I have not seen this film but heard about it CoolHandBond. I think you are not correct. i think the British army can only do to so much to discipline in this times.
In my army it was correct for the NCOs to strike the soldier. When we were training and did the mistake we could be sent before the officer or be hit. If we were hit but fell to the ground this was weak and you would be hit until you got up to your feet. If you were bad you would be sent to detention barracks were you would be really have the most bad of times. I do not know anyone who went to DB more than one time. The things that happened at DB was talked about with the soldiers and this would make them not act bad for the fear of this. i think this is not like the British army because they cannot do this things it is like the teacher cannot hit the child or the parent also, the child has no fear to do things and this would be same in the army. I would not like to see peoples who are not interested in the army be in the army.
I have no military experience Joshua, so my opinion is just that, an opinion, but for those people who are unemployed then 3 years of training and learning discipline would be better than hanging around on street corners causing trouble. And I believe that there are several trades taught within the services that can be carried into civilian life (mechanics etc.).
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
Hello coolhandbond. What I say is i think it is better to train peoples in civilians trade not in the army but in the communities and make this the national service but they could join the army if they wanted to. I said this in other posts that also community service to help the community and make pride in the community this can be done just like it is made pride to be in a army regiment.
I would like to hear from the british army soldiers here if they think they could keep the discipline oif the recruits who were the tearaways (is this word correct?) some of these peoples have no fear of the police or the laws and prison so why would they be scared of the army discipline if the army could not do things like I heard with the yellow card. I think in my army we would beat them to make them do orders and put them in DB and they would be broke but it would be to waste our time to do this with peoples who have no thing to offer the army. I thought the British army could hit people also until i was told this was not so and was shocked to learn this.
Peoples in my country do not act like many here. The police would hit with the stick or the fist. the teacher can hit the pupil also. I just say this because i see the difference in how peoples behave if they know they can be punished and they know they will not be punished. I think the law here in england is just a joke to many.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,764Chief of Staff
Not everyone's a thug who goes in and not everyone's a thug who comes out. Some may not even wish to come out as they may enjoy being in the armed forces and have forged a career path and/or learned a trade..
But they will have all had training and fired weapons...why force that on someone who doesn't want to do it ? Go to army/navy towns on a Saturday night and watch the fighting....I believe people should have a choice...not be forced into it like you believe.
And this doesn't happen in non Army/Navy towns on a Saturday night? Wake up and smell the coffee Sir Miles. The way you and Joshua are carrying on you seem to think the world's a perfect place if we could all do what we wanted to do; yes I'll be disciplined because I got what I wanted. Sorry to disappoint you but it's not a perfect world.
The way you phrase it you make it sound like gangs are forged because they have been in the services.
Do you honestly believe that because people have been forced in to the armed services and have been trained to fire a weapon this is why there is trouble in the towns where there are military bases? I suggest you look at Chriscoop's (quote 26) and give yourself a reality check.
No, it's not a perfect world...and no amount of shouting and bullying people in the armed forces will put that right...you think teaching people to fight will cure the worlds ills 8-)
Quoting John W Henry - "what are you smoking over there?" )
There are certain policies in place to protect new recruits in the Armed Forces - but they are there because some did not appreciate their roles as Instructors or went too far. A rapid gain in operational experience over about 20 years caused a huge gap between expectation and capability. Recruits have died needlessly in training and that had to stop. There is a difference between robust training and bullying some crossed the line (intentionally or otherwise) and it costs lives. Of course those who train for 'specialist' roles can still expect to have to 'prove' themselves but that is the way is should be. But even then this has still cost lives in training which is hard for the general public to understand/ accept. We all know such things happen in every military force. However in the UK the Armed Forces lost Crown immunity in 87 and that changed a lot of things, including training. It still impacts now with actions on operations still being investigated and prosecuted for a split second decision analysed to death years later. Like I say times have changed everyone had to adapt.
The other issue is that the raw recruit is different to those who joined 10, 20 or even 30 years ago. In those days kids were more active, out most of the time and schooling and parenting was more robust. That has changed with the playstation generation. The biggest muscle they have it in their thumbs with all that texting and playing games. So it means to maintain the same military standard takes long to get them their - but with the right training and encouragement they can get there and be as competent as their predecessors. Its a journey of discovery about themselves and what they can achieve. Once they arrive at unit further education continues and so they grow into role. Also lets not forget modern warfare is technologically more complex than in the past - the need for boots on the ground will always be there (though politicians and others would love to think otherwise to much their decision much more clinical and easier) but being able to fly a remote drone from miles away ot operate more complex tech is starting to have equal importance (to which some of the above may now be equally suited)
Some see this as going soft (I get that to the old boys it would) but its about being smart with the raw product you have to get them to where you need them to be. Society has changed and all military forces have had to adapt to that.
Like I said before I miss the Cold War it seemed so much simpler back then
Cheers :007)
My name is Bond, Basildon Bond - I have letters after my name!
Typically in garrison towns a lot of trouble is started by local lads who resent the military types coming out in their town. A bit of a dust up is tolerated by officers and the rmp's or red caps anything above that or repeated offences will garner a reaction back at the barracks.
.
Those were the days I remember a few trips down to the Pegasus in Aldershot for a quiet drink with some Para friends. It was always a interesting night out! Locals seemed to keep their distance and RMP's standing off at closing time until everyone had bashed the daylights out of each other. Then just nicking those who remained on the floor who often went quietly to get a free lift home
Monday morning first parade and a count of black eyes by the Sargent Major - followed by a 'what happened?', bollocking and a quiet 'well done son' thereafter!!
Cheers :007)
My name is Bond, Basildon Bond - I have letters after my name!
No, it's not a perfect world...and no amount of shouting and bullying people in the armed forces will put that right...you think teaching people to fight will cure the worlds ills 8-)
Quoting John W Henry - "what are you smoking over there?" )
This will be my last comment on this topic as you've misquoted me more than once and/or misinterpreted what I have written so I won't waste any more of my time reading your drivel.
As for your pathetic attempt at humour which only yourself laughed at - well that says it all.
"Everyone knows rock n' roll attained perfection in 1974; It's a scientific fact". - Homer J Simpson
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,764Chief of Staff
No, it's not a perfect world...and no amount of shouting and bullying people in the armed forces will put that right...you think teaching people to fight will cure the worlds ills 8-)
Quoting John W Henry - "what are you smoking over there?" )
This will be my last comment on this topic as you've misquoted me more than once and/or misinterpreted what I have written so I won't waste any more of my time reading your drivel.
As for your pathetic attempt at humour which only yourself laughed at - well that says it all.
I haven't misquoted you at all...but that's always the complaint of a sore loser -{
please not to fight but sir miles and me did not say what you are saying. We do not think the world is perfect and to give everybody what they want so please not to to say this. I say military service is not the best for everyone but service to train to learn the civilian skills to those who do not want the military service. This is all I said before.
Finland has a general compulsion for national military service. Around 80% of the adult male population under 30yo go through this. The rest of the male population are either exempted for medical and / or religious grounds, drop out, or under go so called civil-service.
I have seen no evidence, that national military service "refines" the character of the youth of the nation. My time as a career officer also leads me to think, that even career in the military has a very marginal effect on you character; if you're a ba****d out of uniform, you'll just be a ba****d in the uniform. It is just like all professions in the world, where your 25/50/25 average rules the day.
Compulsory national military service makes sense (here in Finland) on the national defense way, because we live next door to brother Vladi, and his cut throats. If we were to live all by our selves, on an island, in the lap of nato (USA), then I would also have to think very hard, if national service in another country makes any sense.
ENDIT 0073
"I mean, she almost kills bond...with her ass."
-Mr Arlington Beech
No, it's not a perfect world...and no amount of shouting and bullying people in the armed forces will put that right...you think teaching people to fight will cure the worlds ills 8-)
Quoting John W Henry - "what are you smoking over there?" )
This will be my last comment on this topic as you've misquoted me more than once and/or misinterpreted what I have written so I won't waste any more of my time reading your drivel.
As for your pathetic attempt at humour which only yourself laughed at - well that says it all.
I haven't misquoted you at all...but that's always the complaint of a sore loser -{
You are wrong, you are beaten and you know it -{
Not sure we have winners and losers here Sir M, as far as I can see so far there are more people in favour of national service than against it of those who have contributed to this thread. Surely a differing opinion to one's own can't be wrong can it?
Finland has a general compulsion for national military service. Around 80% of the adult male population under 30yo go through this. The rest of the male population are either exempted for medical and / or religious grounds, drop out, or under go so called civil-service.
I have seen no evidence, that national military service "refines" the character of the youth of the nation. My time as a career officer also leads me to think, that even career in the military has a very marginal effect on you character; if you're a ba****d out of uniform, you'll just be a ba****d in the uniform. It is just like all professions in the world, where your 25/50/25 average rules the day.
Compulsory national military service makes sense (here in Finland) on the national defense way, because we live next door to brother Vladi, and his cut throats. If we were to live all by our selves, on an island, in the lap of nato (USA), then I would also have to think very hard, if national service in another country makes any sense.
ENDIT 0073
Yes, Finland had the wisdom to keep its territorial defence after the cold war ended, i.e. their military is still organized to defend the whole country from invasion. The country is one of very few European democracies to do so.
Handbags and dawn? Or anyone for a spot of MILLING!! )
There are always two sides to any conflict or argument (see above) and its about 'Perspectives' and keeping a sense of proportion.
What military service has taught me is to keep a sense of perspective, try to see the other side and find the common ground and you often reduce the need for conflict. Or equally its fine to agree to disagree because does it really matter after all no one is going to die? In a game of one up man ship any victory is a hollow one with very short lived gratification.
If you have ever been placed in a position where there was conflict (either physical, or in belief or verbal etc) and you are in a situation of numeric inferiority, you learn quickly it is better to negotiate than fight to a swift death, if you want to live of course. It is because many don't understand this or get stuck in the most basic argument my winky is bigger than yours we have conflicts today. The one thing that places us above Apes is our ability to learn from our mistakes and our reasoning. If not then like in the animal kingdom the strongest and fiercest will always come out on top.
In some areas society is broken, that's clear and its natural to turn to any organisation (especially a uniformed one) and say they could fix it. Frankly, they probably could, but the question is should they? Is that what the armed forces of any government are for - answer No. They are there to be a uniformed service to support the will of the country in defence of their nation. Separate from society but drawn from it. It has to have higher and stronger Values and Standards because of the job it can be called upon to perform. But these are also the sames Values and Standard (or very similar) we would like to see in society today. We talk as if it is an issue with the young, frankly it could the same for any age bracket born I would say from the 60's onward.
If society has a problem (which is some small areas it does) then society should fix it. As I have said before through early intervention, instilling core values and standards and strong punishment for those who break them. Giving someone weapons training does not make them a killer, frankly anyone can pull a trigger its not rocket science. What makes a killer or someone a threat to society is a reason or motivation, opportunity and a tool to do so. Its because these three exist freely in society today there is a problem. So whether is ideological beliefs, being part of a gang or just not liking someone - it is when you give these same people the tool and opportunity to do wrong they will.
Reality is its about boundaries and there is no quick fix, only early education (get them when they are young), robust intervention (be prepared to enforce the rules) or a deterrent (know they will be enforced) will reduce that risk anyone poses to society, but then there are some are just natural born killers anyway or those who will always seek to buck the system (some of whom are actually perfectly matched to serve in some parts of the Armed Forces!).
From a personal perspective I was a little fcuker when I was young, broken home life, hated school (it did not engage me but that was seen as my fault) and borrowing other peoples stuff without permission was my forte I was good at it (good at something at least) - but I got cocky and caught. I was given an option I took because I thought it the easy one. Boy was I wrong, I met men more vicious than me and better than me, and who taught me many lessons in life a father never did. The military saved me and I will be forever eternally grateful for that, but I had to make the choice and there were many times i could easily have given up. Military service could do the same for others for sure - but I also know it did not work for everyone. Then there is the military perspective on this as well I put forward previously which will make sense to anyone who has deployed on operations.
Now lets agree to agree to disagree I say and lets move on - life's too short
Cheers :007)
My name is Bond, Basildon Bond - I have letters after my name!
Black is always very slimming, hence why it's the colour of choice for so many special forces
Even if you're off on a suicide mission, it's always important to look your best.
I think it's possible to have a highly trained professional army. With an element of community service.
For example handing out sand bags in flood hit areas, or helping with rescue work ?
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,764Chief of Staff
This will be my last comment on this topic as you've misquoted me more than once and/or misinterpreted what I have written so I won't waste any more of my time reading your drivel.
As for your pathetic attempt at humour which only yourself laughed at - well that says it all.
I haven't misquoted you at all...but that's always the complaint of a sore loser -{
You are wrong, you are beaten and you know it -{
Not sure we have winners and losers here Sir M, as far as I can see so far there are more people in favour of national service than against it of those who have contributed to this thread. Surely a differing opinion to one's own can't be wrong can it?
You know what ? You are absolutely correct !
I've never had an issue with people having differing opinions - life would be boring if we all thought the same, peaceful but boring
I just find the whole 'misquoting' accusation tiresome... plus is there really a need for name calling ?
What I tried to say previously was, that the choise on national service should be a strategic one, rooted in the need for national defense. It is a much too costly way to just give young men experience, education or worse yet "just something to do".
For Finland it is an obvious choise; even if we would submit our application to NATO this moment, we would never be a full member state. Because of Russian influence, a veto from Turkey or nowadays from the USA will surely take care of that. You see it is as it has always been, here on northern fringe of the western world, we just have to rely on ourselves. Help will be appreciated, if the need arises, but it is not expected nor is it ever going to be relied upon.
"I mean, she almost kills bond...with her ass."
-Mr Arlington Beech
Comments
I have no military experience Joshua, so my opinion is just that, an opinion, but for those people who are unemployed then 3 years of training and learning discipline would be better than hanging around on street corners causing trouble. And I believe that there are several trades taught within the services that can be carried into civilian life (mechanics etc.).
Peoples in my country do not act like many here. The police would hit with the stick or the fist. the teacher can hit the pupil also. I just say this because i see the difference in how peoples behave if they know they can be punished and they know they will not be punished. I think the law here in england is just a joke to many.
No, it's not a perfect world...and no amount of shouting and bullying people in the armed forces will put that right...you think teaching people to fight will cure the worlds ills 8-)
Quoting John W Henry - "what are you smoking over there?"
The other issue is that the raw recruit is different to those who joined 10, 20 or even 30 years ago. In those days kids were more active, out most of the time and schooling and parenting was more robust. That has changed with the playstation generation. The biggest muscle they have it in their thumbs with all that texting and playing games. So it means to maintain the same military standard takes long to get them their - but with the right training and encouragement they can get there and be as competent as their predecessors. Its a journey of discovery about themselves and what they can achieve. Once they arrive at unit further education continues and so they grow into role. Also lets not forget modern warfare is technologically more complex than in the past - the need for boots on the ground will always be there (though politicians and others would love to think otherwise to much their decision much more clinical and easier) but being able to fly a remote drone from miles away ot operate more complex tech is starting to have equal importance (to which some of the above may now be equally suited)
Some see this as going soft (I get that to the old boys it would) but its about being smart with the raw product you have to get them to where you need them to be. Society has changed and all military forces have had to adapt to that.
Like I said before I miss the Cold War it seemed so much simpler back then
Cheers :007)
Those were the days I remember a few trips down to the Pegasus in Aldershot for a quiet drink with some Para friends. It was always a interesting night out! Locals seemed to keep their distance and RMP's standing off at closing time until everyone had bashed the daylights out of each other. Then just nicking those who remained on the floor who often went quietly to get a free lift home
Monday morning first parade and a count of black eyes by the Sargent Major - followed by a 'what happened?', bollocking and a quiet 'well done son' thereafter!!
Cheers :007)
This will be my last comment on this topic as you've misquoted me more than once and/or misinterpreted what I have written so I won't waste any more of my time reading your drivel.
As for your pathetic attempt at humour which only yourself laughed at - well that says it all.
I haven't misquoted you at all...but that's always the complaint of a sore loser -{
You are wrong, you are beaten and you know it -{
Finland has a general compulsion for national military service. Around 80% of the adult male population under 30yo go through this. The rest of the male population are either exempted for medical and / or religious grounds, drop out, or under go so called civil-service.
I have seen no evidence, that national military service "refines" the character of the youth of the nation. My time as a career officer also leads me to think, that even career in the military has a very marginal effect on you character; if you're a ba****d out of uniform, you'll just be a ba****d in the uniform. It is just like all professions in the world, where your 25/50/25 average rules the day.
Compulsory national military service makes sense (here in Finland) on the national defense way, because we live next door to brother Vladi, and his cut throats. If we were to live all by our selves, on an island, in the lap of nato (USA), then I would also have to think very hard, if national service in another country makes any sense.
ENDIT 0073
-Mr Arlington Beech
Yes, Finland had the wisdom to keep its territorial defence after the cold war ended, i.e. their military is still organized to defend the whole country from invasion. The country is one of very few European democracies to do so.
There are always two sides to any conflict or argument (see above) and its about 'Perspectives' and keeping a sense of proportion.
What military service has taught me is to keep a sense of perspective, try to see the other side and find the common ground and you often reduce the need for conflict. Or equally its fine to agree to disagree because does it really matter after all no one is going to die? In a game of one up man ship any victory is a hollow one with very short lived gratification.
If you have ever been placed in a position where there was conflict (either physical, or in belief or verbal etc) and you are in a situation of numeric inferiority, you learn quickly it is better to negotiate than fight to a swift death, if you want to live of course. It is because many don't understand this or get stuck in the most basic argument my winky is bigger than yours we have conflicts today. The one thing that places us above Apes is our ability to learn from our mistakes and our reasoning. If not then like in the animal kingdom the strongest and fiercest will always come out on top.
In some areas society is broken, that's clear and its natural to turn to any organisation (especially a uniformed one) and say they could fix it. Frankly, they probably could, but the question is should they? Is that what the armed forces of any government are for - answer No. They are there to be a uniformed service to support the will of the country in defence of their nation. Separate from society but drawn from it. It has to have higher and stronger Values and Standards because of the job it can be called upon to perform. But these are also the sames Values and Standard (or very similar) we would like to see in society today. We talk as if it is an issue with the young, frankly it could the same for any age bracket born I would say from the 60's onward.
If society has a problem (which is some small areas it does) then society should fix it. As I have said before through early intervention, instilling core values and standards and strong punishment for those who break them. Giving someone weapons training does not make them a killer, frankly anyone can pull a trigger its not rocket science. What makes a killer or someone a threat to society is a reason or motivation, opportunity and a tool to do so. Its because these three exist freely in society today there is a problem. So whether is ideological beliefs, being part of a gang or just not liking someone - it is when you give these same people the tool and opportunity to do wrong they will.
Reality is its about boundaries and there is no quick fix, only early education (get them when they are young), robust intervention (be prepared to enforce the rules) or a deterrent (know they will be enforced) will reduce that risk anyone poses to society, but then there are some are just natural born killers anyway or those who will always seek to buck the system (some of whom are actually perfectly matched to serve in some parts of the Armed Forces!).
From a personal perspective I was a little fcuker when I was young, broken home life, hated school (it did not engage me but that was seen as my fault) and borrowing other peoples stuff without permission was my forte I was good at it (good at something at least) - but I got cocky and caught. I was given an option I took because I thought it the easy one. Boy was I wrong, I met men more vicious than me and better than me, and who taught me many lessons in life a father never did. The military saved me and I will be forever eternally grateful for that, but I had to make the choice and there were many times i could easily have given up. Military service could do the same for others for sure - but I also know it did not work for everyone. Then there is the military perspective on this as well I put forward previously which will make sense to anyone who has deployed on operations.
Now lets agree to agree to disagree I say and lets move on - life's too short
Cheers :007)
Though I am starting to feel there is enough expertise on this tread alone to start WW3!!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Even if you're off on a suicide mission, it's always important to look your best.
I think it's possible to have a highly trained professional army. With an element of community service.
For example handing out sand bags in flood hit areas, or helping with rescue work ?
You know what ? You are absolutely correct !
I've never had an issue with people having differing opinions - life would be boring if we all thought the same, peaceful but boring
I just find the whole 'misquoting' accusation tiresome...
Cheers.
-Mr Arlington Beech
For Finland it is an obvious choise; even if we would submit our application to NATO this moment, we would never be a full member state. Because of Russian influence, a veto from Turkey or nowadays from the USA will surely take care of that. You see it is as it has always been, here on northern fringe of the western world, we just have to rely on ourselves. Help will be appreciated, if the need arises, but it is not expected nor is it ever going to be relied upon.
-Mr Arlington Beech