I think the military should stop promoting to children, do you agree?
I saw this opinion on the Independent this morning and want to know your views on it
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-british-armed-forces-needs-to-stop-targeting-and-recruiting-children-10352738.html
Personally I think the military shouldn't be advertising to younger people in schools and colleges, and shouldn't have a huge presence at university too. I cant believe they visited over 11,000 schools in a year.
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone. Also the mental trauma can be horrifying too.
What are your thoughts?
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-british-armed-forces-needs-to-stop-targeting-and-recruiting-children-10352738.html
Personally I think the military shouldn't be advertising to younger people in schools and colleges, and shouldn't have a huge presence at university too. I cant believe they visited over 11,000 schools in a year.
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone. Also the mental trauma can be horrifying too.
What are your thoughts?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by GuppyFox
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone.
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone.
Do you think we're the only country on this planet?
Other countries aren't interested about your pacifist stance, and they're more than likely to exploit you when you're vulnerable.
In Russia when children are indoctrinated at a young age are incentivised to become ardent patriots and in China when everyone goes to the military for two years, it's not exactly sending a good message to the future of our country that there is no one willing to defend it.
The Military has just about as many justifications to be in children's lives as there is a justification for civil/gay rights to be taught in schools and for geography to be taught on Thursdays. It's a norm in every country.
What pacifists tend to forget is that we're not the only country on this planet, and unilateral demilitarisation isn't exactly a guarantee that other countries will follow - in fact it's an incentive for them to follow our troops by settling theirs in our land.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
If you want peace, prepare for war.
I went into a public-‘ouse to get a pint o’beer,
The publican ‘e up an’ sez, “We serve no red-coats here.”
The girls be’ind the bar they laughed an’ giggled fit to die,
…
O makin’ mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;
An’ hustlin’ drunken sodgers when they’re goin’ large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin’ in full kit.
The publican ‘e up an’ sez, “We serve no red-coats here.”
The girls be’ind the bar they laughed an’ giggled fit to die,
…
O makin’ mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;
An’ hustlin’ drunken sodgers when they’re goin’ large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin’ in full kit.
Original post by SotonianOne
Do you think we're the only country on this planet?
Other countries aren't interested about your pacifist stance, and they're more than likely to exploit you when you're vulnerable.
The Military has just about as many justifications to be in children's lives as there is a justification for civil/gay rights to be taught in schools and for geography to be taught on Thursdays. It's a norm in every country.
Other countries aren't interested about your pacifist stance, and they're more than likely to exploit you when you're vulnerable.
The Military has just about as many justifications to be in children's lives as there is a justification for civil/gay rights to be taught in schools and for geography to be taught on Thursdays. It's a norm in every country.
Although I do believe that military should be promoted as a possible career path, does it really need to have much of a presence?
If Russia or China were to escalate their agression, their first and obvious target would be the US.
Furthermore, the UK has nuclear weapons - any attempt to invade the island looms under the threat of nuclear war.
Best leave it to the Americans and their gigantic military spending.
The thing that annoys me about ads for the military is how cool they try to make it look. Shooting guns, using tanks and radios, bleeding masculinity out of every orifice and being told you can be the 'best you can be' - but you won't be. People will call you a hero, but you won't be. You'll have signed over your moral agency to obscure authority figures, protecting 'British interests', and potentially risking your life for these things because adverts made it look cool and because someone somewhere along convinced you patriotism was a virtue.
If you need an army you have to interest young people and especially teens and young men.
It has often been said that a ressesion is the best recruiting sergeant the forces could ever have.
Every country is the same and as has been said earlier, other countries and potential enemies would love us to stop promoting the forces to teens and young men.
Without the supply of them the forces would be decimated.
It has often been said that a ressesion is the best recruiting sergeant the forces could ever have.
Every country is the same and as has been said earlier, other countries and potential enemies would love us to stop promoting the forces to teens and young men.
Without the supply of them the forces would be decimated.
I'd supporting raising the minimum age to 18 for the sake of the mental health issues, but wouldn't curtail anything else. The Armed Forces have as much right to 'recruit' at schools and universities as any other employer.
Original post by PopaPork
I went into a public-‘ouse to get a pint o’beer,
The publican ‘e up an’ sez, “We serve no red-coats here.”
The girls be’ind the bar they laughed an’ giggled fit to die,
…
O makin’ mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;
An’ hustlin’ drunken sodgers when they’re goin’ large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin’ in full kit.
The publican ‘e up an’ sez, “We serve no red-coats here.”
The girls be’ind the bar they laughed an’ giggled fit to die,
…
O makin’ mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;
An’ hustlin’ drunken sodgers when they’re goin’ large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin’ in full kit.
Good Kipling reference. This one sprang to my mind as well:
http://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poems_islanders.htm
Original post by GuppyFox
I saw this opinion on the Independent this morning and want to know your views on it
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-british-armed-forces-needs-to-stop-targeting-and-recruiting-children-10352738.html
Personally I think the military shouldn't be advertising to younger people in schools and colleges, and shouldn't have a huge presence at university too. I cant believe they visited over 11,000 schools in a year.
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone. Also the mental trauma can be horrifying too.
What are your thoughts?
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-british-armed-forces-needs-to-stop-targeting-and-recruiting-children-10352738.html
Personally I think the military shouldn't be advertising to younger people in schools and colleges, and shouldn't have a huge presence at university too. I cant believe they visited over 11,000 schools in a year.
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone. Also the mental trauma can be horrifying too.
What are your thoughts?
That article was grossly misleading. It seems to imply that 16 year-olds are likely to die in the Armed Forces. This is not the case as no 16 year-old soldier may be sent into a war zone. Only once they reach 18 can they be sent to war. The author appeared deliberately vague on that point, talking of the percentage of deaths among 16 year old recruits as if they're being sent to Afghanistan straight from the recruiting office.
A more troubling point about the article was the journalist's vague complaints about military values. At no point does he define what he considers them to be, or why they are a negative thing to impart to children.
Is it wrong to have children taught to keep themselves physically fit? Or taught to be more confident, to have self-belief, to lead, and to work effectively in a team? Is it wrong to be taught that attention to detail, thorough preparation and disciplined, regular practice are the bedrock of success in any field? Is it wrong to teach self discipline, integrity, and grace under pressure? Is it wrong to teach that self sacrifice and putting others before yourself is a virtue? I'd view all of those as things the military values, and if they're the wrong things to be teaching children then I don't want to be right.
The mental trauma point I find dubious. Why does he link it to the recruitment of 16 year-olds? I suspect that every country which doesn't recruit 16 year-olds has exactly the same levels of PTSD, etc..., among their front-line troops as we do. I suspect the increased likelihood of mental illness in that specific group of recruits is more attributable to the the appalling lack of support given to troops after they leave the forces. It seems likely that this would hit such recruits harder as they have known very little else outside the ordered world of the military. That is something worth getting worked up about - but I digress...
Why on earth would you say people shouldn't feel a need to risk their lives for their country? I would say that is a duty, in fact more than that, it is something you owe to your country. Your country has nurtured you, educated and raised you in conditions of relative peace and prosperity - I'd say JFK is pretty much on the money when he said you should be asking what you can do for your country.
No one is suggesting that we teach children to want to go to war with everyone, but let's please not be so naive as to think that pacifism is in any way a realistic answer to, lets say, ISIS. There are plenty of things wrong with our Armed Forces, their administration, MoD spending, etc... but I really do not think this is one of them.
Original post by B-FJL3
That article was grossly misleading. It seems to imply that 16 year-olds are likely to die in the Armed Forces. This is not the case as no 16 year-old soldier may be sent into a war zone. Only once they reach 18 can they be sent to war. The author appeared deliberately vague on that point, talking of the percentage of deaths among 16 year old recruits as if they're being sent to Afghanistan straight from the recruiting office.
A more troubling point about the article was the journalist's vague complaints about military values. At no point does he define what he considers them to be, or why they are a negative thing to impart to children.
Is it wrong to have children taught to keep themselves physically fit? Or taught to be more confident, to have self-belief, to lead, and to work effectively in a team? Is it wrong to be taught that attention to detail, thorough preparation and disciplined, regular practice are the bedrock of success in any field? Is it wrong to teach self discipline, integrity, and grace under pressure? Is it wrong to teach that self sacrifice and putting others before yourself is a virtue? I'd view all of those as things the military values, and if they're the wrong things to be teaching children then I don't want to be right.
The mental trauma point I find dubious. Why does he link it to the recruitment of 16 year-olds? I suspect that every country which doesn't recruit 16 year-olds has exactly the same levels of PTSD, etc..., among their front-line troops as we do. I suspect the increased likelihood of mental illness in that specific group of recruits is more attributable to the the appalling lack of support given to troops after they leave the forces. It seems likely that this would hit such recruits harder as they have known very little else outside the ordered world of the military. That is something worth getting worked up about - but I digress...
Why on earth would you say people shouldn't feel a need to risk their lives for their country? I would say that is a duty, in fact more than that, it is something you owe to your country. Your country has nurtured you, educated and raised you in conditions of relative peace and prosperity - I'd say JFK is pretty much on the money when he said you should be asking what you can do for your country.
No one is suggesting that we teach children to want to go to war with everyone, but let's please not be so naive as to think that pacifism is in any way a realistic answer to, lets say, ISIS. There are plenty of things wrong with our Armed Forces, their administration, MoD spending, etc... but I really do not think this is one of them.
A more troubling point about the article was the journalist's vague complaints about military values. At no point does he define what he considers them to be, or why they are a negative thing to impart to children.
Is it wrong to have children taught to keep themselves physically fit? Or taught to be more confident, to have self-belief, to lead, and to work effectively in a team? Is it wrong to be taught that attention to detail, thorough preparation and disciplined, regular practice are the bedrock of success in any field? Is it wrong to teach self discipline, integrity, and grace under pressure? Is it wrong to teach that self sacrifice and putting others before yourself is a virtue? I'd view all of those as things the military values, and if they're the wrong things to be teaching children then I don't want to be right.
The mental trauma point I find dubious. Why does he link it to the recruitment of 16 year-olds? I suspect that every country which doesn't recruit 16 year-olds has exactly the same levels of PTSD, etc..., among their front-line troops as we do. I suspect the increased likelihood of mental illness in that specific group of recruits is more attributable to the the appalling lack of support given to troops after they leave the forces. It seems likely that this would hit such recruits harder as they have known very little else outside the ordered world of the military. That is something worth getting worked up about - but I digress...
Why on earth would you say people shouldn't feel a need to risk their lives for their country? I would say that is a duty, in fact more than that, it is something you owe to your country. Your country has nurtured you, educated and raised you in conditions of relative peace and prosperity - I'd say JFK is pretty much on the money when he said you should be asking what you can do for your country.
No one is suggesting that we teach children to want to go to war with everyone, but let's please not be so naive as to think that pacifism is in any way a realistic answer to, lets say, ISIS. There are plenty of things wrong with our Armed Forces, their administration, MoD spending, etc... but I really do not think this is one of them.
I think you hit the nail on the head there.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Definitely not, pupils need to know about our armed forces and how important they are to our country as well as be aware of all their career options
They aren't press gangs. The armed forces remain entirely voluntary.
The things that article failed to mention?
Anybody aged 16-18 wanting to sign up has to have parental permission.
Youth organisations are proven to help the development of teenagers, and fill the large gaps that schools miss out. The biggest, once you take all the cadet groups out of the equation, is the Scouts. An organisation originally set up to prepare boys for a military career.
There is nothing at all wrong with the situation we have. Nobody would bat an eyelid about any number of huge multinationals going into schools to promote themselves and as we all know they are often responsible for far more damage and death. So why the double standards?
The things that article failed to mention?
Anybody aged 16-18 wanting to sign up has to have parental permission.
Youth organisations are proven to help the development of teenagers, and fill the large gaps that schools miss out. The biggest, once you take all the cadet groups out of the equation, is the Scouts. An organisation originally set up to prepare boys for a military career.
There is nothing at all wrong with the situation we have. Nobody would bat an eyelid about any number of huge multinationals going into schools to promote themselves and as we all know they are often responsible for far more damage and death. So why the double standards?
Original post by GuppyFox
I saw this opinion on the Independent this morning and want to know your views on it
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-british-armed-forces-needs-to-stop-targeting-and-recruiting-children-10352738.html
Personally I think the military shouldn't be advertising to younger people in schools and colleges, and shouldn't have a huge presence at university too. I cant believe they visited over 11,000 schools in a year.
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone. Also the mental trauma can be horrifying too.
What are your thoughts?
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-british-armed-forces-needs-to-stop-targeting-and-recruiting-children-10352738.html
Personally I think the military shouldn't be advertising to younger people in schools and colleges, and shouldn't have a huge presence at university too. I cant believe they visited over 11,000 schools in a year.
People shouldn't feel as if they need to risk their lives to protect their country, and shouldn't have this large military influence early on in life. The world should progress through peace and community ideals, which to prosper in the future, should be embedded in children's minds from a young age, and not that fact we need to go out to war with everyone. Also the mental trauma can be horrifying too.
What are your thoughts?
Never met anybody who
I served with regret joining up in the first place.
In fact the military is the one organisation that truly promotes social
Mobility and is an avenue for kids from poor backgrounds to make a go of life.
Then again, those on the left have been shafting the working classes for a long time now and continually remove their opportunities for advancement in life.
You seem to be looking at the world through rose tinked glasses, it isn't full of peace loving diplomatically solvable problems its full of violent people who can only be dealt with by the means they employ and the army isn't forcing subscription on them its a simple presentation hardly indoctrination.
The military can provide a great career to people. Also seeing in you can't join the regulars from your later 20's, if you want full time career soldiers you do kind of have to start advertising to people at a fairly young age.
The only people I know who regret the armed forces are those who stayed too long and got into this middle group, where you have all this bureaucratic BS and have become stuck there for the rest of their career. If you want to be a mechanic or engineer, the military is a great option seeing your very employable once you leave, much more so than a uni student who did engineering for example.
The only people I know who regret the armed forces are those who stayed too long and got into this middle group, where you have all this bureaucratic BS and have become stuck there for the rest of their career. If you want to be a mechanic or engineer, the military is a great option seeing your very employable once you leave, much more so than a uni student who did engineering for example.
Original post by DanB1991
The military can provide a great career to people. Also seeing in you can't join the regulars from your later 20's, if you want full time career soldiers you do kind of have to start advertising to people at a fairly young age.
The only people I know who regret the armed forces are those who stayed too long and got into this middle group, where you have all this bureaucratic BS and have become stuck there for the rest of their career. If you want to be a mechanic or engineer, the military is a great option seeing your very employable once you leave, much more so than a uni student who did engineering for example.
The only people I know who regret the armed forces are those who stayed too long and got into this middle group, where you have all this bureaucratic BS and have become stuck there for the rest of their career. If you want to be a mechanic or engineer, the military is a great option seeing your very employable once you leave, much more so than a uni student who did engineering for example.
The foreign banks are short on cannon fodder to fight armies that they funded.
Original post by SeaPony
110% agree they should stop targeting the young. Scum always target the young and the vulnerable.
Funny how the schools they most visit are in poor areas.
Funny how the schools they most visit are in poor areas.
Firstly they actually visit a wide variety of schools, secondly they don't actually like taking on neat student. Most of those who join at 16 will have fairly good GCSE's.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Is the UK prepared for WW3?
- How can I cope with my BF (25) joining the British Army?
- [Official thread] Hamas-Israel Conflict
- Joining infantry as an officer or squaddie
- [Official Thread] Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Starting non Commissioned role at 41
- Five SAS soldiers arrested for alleged war crimes in Syria
- Thoughts on Abortion?
- Relationships
- gcse aqa sociology 12 marker
- Making Othello statment question-A level english literature aqa b
- How good is “You are the average of the 5 people you spend time with”?
- Why do schools ignore bullying?
- RAF & RN - Considering a change of career in my forties...
- how could anyone be pro-israel?
- Core ideology essay
- Head teacher without having been a teacher?
- Advantage of an offer multiple times
- Children to no longer be prescribed puberty blockers, NHS England confirms
- Joining the British army - How do I tell my family I will be joining?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
