• MonsterMonster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    The realistic prospect of an armed conflict with Russia is what has changed.

    Whether we cannot afford it is irrelevant, we may have no choice. We couldn’t afford it in 1939 and it wasn’t long ago that we’d only finished paying for our WW2 debts.

    Unless something drastic happens that Putin comes to his senses we are in most likelihood heading for very dark times.

    We’re not the only country considering a return to National Service/Conscription.

    • frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      Which is exactly why the army has been asking for more funding, which it actually needs. It doesn’t want conscription, which it recognises would be a waste of resources.

      Other countries considering a bad idea doesn’t make it a good idea.

    • thehatfox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      The military part of the proposed new national service is going to be optional however, those “conscripted” can choose a civilian volunteering path instead. So I’m not sure how this scheme would help with the threat of future conflict when nobody chooses the military option.

      It’s a ridiculous gimmick to distract from the Tories failures in areas people do care about.

    • Dendrologist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You think NATO v Russia is going to require conscription?

      Or, sorry, let me rephrase that. You think Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Montenegro, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, UK, and USA v Russia is going to require conscription?

      Or, sorry, let me rephrase that. You think 966 million people v 145 million people is going to require conscription?

      Or, sorry, let me rephrase that. You think a country that has been at war with its small neighbour for 10 years and is struggling v the largest military alliance in the world with the largest economies in the world would require conscription?

      I’ve been a bit of a dick here to get my point across but making excuses for the tories bringing back conscription is also a bit dickish.

      If you want to sign up, go for it. If there comes a point where it’s required, I’m a relatively young fit man so would consider signing up too. But only when there’s a need for it. There is no need yet.

      Plus, if we’re going for WW3, we’re all gonna die in the nuclear blasts before we even get a chance to put boots on the ground anyway.

      • MonsterMonster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yes you certainly have.

        For clarity, I have not stated any excuse whatsoever, certainly not for Tories, but rather a reflection on where we are at present, where we could possibly be in the future and what has happened previously.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Tbh as much as this annoys me, if it became mandatory I wouldn’t really resist it. Because I can see the necessity of it, and it could easily do me some good.