national service in the u.k / conscription

it seems that a bill has been discussed by the house of commons in the u.k on 24/6/2013 and is due to be read again on 6/9/2013 .

the other times it has been approved was in 1916 and 1937 and we know what happened then .

every person of fighting age 18-55 will be conscripted this should make most people sit up and think what have they got planned .services.parliment.uk....

well what do you think a.t.s i shall return to this later when i wake up and as you can see i do not make many threads so go easy

Originally posted by geobro
it seems that a bill has been discussed by the house of commons in the u.k on 24/6/2013

It was not discussed, and it is just a private members bill

reply to post by geobro


You are right about sit up and think. Well done for picking this up.

I did try your link but no joy - so on the strength of what you say I am horrified, but somehow not surprised. I had not seen the RAF advertise for recruits before and suddenly a few weeks ago, there they were with a pretty ad.

I hope that people remember the Gulf wars and the chemical mix that our armed forces were either exposed to or worse, injected with. Today the repercussions of these weapons is fully understood simply because of the birth defects and cancers and chronic illnesses both the civilisations where they are deployed and our soldiers and the children they have post war are being seen especially in the USA. Depleted uranium weapons cause cancer more common than the common cold in Iraq and pollute the area for years.

I hope people today, unless our country is actually going to be invaded and us all put to death, or slavery, simply won't sign-up. I don't think the mood of the public is the same as it was for WW1 and WW2 to consider them cowards. Personally I would prefer all wars fought by the people who decide to commit to war, eg the Crowns and politicians left on an island to fight their wars themselves and settle disputes that way. It would be the only time
Go Get Em Cameron would ever come out of my mouth - I prefer, Go Cameron just Go!

I also see this as a possible means of controlling an extremely dissatisfied public that simply due to numbers and the fact that many would be prepared to use civil disobedience if they are not either able or willing to take to riot due to the collapse of the financial markets or some such problem and our police force could not contain such an outraged and disillusioned public.

I hope this means that there is not some huge problem being hidden from us, (I did see that dispicable Soros has bet the markets will collapse) and men like him with no conscience about the effect of the actions they cause control the world).

reply to post by hellobruce


I read your post after I had commented. Do we know why the Member decided to put this forward and does it have any backing, I see its up again in September?

Found another site for this here. I am sad to say that I don't know about British legislation, so perhaps somebody could make a few things clearer.

I would like to comment that my most immediate concern is the possibility that these conscriptions will occur in preparation for a World War 3 that I personally believe is right around the corner, but with the likelihood that a fair bit of the fighters will be Muslim countries, I am extremely concerned about a backlash from the significant minority of Muslims that exists within Britain from my knowledge.

reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
thanks it did work when i posted i dont know what went wrong

Originally posted by geobro
it seems that a bill has been discussed by the house of commons in the u.k on 24/6/2013 and is due to be read again on 6/9/2013 .

the other times it has been approved was in 1916 and 1937 and we know what happened then .

every person of fighting age 18-55 will be conscripted this should make most people sit up and think what have they got planned .services.parliment.uk....

well what do you think a.t.s i shall return to this later when i wake up and as you can see i do not make many threads so go easy

Typo on parliament

Correct link is services.parliament.uk...

I'm trying to find the part where you mentioned 18-55 conscription.

Bills are only proposals and I'm sure a lot of fanciful ones get suggested from time to time, especially first readings. There are a few on that list I'm not sure I'd agree with having, like a Margaret Thatcher Day or the Capital Punishment, although the decriminalisation of non-payment for the license fee sounds good.

reply to post by wisdomnotemotion
18 - 55 was the normal range for national service last time

Interesting that it's popped up again. Personally If I were to be conscripted (which I would as i'm of age) I'd be somewhat proud to "serve my country", and I feel the there are a lot of late teens and young 20 somethings in this country where National Service would kick them into touch, and make them realise there is more to this world than their next night out/handbags/shoes/flat screen tvs...

I've met a few people in my time who have said that national service was the best thing they'd ever done, with regards to life experiences and personal development, and I wonder why it was ever scrapped, cause our bad kids are REALLY bad.

reply to post by RichAwake

Interesting that it's popped up again. Personally If I were to be conscripted (which I would as i'm of age) I'd be somewhat proud to "serve my country", and I feel the there are a lot of late teens and young 20 somethings in this country where National Service would kick them into touch, and make them realise there is more to this world than their next night out/handbags/shoes/flat screen tvs...

Why would you be proud to go to war and make rich people more money. That is what war is about make no mistake about it. The rich sending the poor to die so they can line there pockets..

You've got to wonder how crap a person's life must have been for them to consider national service the best thing that ever happened to them. If a nation expects some sort of service from its fit and able 18-55 yr olds, it'd better come up with a better name for it than "National Service" and it had better be a more constructive exercise than merely preparing them to be able to get together as a fighting force.

It won't happen. It's a private member's bill, which means that the Government isn't supporting it. It's actually one of the bat# crazy bills brought in by the nuttier elements on the right of the Tory Party. It would also be electoral suicide for the Tories if they tried to make it happen.

Conscription during WWII was for those 17 - 51 years old.
After the war National Service was introduced for males between 17 - 21 years old. This service lasted for 18 months.

Like most things, National Service has some good points and has some bad points.
When I was younger I was passionately opposed to the idea, now I'm not so sure.

This was a Private Members Bill, is not government policy, won't be debated and certainly has absolutely no chance whatsoever of becoming law either during this government or in the foreseeable future.

Some may view National Service a far better option than the poor house or workhouse that we could possibly see returning very shortly if Cameron gets re-elected.

As previously mentioned, this wont happen.

Nobody wants it. Mainstream politicians don't want it, the public doesn't want it and the military certainly doesn't want it.

I have trouble coming up with a realistic scenario where conscription could be introduced.

Originally posted by justwokeup
I have trouble coming up with a realistic scenario where conscription could be introduced.

Try this....

reply to post by hellobruce


Such a brilliant show that was...

reply to post by hellobruce


Genius program. Amazing how well it stands the test of time. :-)

Regardless, that presupposes somebody has a desire to drum up support for national service. Other than the odd fruitbat in the conservative party nobody does.

It would be expensive and degrade the effectiveness of the UK military.

Originally posted by RichAwake
Interesting that it's popped up again. Personally If I were to be conscripted (which I would as i'm of age) I'd be somewhat proud to "serve my country", and I feel the there are a lot of late teens and young 20 somethings in this country where National Service would kick them into touch, and make them realise there is more to this world than their next night out/handbags/shoes/flat screen tvs...

I've met a few people in my time who have said that national service was the best thing they'd ever done, with regards to life experiences and personal development, and I wonder why it was ever scrapped, cause our bad kids are REALLY bad.

when i was young that is what i thought we should have had national service it might have saved the country from what we have now a generation of one million unemployed teens with a care factor of o and the gang culture

I have trouble coming up with a realistic scenario where conscription could be introduced. .

how about a million kids with nothing to do and no sign of work or a future ahead it might make men/women of them bring it on i say