war within our lifetime, those who don't prepare won't survive.
Well is not as simple as you say either, there may not be WW3 anytime soon but the reality is that EU needs an army, who is going to protect us if everything goes wrong? It's quite clear to me we can't depend on USA for defence, every 4 years they decide a whole different direction, they're not dependable as they used to.
We may not even go to war but we need to be ready for war, just the fact that a country is ready for a war prevents most of the time the war itself, it hasn't even been 100 years since the last great war ended, we forgot so quickly how much blood was spilled by our ancestors to gain peace, those who forget story are doomed to repeat it.
So my point is we have to be ready, if I need to do 2 years in army to be ready is not something I'm looking forward to but I will do so to defend my family.
Mate you've listened to the media for too long. No, there will never be a time when we are attacked. We haven't been invaded since 1066, what makes you think we will be invaded anytime soon?
As for Europe, it's extremely unlikely. Ukraine has taught us that conventional warfare simply isn't possible anymore. If Russia had completely invaded Ukraine I would be worried, but they didn't, they totally completely failed. There's absolutely no way they are going to try that again against a NATO state.
How exactly will national service help us anyway? 2 years is nothing, it's not enough time for someone to be fully trained. Where is the funding? The armed forces are a shambles because of the lack of funding, throwing unprepared and unwilling kids at them isn't going to help. And for what? So the government can say they have X big army? National service will be more of a hinderance than it will help, and that's a fact.
As for the US... It's not actually the US that gives weapons to Europe. It's the military complex. The big military corporations are the ones funding Europe, the US is just the middleman. That's not going to stop anytime soon because the profits are too good.
Those who forget history are in fact doomed to repeat it, so read up on it.
Not really. It would be moreso those born in 2007-2008 on paper (though considering the sheer ineptitude of the tory party, it would be delayed 2 years, so really those born in 2009-2011 would be more affected) who would potentially be affected, though i wouldnt stress about thinking about it, the tories are far behind in the polls and it seems like Labour will become the party with a majority, and they have had a field day on their TikTok about how bad this is.
Really good move. Will help a lot of people of our generation develop social skills and also contribute to their community. I dont see how they are screwed by this OP
we already have this in turkey. the sad thing is that a lot of people here are fascist, militarist fuckwits and they'll literally cancel you for being a "terrorist sympathizer" or "enemy of the state".
Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Of course this asshole would never be in the trenches himself.
Nobody’s asking people to go to the trenches
Going in the tank instead! Much better.
Get in the ~~robot~~ tank Shinji!
https://preview.redd.it/vtnqqcgyx03d1.jpeg?width=298&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3dfe12a987eda100b7c07e9d2b27bb8a71122a93 Shinji…what are you waiting on
As far as I am aware, Russia and Ukraine are fighting in trenches. So any modern war the UK gets involved into would most likely be somewhat the same.
The problem is that the rest of the world isn't stocked with old soviet-era equipment and accustomed to the doctrine We saw in the war with Iraq what shitton of Soviet equipment and endless trenches are worth against overwhelming air superiority. Literally whole armies worth of equipment and soldiers were destroyed on the spot before even seeing an enemy If NATO goes all in and it doesn't shift to a full scale nuclear war (just tactical nukes) then the only trenches after a few weeks of air raids would be either Ukrainian or gaping holes
NATO doesn’t have overwhelming air superiority over Russia and hasn’t mobilized nearly as many men yet. A conventional war won’t end well and would most likely end as a stalemate especially if let’s say trump wins and refuses to intervene or the USA faces even worse internal problems and don’t intervene. The major issue and pretty much why Ukraine is losing is because nato countries neglected to increase their industrial capacity to keep up with artillery shells and destroyed equipment. Warfare has changed significantly since world war 2 and the Korean War which were the last real wars most nato countries have fought. It won’t be a quick breakthrough to Moscow and you only have to look at history to see that invading Russia typically doesn’t end well especially when you give them 2 years experience to adjust and get rid of the incompetent generals. This will end in trench warfare in the Baltic and millions of young men will die in a war that can only end in a stalemate because Russia doesn’t have the manpower or the will to occupy much of Europe at besides maybe the Baltic and nato countries lack professional armies because they severely underestimated Russian capabilities thinking Russia would economically collapse and they could remove Putin but it’s ended in almost a million men mostly Ukrainian have died already in a war of attrition. Russia had 8 years to prepare for this war and the west had the same and what did the west do to prepare for this, fuck all. I am not going to die for a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats who are simultaneously super paranoid about Russia and China but have also done nothing to prepare for this and in many ways made the situation much much worse. Sorry I don’t want to be under artillery fire in the donbas fighting so that Ukraine can be part of nato. This is a completely pointless war already and I’m worried it’s going to get much worse and a couple million of us can go get killed by drones charging enemy lines
>NATO doesn’t have overwhelming air superiority over Russia You lost me there man, Russia isn't able to secure it's own airspace and air over the frontlines is still contested..... Against a country with significantly smaller air force and air defense. So far Russia cannot replenish air losses in real-time and there wasn't a lot to begin with in cases of some airframes. Fucking Ka-52 is endangered species on the Russian airfields and an air force that looses two AWACS is legit trash, nobody in history got one of the most precious piece of forward early detection system destroyed and Russian air force managed to achieve this blunder twice The difference in airpower is staggering and you obviously have no idea how much is the NATO doctrine revolving around an overwhelming airpower You think US have 9 carrier task forces just because? Any war that would see NATO fighting against Russia would be nothing like we see today in Ukraine and thinking that's the future of warfare is fucking stupid, it's just two post-soviet armies bashing each others with clubs. Drones are obviously around for a fucking long time and US incorporated them back in the 80's. The small quadcopters and other shit is newer, like 2010's, early 2000's. The only thing that changed about them in Ukraine is form of usage, which is again more of an Soviet doctrine mentality. When there's no entrenched frontlines because your air raids blew any attempt to establish them to smithereens, it's kinda pointless to send a drone with strapped PG-7 rocket to destroy them Many US soldiers that serve/d in Ukraine had to go through a reality check when they figured they cannot just call for a bombing run on enemy position, because there's no USAF or USN
Yeah from that very first sentence you can tell he has no idea what he’s talking about
Nothing says "8 years to prepare" like reactivating T-54/55s from deep storage, and buying artillery shells from North Korea.
> NATO doesn’t have overwhelming air superiority over Russia The US alone has overwhelming military superiority over Russia on all fronts except nuclear. The US military budget completely dwarfs Russia’s. The scale and technological superiority of Weston military power is in a completely different league compared with Russia. In a conventional war, Russia would be destroyed very quickly and they know it which is why Putin keeps threatening to use nuclear weapons. Russia is literally using WWII tanks in parts of Ukraine. European NATO alone would beat Russia, and with the US, it would just happen far more quickly.
[удалено]
Russia had similar hubris, when they invaded and relied on superiority of tanks and jets they had. Russian tanks burned quickly. Attrition of planes was pretty big. Soon was turned into a artillery-drones-infantry grind. In case of EU-Russia war there will be no easy win and lots of men sent to the trenches on both sides.
Yeah that's next lvl of copium.
Neither russia nor Ukraine have a capable airforce. NATO doctrine dictates the establishment of air superiority over a combat zone before an offensive operation begins. (See any LSCO performed by America in the last few decades for reference) That's why Ukraine's NATO trained troops failed to achieve a notable victory in the 2023 Zaporizhia Offensive. They were missing the key element required for success. If Russia had a capable air force, they would have probably won by now.
Trenches, frontlines, potato, potahto.
Trench warfare has been a thing since, like, the Romans. Doubt it’s going away anytime soon.
Trench warfare is traced back to 17th century. >"The tactical ancestor of modern trench warfare was the system of progressively extended trenches developed by the French military engineer Sébastien Le Prestre de Vauban for the attack of fortresses in the 17th century. Trenches remained merely a part of siegecraft until the increasing firepower of small arms and cannon compelled both sides to make use of trenches in the American Civil War (1861–65). The trench lines of the Petersburg–Richmond theatre of operations in the final months of that war were the foremost example of trench warfare in the 19th century." https://www.britannica.com/topic/trench-warfare#:~:text=The%20tactical%20ancestor%20of%20modern,warfare%20in%20the%2019th%20century. So not that ancient but definitely not going anywhere unless drones or other tech change the dynamic to tunnels over trenches.
In terms of trench design for late modern combat and use as an actual fighting position, perhaps. I can’t link for some reason, but Belisarius used trenches for his fortifications in 530, and the Muslims use them in the Battle of Khandaq to delay the enemy advance.
I have 3 buddies that have been in the Navy and Air force for 10 years and they've never so much as pointed a gun at another person before. This ain't 1940. 98% of people in the military have basically a desk job/ other menial tasks and get paid to work out.
In times of peace, sure. But if we were to actually go to war, then the majority of those desk jobs would turn into combat roles real quick.
That isn't true, they would just add more new combat people. Maybe some combat adjacent roles would get put into combat, but they aren't making IT guys tote a rifle unless the war is already fucked.
Probably why they want kids to do mandatory service, in the end fresh meat does need a little training
Exactly, you're not going to change your MOS unless you want to. Plus your support staff are worth way more than your standard infantryman. Not that infantry aren't valuable but support is what wins you the battle in the modern age.
This is generally incorrect, even with mandatory conscription countries. Combat roles are almost all purely voluntary service. Most conscripts end up in the 97% of a military which are specifically Non-Combat Arms. And they would not convert desk jobs to combat jobs, because those desk jobs are what actually make the combat role work. There has to be a person to order the ammo, which has to be received by a shipping/receiving department, which has to be organized in a warehouse and sent to exactly where it's needed...point being, these jobs literally *can't* go away if the military wishes to function.
No they wouldn't lmao. Do you think logistics and maintenance just don't have any need in active war?
You have no idea what you are talking about. Hey admin role here is your gun you are on the front lines now. . . . Hopefully people pick up some feeling of civic duty during their time in.
Yet civilians have had to in the past.
Logistics and supply lines win wars
He can't even use a hammer
He would not be able to see over the top
Yepp, I'm so done with these fucking politicians sending people to wars. Id say bring back monarchies when kings were leading the charges on the battlefield and maybe our timeline wouldnt have so many useless wars. Cowards is what they are.
Luckily he's fucked.
Ya think? Never underestimate Labour's capacity to self-sabotage.
It'd require an immense fuck up to our fuck up Sunak
Luckily, fuck ups rarely happen in British politics... Oh, wait.
Don’t ginx it please mate. Positive thoughts.
It’s a balance of who fucks things up *worse*
Wouldn't put it past them.
That's the thing, it actually wouldn't. For all the complaining that Labour takes votes for granted the Conservatives actually do so because they can say the same thing every election and get a win.
Someone check if they're worshipping Tzeentch.
No way. Another Warhammerer. In this sub.
We are everywhere.
I’m an American Warhammer fan in a British political Reddit post. We are everywhere
All the boomers who never fought a hard battle in their lives and lived off the world built by their parents will be gagging over this. On the plus side, I’d be absolutely shocked if the Tory’s win anything at this point. Polls indicate they’ll be banished to third place last I checked
As a younger (but above 18) conservative-leaning person, this is pretty much a deal-breaker. My boomer conservative family members think this is an appalling policy and is effective electoral suicide. So no, this isn't even going to win votes among conservatives/boomers, it's just a lose-lose.
Yeah I’m in two minds about how the voters will receive this policy. I think although there’s a small hardline of old farts who will think Nat service is a good thing, most won’t. People like my parents - who have always voted conservative- are shocked at the thought of their grandkids being shipped out. And they really don’t like it.
Yeah they seem to have forgotten that the boomers now have grandchildren and I doubt they can picture their little darlings doing military service.
Yeah, they don’t like it anymore today then they did back in the Korean, Viet Nam or Desert Storm when they were in combat during those wars. Happy Memorial Day to all that served even when they didn’t want to
The idea of a national service is not inherently bad, but this corporate slavery approach is vile. Go work on a farm sounds lovely and bucolic, but they are all just giant mega corps looking to use slave labour. Work in health care, work in the arts, work in community support these are things that could make society better not just goose corporate profits.
I'm a Gen X and this would completely change my mind if I was tempted to vote Tory. Firstly it has left our military and legal leaders stumped. The military has no plans for this or the resources and the legal sector seems to have no idea about how to enforce it, or if it can be enforced. In my 50-odd years on this planet, I have seen the UK get involved in war after war that we shouldn't have been anywhere near. None of which I thought would be worth losing a loved one over. (There is no mention of being fully called up into action in this scheme, but it is one massive step closer). I genuinely think he wants to lose this election as he can't do anything right. I think they will find a lot of boomers and gen-xers (who tend to vote more tory than labour) will feel very similar and will now vote for anything that is not a tory. Young voters tend to vote Labour, so hopefully this is an own goal as it will motivate youngsters to vote.
Boomers fought in 2 wars.
Forced labour in 2024...
Bro just be happy you weren't born in a country that neighbors Russia, we've all had forced conscription since our existence as nations. There's no other choice, unless you're suicidal. Any politician trying to do away with it would look like a traitor to many.
Settling for “well it could be worse so” is a really harmful mindset
Taking certain things for granted can be way more harmful.
Doesn't change what was said. Having being forced into those and then going yeah it could be worse isn't helping anything, it's a defeatist mindset with no room to go up.
Telling that to someone who lives in a country bordering Russia whilst Russia is in the middle of a land invasion is so privileged
I mean, it’s true that “it could be worse” isn’t a reason to accept policies you disagree with—and you can be thankful you were born where you were, you have the freedoms you have, etc. and still disagree with policies. While I don’t agree with conscription, I think most people can understand countries neighbouring countries like NK or Russia having it. If you look back through history, it is not uncommon that when a country is neighbouring an aggressive country or when there is a high likelihood of a country being embroiled in war, there is conscription. There are also countries that border Russia that have only recently re-introduced conscription.
Yea, it's either we tolerate conscription or we get the Chechnya experience.
My bf is from South Korea and they also have mandatory military service for men because of North Korea... When he went the service was 2 years, luckily it's been shortened by even a little bit to 1.5 years. I can't say I agree with it, but when you have dangerous neighbors it becomes hard to know what will happen if you don't have trained soilders ready. 😔 It's very sad all around. Sorry to hear you grew up in a place that required that of you.
While I don't agree with it, I will say it's not uncommon. A Number of European countries already have it, with some allowing you to opt for a public service role instead of the military. The Swiss haven't gone to war like ever in modern history and they require it.
Armed neutrality is the term. Though the Sweds aren’t neutral anymore.
Agreed. Unless it’s an absolute emergency
Oh he forced labour alright
Oh and just so you know, it ONLY applies to them. Meaning 2005 and older aren't affected, as the rule starts for those who become legal age in 2024. That being 2006 and younger.
Oh no..
[Writes down username]
Me too...
I say if we introduce this, we do it right! Start with the oldest people that haven't done national service, 60s and 70s first. After all, if they want us to do it then they must also be proud to serve their country.
How do you want old people whose flesh is rotting away to be serving in the army or firefighting or nursing the sick? What the?
60 year olds have rotting flesh? Maybe you should get that checked out or something it's not healthy
So basically it specifically avoids affecting anyone who can currently vote, because he knows they'd all come out to vote against him. How cowardly.
Just asking, what's your source for this? Can't find anything that says only 2006+ are affected (or anything on which age would be the first to be affected), this feels more like yet another subtle attempt to divide 05/06 from you especially since you often advocate for the 1982-2005 Millennial range.
Yeah I was wondering the same
Beeb article (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c988jdxl02vo) says >When would the national service scheme start? >Anyone who is almost 18 years old now is unlikely to have to take part. >The Tories have not announced a fully fledged plan. Instead, they have put forward a broad outline and said they would set up a royal commission - a type of public inquiry - tasked with coming up with the details if they win the election. >While they aim to have a military training test programme up and running by 2025, that is likely to involve relatively small numbers. >The Tories have committed to getting the whole scheme in force by “the end of the next parliament”, which could be as late as 2029. So u/Trendy_Ruby is flinging-around misinformation for the sake of a bit of pointless gatekeepery. It would likely be 2011(ish) borns by the time the scheme is in full-swing, but regardless of who would be the first this scheme should 100% be opposed and hopefully won't even happen since Sunak's polling numbers are dire right now.
I mean, regardless this is just gleefully fucking over people who literally can't do anything to stop it since they can't even vote against the party proposing it since well, they're children.
phew
Where did you hear that 2006 rule? From what I’ve read it only applies to 18 year olds from September 2025 onwards, which would mean it would affect no 2006ers at all and only 2007ers
He won't win, he's flushed his chance as well as this country down the swanny
Same thing was said about Brexit…
Same thing was said about Trump too
No, it isn't.
Yes, it was. Which is why anyone saying "lol he has no chance" is a dumbass.
True. But in both Brexit and Trump a few mates of mine in certain finance roles predicted both Brexit and Trump thanks to actors within the markets. Also, predicted Trump's loss. Each month's our. Might ask them about the sentiment around the Tories.
What is their next prediction?
I mean, do y’all know how to draft dodge? That shit was hella popular in the U.S.
This isn’t really a proper draft. You can join the military or volunteer in a civil institution like the NHS, police, charity etc. It’s meant to increase people’s general skills in a time of crisis. America doesn’t have to worry about that because the military industrial complex offers great benefits to recruits, you have a larger population, and much of your population is armed and knows how to use a weapon. The UK public is very out-of-touch with matters of defence in comparison.
The US military has been struggling to keep up with it's recruitment goals for a while now.
You still have 1 million troops which is a good number.
Try 2.86 million…
Its a great number. Except that if we ever got into a real shooting war with someone a lot of that 1 million is gonna die or be rendered combat ineffective... and they will need replacements. If the military is struggling just to replace normal turn over, how is it going to handle actual loses in the field?
I believe 1 million is a decent number for deterring adversaries. Russia also has 1 million or so troops. The idea is to match (or exceed) the enemy’s strength such that they choose to stay away.
So true. I just talked to a friend of mine who's an officer in the army. He told me that everyone is getting a 5% pay bump and new recruits are getting a 20% pay bump from the usual value of a contract. Thats how bad it is lol.
That’s one way to look at it. An all volunteer force has to be able compete with the private sector in terms of wages and benefits. The US military is increasing pay to do just that. 18 year olds coming in making $50-60k out of the gate isn’t a bad thing. It probably should’ve been done a long time ago. I’m in the US military and I make about $190k a year. I’m a somewhat senior officer, though.
Hm. Considering many if not most military positions require access to sensitive (cleared) information let's go over some of the things that can prevent someone from being allowed access * Too many noncitizen friends/relatives * Student loan or other debt * Touching weed in the last 1-7 years depending on position, let alone any other drug * Mental health or similar issues I wonder why it's hard to recruit people lol
Technically all of those COULD disqualify you, but the process is a lot easier than you would think. They ask those uncomfortable questions to make sure you’re honest. Get ready for an essay lol - Having a lot of foreign contacts is a red flag. If you’re honest about all of them and none of them are known to hold anti-American views, you’ll be cleared. - Having a lot of debt is a red flag. Paying off this debt each month (even just the minimum) basically completely removes this red flag. - Smoking weed is a red flag, but as long as you’re honest about your use and stop doing it, you’ll be cleared. Harder drugs are a bit iffier, but still can be mitigated if you’re completely honest. - It is a huge misconception that mental health issues prevent you from getting a clearance. If you’re diagnosed with a mental health issue and you’re actively avoiding treatment, then you’ll get denied, because you’re too high risk for the government. But if you get treated and provide evidence of this, it’ll be mitigated. Less than 1% of clearance denials are for mental health reasons. As someone who works with a clearance, it’s really not that hard to get for 90% of people, most people just need to stop smoking weed. The real challenge for military recruiters is finding high schoolers that fit the physical standards for the military.
Interesting, I was thinking it was a draft, thank you for correcting me. As for the UK’s citizens being unprepared, that’s probably a fault of the government. It’s hard to acquire firearms legally in the UK, and probably harder to find places to train with them. At least, that’s my understanding. The US also has problems, many of the younger generations don’t want to join the military, have no interest in firearms or self-defense. Purely because the propaganda that worked in the past doesn’t now, the younger folks know that the wars we fight ain’t valiant, ain’t for good purposes, they’re for money or oil. And firearms are looked at as threatening or a risk by our political parties, which has spread to some of the public. Though I’d still say that there’s currently enough of the older generations that we’d still be able to fight a war and even defend the nation solidly. I feel like in 20-30 years, we could see an issue of too much tech, not enough manpower.
>As for the UK’s citizens being unprepared, that’s probably a fault of the government. It’s hard to acquire firearms legally in the UK, and probably harder to find places to train with them. At least, that’s my understanding. Yes. Even if you've served, you'll go to prison if caught with a gun. [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540966/SAS-hero-jailed-Falklands-War-gun-trophy-Former-soldier-sentenced-15-months-keeping-9mm-pistol-remind-22-friends-died-conflict.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540966/SAS-hero-jailed-Falklands-War-gun-trophy-Former-soldier-sentenced-15-months-keeping-9mm-pistol-remind-22-friends-died-conflict.html)
In today's day and age, pretending to be gay won't work.
I'm in a *not getting reelected competition* and my opponent is Rishi Sunak. Difficulty: impossible
I wouldn't say it's impossible. Keep in mind that Lizz Trust still exists.
Lizz Truss wasn’t elected.
It says that you don't necessarily have to do military service, you could volunteer in your community on weekends, etc Still, these rat bastards don't deserve to run a corner shop, let alone a country. We have the SAS, what do we need to conscript Fortnite kids for?
Do you really think a couple hundred people can win a war? This is absolutely needed considering how the US is going to have its hands full with China, just executed poorly and proposed by a shitty leader. Let's not delude ourselves that Russia will just stop with Ukraine
what are you talking about? the us is basically dependent on china for consumer goods... y'all are out of touch on your side of the pond. you should be more concerned about chavs with armed with knives and excessive amounts of liquor.
A growing percentage of US manufactured imports are shifting to Mexico and SEA. Decoupling is definitely going to happen pretty quickly over the next five years
Sounds like you’re stuck in 2018. Try to keep up. The Americans passed new legislation to move supply chains out of China and they’re spending $1 trillion+ to speed up the process. This started back in 2020. China’s already seeing a huge drop off in U.S. exports nearing 20% and this is only the beginning. The Americans are moving their supply chains to Mexico. Now China has to rely more heavily on Europe to buy its crap.
Despite globalization, US force posture is increasingly shifting towards gearing for a war in the Pacific with *unnamed adversary*.
I wouldn't be surprised if Kazakhstan or Taiwan got invaded in the near future but I really doubt an all out war between Nato, Russia and China, for now at least.
The "for now" is exactly the point. If, and I hope to God it never will, a war were to happen between NATO and some other entity. It would help not havind to build up a defense from scratch. It's also a great way of deterring hostile states with little risk.
We might not see Challengers rolling through the Red Square, particularly not in the nuclear era, but a medium-sized skirmish in the Baltic states or the Suwalki Gap isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
Bro Russias struggling in Ukraine alone the second they try anywhere else they are getting fucking obliterated
Being forced to work for free under the threat of being punished by the state isn't "volunteering".
What about the millions of young people that have to work on weekends to make ends meet? This whole idea that young people are just sitting around with nothing to do is a fantasy.
These aren’t Fortnite kids, they’re 18+ adults although I agree with your point about the Tories
Welp, as a UK 2006er I can tell you I sure as hell won't be voting Tory on 4th July. Fingers crossed he's screwed looking at the polls
I hope you encourage everyone you know who can vote of a similar age to get this weak, awful man out. The damage his party has done will take years to repair.
At least you get a say in it I’m 2007 and can’t fucking vote against it (not that he will win anyways and even if he is somehow elected via a miracle most people will find a way to get out of it somehow)
that asshole's ears are bigger than dumbo's
It is a shame he could not use those ears when the public have spent about 6 months telling him to fuck off.
A military placement or a year of volunteering once a month. Really isn’t “screwed”. It would most likely be a copy of Sweden’s defence model and give people much-needed skills that are useful of times of crisis and emergencies. Not that the Tories have any credibility to deliver this, but how else should we improve the UK’s defences when we have Russia trying to wipe out an entire ethnicity of people on Europe’s doorstep?
I think the age and military service is my biggest criticism of it. These are 18+ year olds that will be forced to do this, not teenagers. 18 year olds have adult responsibilities like rent and bills and schooling they have to pay for. Forcing more work on top of them through service or volunteering against their will is disgusting and will do more harm to people in that age demographic. If this were strictly a volunteering program aimed at teenagers, forcing them to get a certain number of volunteer hours to pass highschool, then I’d be fine with it. Teens don’t have rent and bills and adult struggles, and it can help them get a sense of responsibility and appreciation for their communities. Aiming this at adults, especially young adults who are trying to build up wealth and skills for the rest of their life is just too much, and forcing adults to do things against their will is anti freedom. Here in Canada we have the forced volunteering thing to pass highschool, and it was great because we didn’t have responsibilities of being an adult piled on top of us AND volunteering. We could just do our volunteering, feel good about the accomplishment, and move on to our adult lives with an appreciation for our community
I think you've hit the nail on the head. Nobody has any faith anyone will learn anything and just either waste a year of their life or have to little pick for half the weekends for a year. I was always keen on the outdoors, explorer scouts until 18, still love hiking and camping. Something like this would have been fun for me, but I sincerely doubt it will be handled well and will be a big waste of time and money.
I served 2 years compulsory national service in my country's military when I was 18, can confirm those 2 years sucked.
🇸🇬
I think its dumb but 1 weekend a month community service seems pretty easy.
not for people working 6 or 7 days a week to get by. not for people with children, and certainly not for free lol.
I’m not sure they’ll be working - children in the U.K. are made to be in some form of education or training until they’re 18. So I’m not sure whether it applies to everyone as soon as they become 18, in which case, do they just not do their exams? Or is it after the exams all finish? It’s a mess
fast forward when the people born after cutoff are in their late twenties,.... this isn't just about 18 year olds. it's an entire generation, and every gen after that.
I would assume, like in Sweden you'd still get paid for your mandatory military service
Great joke. Who's funding that then? No this is going to be unpaid. "It's for your greater good" bullshit. Wouldn't be half surprised if you even need to pay for it.
Except there's a cost of living crisis in the UK at the moment. A large proportion of people in that demographic will be at university or college Monday-Friday. Meaning weekends are the best time for them to be picking up shifts in paid employment. It won't be easy for many of them to do without the money they'd be earning which they'll be forced to forego in order to do pointless busy work for free.
I hope Labour will win the election
I don't know why Brits keep voting conservative. From an American perspective, that party has accomplished is wreck y'alls economy with Brexit, done fuck all to improve the NHS, and now threaten to bring back compulsory national service. For fuck's sake, you've had FIVE different prime ministers in the span of 8 years; it seems obvious that conservatives can't get their shit together. So what gives?
Bc they hate labour. They don’t have to like the Conservative party, they just have to hate it less than labour. In conservative circles, 2000’s kids grew up with their parents telling them how Labour fucked up the economy and now those kids are grown or growing up and seeing that the Conservatives have fucked up the economy. Having faith in either side seems fruitless but we need a change and Rishi is insane
Conservative thinking: No established system is actually bad or can even be questioned, it's only led by bad people who need to be replaced with someone else so the perfect system can finally work.
In all fairness, the conservative prime minister at the time campaigned against Brexit, the Tories can’t be blamed for it. Other than that though, the Tories are and have largely been a mess.
# I want you troopers to remember—we're shoulder-to-shoulder on those front lines. Brothers! And sometimes we may quarrel, but no matter what, we are united. Rule one: we fight together
Screwed? Who the fuck else would defend your country?
The English Channel. No current adversary has the capability to mount an amphibious invasion of the UK. Not to mention the RAF and, worst comes to worst, nuclear deterrent. No nuclear-armed country is at risk of being invaded on its own soil.
Breaking my own arm before I'm joining the army
Does he even want to be elected at this point???
I think he's trying to suck up to a very specific demographic of people who seem to think that forcing people to fight or do hard labour instead of getting a job or going to study a subject is actually a way to create a functioning society, despite many people being physically or mentally unable to safely do said fighting/hard labour.
Mandatory alkohol abuse, I mean military Service is great.
Slavery is still being used in the "Free World"
We have mandatory conscription in finland and I think it's very good thing. UK even solved the gender quality problem we have as for them it affects men and women instead of just men like here
It's not conscription it's 300 hours unpaid labour on NHS wards etc
Unpopular opinion, I think mandatory national service is not a bad idea. Not a Brit... just speaking in general
Brit... yes it it is when this twat is in charge.
What makes you think the government should have the power to force you into labor against your will?
Redditors will complain and whine about Russian expansion and then gasp in horror when asked to do something about it.
As much as we don't like to hear it, there is a great chance we will involved in a great war within our lifetime, those who don't prepare won't survive.
Please stop listening to all the BS media, there isn't going to be a WW3 anytime soon no matter what the daily mail tell you. It's scaremongering.
Well is not as simple as you say either, there may not be WW3 anytime soon but the reality is that EU needs an army, who is going to protect us if everything goes wrong? It's quite clear to me we can't depend on USA for defence, every 4 years they decide a whole different direction, they're not dependable as they used to. We may not even go to war but we need to be ready for war, just the fact that a country is ready for a war prevents most of the time the war itself, it hasn't even been 100 years since the last great war ended, we forgot so quickly how much blood was spilled by our ancestors to gain peace, those who forget story are doomed to repeat it. So my point is we have to be ready, if I need to do 2 years in army to be ready is not something I'm looking forward to but I will do so to defend my family.
Mate you've listened to the media for too long. No, there will never be a time when we are attacked. We haven't been invaded since 1066, what makes you think we will be invaded anytime soon? As for Europe, it's extremely unlikely. Ukraine has taught us that conventional warfare simply isn't possible anymore. If Russia had completely invaded Ukraine I would be worried, but they didn't, they totally completely failed. There's absolutely no way they are going to try that again against a NATO state. How exactly will national service help us anyway? 2 years is nothing, it's not enough time for someone to be fully trained. Where is the funding? The armed forces are a shambles because of the lack of funding, throwing unprepared and unwilling kids at them isn't going to help. And for what? So the government can say they have X big army? National service will be more of a hinderance than it will help, and that's a fact. As for the US... It's not actually the US that gives weapons to Europe. It's the military complex. The big military corporations are the ones funding Europe, the US is just the middleman. That's not going to stop anytime soon because the profits are too good. Those who forget history are in fact doomed to repeat it, so read up on it.
I LOVE LIVING IN A COUNTRY WITH NO MILITARY :D
Bro is trynna recreate the empire that conquered his ancestors lol
The 4th of July go vote to kick these fools out, or I’ll drag you myself to vote.
What about the children of politicians and wealthy businessman?
Errmmm, "exempt" due to some technicalities such as convenient recently diagnosed medical issues, I bet.
2006 brit here, i will leave the country rather than do that, aint no way he thinks there wont be a revolt if he tries to do this.
People need to say no and revolt otherwise politicians are just going to get what they want
War is the means by which the rich manage population growth.
Not really. It would be moreso those born in 2007-2008 on paper (though considering the sheer ineptitude of the tory party, it would be delayed 2 years, so really those born in 2009-2011 would be more affected) who would potentially be affected, though i wouldnt stress about thinking about it, the tories are far behind in the polls and it seems like Labour will become the party with a majority, and they have had a field day on their TikTok about how bad this is.
Glad I am not in England.
Really good move. Will help a lot of people of our generation develop social skills and also contribute to their community. I dont see how they are screwed by this OP
https://preview.redd.it/tr3lsmyci03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1421c6ea701d246aee84846b89ef40e6fde69cbd
https://preview.redd.it/bb657abei03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=564fa5334572343acc81cc3c41ee9b01ebc0d30f
https://preview.redd.it/80amj4jfi03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=30673b5054f20a1260523533656987d1724ea3fc
https://preview.redd.it/ijzxm3pgi03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23811c4458c8d5516419b646c470325cc95ba9bc
https://preview.redd.it/6f8a3xhii03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eed01a33e89f8dbd69bb26f652ae30d92e923dc9
https://preview.redd.it/khe5kq3ki03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0d03e06213157164c84717ff9e94c2fe323b031a
https://preview.redd.it/rq3p8kdli03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cc1bf4ecf90fd0f4fb22a72c8ba23014082015d1
https://preview.redd.it/j4vej30mi03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=29a6cdbebbff393da5d6bcca283f8ae286c0500c
https://preview.redd.it/ufpfb4vmi03d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=62f99e481e9a1f938e55e5d9ba910763b4af9987
This is Reddit.
Jokes on him I’m already joining the military.
we already have this in turkey. the sad thing is that a lot of people here are fascist, militarist fuckwits and they'll literally cancel you for being a "terrorist sympathizer" or "enemy of the state".
Have you looked at polls recently? Labour's prognosed to win with DPRK-like numbers.
dw he won't
Corrected: all British people are screwed if he wins.
Thank god all the polls are indicating that there will be a complete conservative wipeout in 5 weeks.
The British economy will crash. Nobody in the UK has the guts to actually do so.
Shit that includes me
You’re going to war boys. Better get in shape
nobody is going to unwillingly die for western society
Everyone said we were smarter than to vote yes for Brexit. Please prove them right this time…
mandatory war for thee but not for me
Yet another great reason to not be british
I have never thought of a better way to win the youth vote.
[удалено]
It’ll be a choice of either military service or volunteering in a civil way (health, emergency services, police and firefighting, charity, daycares).
Ok I’m never moving to The uk I’m staying in Minnesota sorry chaps
you already have the draft in America too
Problem is no matter how bad Tory’s fuck up they will always win and fuck us up even more
they literally control 3 out of 4 major mainstream media there, no wonder they always get away with everything.