• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Conscription.

azOOOOOma

Member
Joined
16 Mar 2023
Messages
114
Location
Durham
With all this talk of conscription and the like, am I the only one getting extremely anxious about it? It kept me awake last night and I’ve been thinking about it ever since.

I did initially think that those who say we should prepare for the worst were just using their voice to pressure the government into boosting armed services funding. When I saw Sweden the other week mention that citizens could be asked to help should war break out I just thought it was politics and engineering something. But now I hear talk of conscription a lot this week and I’m genuinely frightened.

Should I be worrying? Personally I can’t see my generation or (especially) Gen Z . My generation are largely inept. Gen Z seem to think it cool and proper to despise the country so I can’t see them being any use neither.

Laura x
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Junctionman

On Moderation
Joined
11 Jan 2024
Messages
41
Location
in the naughty corner
With all this talk of conscription and the like, am I the only one getting extremely anxious about it? It kept me awake last night and I’ve been thinking about it ever since.

I did initially think that those who say we should prepare for the worst were just using their voice to pressure the government into boosting armed services funding. When I saw Sweden the other week mention that citizens could be asked to help should war break out I just thought it was politics and engineering something. But now I hear talk of conscription a lot this week and I’m genuinely frightened.

Should I be worrying? Personally I can’t see my generation or (especially) Gen Z . My generation are largely inept. Gen Z seem to think it cool and proper to despise the country so I can’t see them being any use neither.

Laura x
Don't worry, I read this as well

Britain should train a "citizen army" ready to fight a war on land in the future, the head of the Army has said.
He highlighted the threat from Russia and pointed to steps being taken by other European nations to put their populations on a "war footing".
When I say interesting, it made me read it

I'm 63, epic fail at military full time service after 3 months, many years ago.

Three years in the Territorial Army as a cook, so I suppose I could beat the enemy with a frying pan!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

randyrippley

Established Member
Joined
21 Feb 2016
Messages
5,141
Conscription would be a waste of time because quite simply we don't have the facilities or resources to house and train the recruits required.
Nor do we have the stockpiles of weapons for the recruits to use.
I guess if we planned for a major war in five years time then it might just be possible to train enough, but the hot money at the moment seems to be that Russia are looking to to escalate during the hiatus following the next USA election. So depending on weather late this year / early next
 

Junctionman

On Moderation
Joined
11 Jan 2024
Messages
41
Location
in the naughty corner
Conscription would be a waste of time because quite simply we don't have the facilities or resources to house and train the recruits required.
Nor do we have the stockpiles of weapons for the recruits to use.
I guess if we planned for a major war in five years time then it might just be possible to train enough, but the hot money at the moment seems to be that Russia are looking to to escalate during the hiatus following the next USA election. So depending on weather late this year / early next
Here, here


people are saying things about the lead up to WW1 and WW2 and all those proxy wars

it`ll all die down soon (the talk i mean) then they`ll tell about an a asteroid thats gonna pass close to earth just to scare people
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,843
Location
Yorkshire
With all this talk of conscription and the like, am I the only one getting extremely anxious about it? It kept me awake last night and I’ve been thinking about it ever since.

I did initially think that those who say we should prepare for the worst were just using their voice to pressure the government into boosting armed services funding. When I saw Sweden the other week mention that citizens could be asked to help should war break out I just thought it was politics and engineering something. But now I hear talk of conscription a lot this week and I’m genuinely frightened.

Should I be worrying? Personally I can’t see my generation or (especially) Gen Z . My generation are largely inept. Gen Z seem to think it cool and proper to despise the country so I can’t see them being any use neither.

Laura x
I've not heard this and am not worried in the slightest. I am sorry to hear this is making you anxious; try not to be worried.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,933
There's a lot of this going round at the moment from various military big wigs. Why? Because there are elections this year, so they want to put their claim on funding with a good bit of scaremongering. And the media (particularly Sky News) are lapping it up. These are the same military men who were saying only a few months ago that Russian's capabilities had been pushed back by at least a decade after their activities in Ukraine.

There is a war going on that we are involved in directly. An information war. And it seems some British outlets may as well be on Putin's side.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,552
Location
UK
A large conscript army can be useful in the case of invasion, but next to useless in operations in other theatres, we'd be better off investing the money in new machinery, aircraft and ships.

Edit: that's doing a disservice to the civilian volunteers in the US National Guard and TA/Reserves in Afghanistan and Iraq, but for the sorts of operations we are likely to see in the near future, metal is more important than manpower.
 

uglymonkey

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2018
Messages
480
The problem is with conscription is that one half of the army ( the volunteers, who want to make it a career) end up training the other half ( the conscripts) who they only have for 18 months to 2 years. The army doesn't have time to do all the other stuff because its training the conscripts ( who don't want to be there anyway). The armed services are all extremely high tech now ( unlike 40's and 50's) and unlikely to train conscripts to a "usable" level in 2 years.

Historically the UK never kept a big standing army, preferring to keep out of European land wars and having the Royal Navy as the first line of defence. We also invested in nuclear weapons, so that we didn't have to keep a massive conventional armed forces to fight with, as the deterrent value of our warheads would provide security.

Since the 2nd world war, the convention has been that its a bit pointless having massive conventional forces , as if push comes to shove ( say in the cold war) Soviet tanks roll across the Polish plains towards the English Channel , you would lose most of them in short order as the conflict would go at least tactical ( battlefield) nuclear very quickly.

So its a waste of money - we are not fighting WW2 any day soon. Unless you want to train up people to walk slowly towards the opposing sides trenches in a "meat grinder" al la 1st day on the Somme, its all a bit pointless as the conscripts in the modern theatre aren't really worth ( in a tactical sense) the money invested in them to train.

You can always refuse to serve in any case, be a conscientious objector at any time.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,306
Location
Fenny Stratford
In what follows please do not take this as any criticism. I am trying to offer some context and background that might help you process your thoughts and find some relaxation.
It kept me awake last night and I’ve been thinking about it ever since.
Don't let it make you anxious - it isn't worth it and it isn't going to happen in peacetime . In history the UK has never had conscription. Only during WW1 and WW2 ( and for a period after) was it brought in. We have ALWAYS had a small, professional army and that wont change.

The key line from the article above is: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68086188
"In a speech at an armoured vehicle conference, Gen Sir Patrick was not making an argument for conscription - where men of fighting age are required to enlist in the military - but rather laying the foundations for a voluntary call up if war broke out"
We DO need more soldiers, sailors and airman - but they need to be volunteers. Our armed forces DO NOT want conscription. After all: A volunteer is worth 10 pressed men as they say ( not sure who they are but they say it ;) )

When I saw Sweden the other week mention that citizens could be asked to help should war break out I just thought it was politics and engineering something.
Sweden has a very different history of armed forces service. Since 1900 they have had a form of conscription. In the cold war 80% of males served at some time in the armed forces. They are a neutral nation ( historically) and had to be able to provide rugged defence of that neutrality towards all nations but especially the Soviet Union because no one was coming to help them. This conscription system fell into disuse after the cold war but restarted in small numbers in the late 2000's. They may review that with the current Russian belligerence.

Many ( perhaps most) countries in Europe have a history of compulsory national service. We do not. It is something that is felt, almost, to be un British!

Should I be worrying? Personally I can’t see my generation or (especially) Gen Z . My generation are largely inept.
Do you think the people called up in WW1/WW2 were any different, really, to you or I? They wanted a nice life, good job, a bit of money, a nice home and a nice family. They might have had different skills but i bet most weren't equipped with the skills to be a soldier.

There is nothing to worry about in regard to conscription - this all looks to me like an outgoing senior army officer highlighting how short of men the army is and how we should have more, knowing that touching on conscription would get him into the papers. The M has already denied having any intrust in conscription on the back of this!
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
Should I be worrying?
In a word: no.

There will be massive increase in regular recruitment and improved benefits of being in the Territorial Army long before we move to conscription.

Armies formed of people who want to be there are much more motivated than ones filled with ranks of conscripts ever will be.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,306
Location
Fenny Stratford
You can always refuse to serve in any case, be a conscientious objector at any time
You can BUT you don't just get an out. You have to prove your objection in great detail. if you say you have religious objections they will bring in a theologian to debate the finer points of scripture with you and if they don't believe what you say you you wont get classed as as CO. IN any event many contentious objectors served as medics and stretcher bearers so were in no way insulated from the danger.

Easier just to prove bone spurs ;)
 
Last edited:

birchesgreen

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
5,159
Location
Birmingham
A large conscript army can be useful in the case of invasion, but next to useless in operations in other theatres, we'd be better off investing the money in new machinery, aircraft and ships.
Which are being cut of course.

With this national service talk anyone would think it was an election year or something.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,552
Location
UK
Which are being cut of course.

With this national service talk anyone would think it was an election year or something.
They certainly have been, hopefully having a few little fires around the world will be concentrating minds. Disruption to the just-in-time logistics of international trade is very, very expensive;, as we saw with the Evergiven. A few more ships to police the sea can very quickly earn back their cost.
 

Reliablebeam

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2017
Messages
247
I was pleasantly surprised at the lack of support this got in the readers comments in the Daily Heil and the Telegraph. I suspect it wasn't the response they were aiming for.

As others have pointed out this is grandstanding by senior military to keep their gravy train running.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,092
In a word: no.

There will be massive increase in regular recruitment and improved benefits of being in the Territorial Army long before we move to conscription.

Armies formed of people who want to be there are much more motivated than ones filled with ranks of conscripts ever will be.
The reality is a massive decrease in regular recruitment of soldiers in recent years.

In saying that, I'm in no way implying I think conscription is either necessary or desirable. The best way to ensure that remains the case is for Trump to be massively defeated later this year, should he still be in a position to stand for election.
 

Scotrail12

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
835
I learned during COVID not to read the mainstream news and my mental health is much better for it. Way too much scaremongering going on.
 

Reliablebeam

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2017
Messages
247
the gravy train has already derailed. It is at the bottom of the embankment. They are asking for a crane!
I suppose the senior officers have to keep their revolving door to a cushy military contractor job open!! 8-)

As an aside to this thread since it's been discussed, I understand the Swedish conscription model relies on the kids expressing an interest in a military career, and it hasn't been without problems. My mates out there used to be very much 'we want our kids to do national service'. The enthusiasm levels have dived considerably.. I will see the lay of the land when I am out there next month.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,686
Location
Redcar
I think a nice deep breath is in order. As @DarloRich has ably demonstrated some sections of the media are running away with themselves. We're not going to wake up tomorrow and find out that Rishi is bringing back a liability for conscription for everyone aged 18 - 41 (as it was at the outbreak of World War 2). If for no other reason than it would be hideously expensive and we haven't got a fraction of the infrastructure and equipment that rapidly increasing the manpower of the armed forces would entail. But it does make a good headline and has gotten plenty of media outlets loads of engagement and clicks today by reporting in the way that they have.

That being said the drip drip of stories coming out of various countries (and not all of whom are in election years so it isn't just "fighting for their slice of the pie") does put quite a clear marker down that the era of the "Peace Dividend" that we've enjoyed here in the West for the last thirty odd years since the end of the Cold War is now over. In reality it ended when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 (even arguably 2008 when Russia invaded Georgia) but it certainly ended in the early hours of 24 February 2022 and it is time to behave as if that glorious era of peace has come to an end.

That doesn't mean we will fight a war with Russia (or anyone else) but it certainly means that it's time to start behaving a bit more like we might have to fight one. And one way to ensure that we don't is to strengthen our defences here in the UK and in Europe more widely. It is time to quite seriously begin rebuilding the defence industrial base that has almost catastrophically atrophied throughout Europe, to begin increasing the number of troops, sailors and airmen that are in service, the number if ships, armoured vehicles and aircraft, the numbers of munitions in our bunkers, etc etc. We need to get serious about tackling the corruption where it exists in the procurement process. It should not take decades to design, build and introduce new equipment which, when it does arrive, does so over fantastically over budget. It should not take years and many millions to integrate new missiles onto old aircraft. And so on and so on. If that means some monopolies have to be broken up, if some have to be nationalised, if some revolving doors have to be glued shut, then it must be done.

The Baltics and Poland woke up to this danger (having never really been unaware of it to be fair) following 2014 and have escalated their preparations since February 2022. It is time to follow suit.

It is an utterly damning indictment of European defence capability that two years after the full scale invasion of Ukraine we appear unable, as a Continent, to be able to supply Ukraine with much more than fraction of what it needs to defend itself. We don't even appear able to produce in large quantities something as simple 155mm artillery shells. Let alone complex systems like surface to air or cruise missiles, or armoured vehicles like tanks and APCs. Two years! And we don't appear to be much further forward than we were in February 2022.

We don't need to worry about conscription any time soon. But we should all be aware that there is a very serious threat to the security and peace that we've all enjoyed for the last thirty years and if we want to keep it, we're going to have to start making deadly serious preparations to fight for it because right now the cupboard is bare and we are reliant on the United States to keep us safe in a conflict that goes longer than a few weeks or even days. Which is an appalling strategy considering the current state of politics in the United States.

There is an old latin phrase which seems to date back to the Roman era: "Si vis pacem, para bellum" which translates to "If you want peace, prepare for war". It remains astue advice.
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
7,343
There would be massive public resistance to any attempt to reintroduce conscription. All sorts of human rights laws would be used to challenge trying to force people to join the armed services, and it would take years to resolve in the courts.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
All sorts of human rights laws would be used to challenge trying to force people to join the armed services, and it would take years to resolve in the courts.
I doubt it, given that various forms of compulsory military service exist in many countries, including those with high standards of human rights.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,306
Location
Fenny Stratford
There would be massive public resistance to any attempt to reintroduce conscription. All sorts of human rights laws would be used to challenge trying to force people to join the armed services, and it would take years to resolve in the courts.
Not in the slightest. ECHR article 4 (servitude) has a conscription exemption IRC
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,272
Location
St Albans
There would be massive public resistance to any attempt to reintroduce conscription. All sorts of human rights laws would be used to challenge trying to force people to join the armed services, and it would take years to resolve in the courts.
Don't believe that current human rights laws laws would be availble to subvert a government war ready or wartime mobilisation. Take a look at the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, where almost anything is possible in an emergency.
 

Top