There is of course another option, which is to fully arm, equip, and support Ukraine, now.
They can and will win with sufficient support, and its a far better investment than waiting for things to get far worse (and far more expensive).
Money spent supporting Ukraine now, getting them to victory, represents a material savings over having to further spend later to fix the mistakes we've made in failing to fully support Ukraine up until now.
Noble class first.
That is the basis of nobility, is it not?
The king can lead the charge. Give him a horse and a sword like the good old days.
I'd love to see that wizened old cunt try to mount a horse wearing a full set of plate or chain mail like the kings of yore wore to battle 😂
I thought kings don't wear armor?
They are always ready to kill your kids in defense of their interests. Them and their kids? Not so much.
Can't we just take all of the sociopaths from the banking industry and stick them on the front line?
As long as we put the health insurance execs, the pharma execs and the big ag execs right there with them.
"Could we try offering actual support to our soldiers and competitive pay and benefits, and eliminating toxic military cultures, to increase recruitment?
No. It is the people who don't want to ruin their health and their life for minimal benefits in peacetime who are wrong."
We do see that's the general's goal, right? He doesn't actually want conscription; he wants funding and attention.
Who the fuck is the UK going to have a land war with, exactly?
I think instability of the world at the current moment is being acknowledged by military brass throughout NATO as having the potential volatility to see current regional conflicts expand considerably. Middle East, Taiwan, NK (unlikely but a bit of a crapshoot always), Ukraine, etc. Throw in the wild card that is Trump and his rhetoric surrounding NATO and Europe combined with his embrace of Putin and Russia/dictorial aims in the US and you’ve got several things that would have you worried presently. His job is to make sure the UK is ready to address any situations that arise I think statement is more publicly acknowledging that troubled waters COULD be on the horizon.
I never get why people who were handed a gun and told to march off and die over there wouldn’t just turn the gun around at the person sending them to be killed?
Like does anyone feel like the shit state of the world, where the elite class are giving us a worse quality of life than previous generations is worth sacrificing ourselves for?
this was a big problem the last time the US tried to use a slave army in Vietnam.
World War I had that happen several times actually, look up the Christmas truce.
Or just pay them all enough that people join.
No volunteer army will ever be able to fight a war with Moscow. We don't need conscription now, but we need to be aware that we might need in 5-15 years time and be prepared.
No volunteer army will ever be able to fight a war with Moscow.
Bullshit. Russia's military is stretched thin and its economy in tatters to the point that it won't recover in decades "just" from fighting Ukraine+a shitload of material assistance and sanctions from the West.
If it ever comes to direct war between Russia and the West, especially if that's during the next few decades, the current forces of the West will absolutely annihilate Russia WITHOUT having to force the unwilling to kill and get killed.
Unless of course Putin snaps and uses nuclear weapons, in which case there won't be people alive to conscript.
I hope you are right.
So... time to consider conscription.
I think the government would find it difficult to make all the young people go. If they all protest, what are they going to do, put them in our overcrowded prisons?
This is a horrible time in history to be a pacifist 😮💨
Fuck them all. I’m not fighting their meaningless war…
What does “Sir Richard Sheriff”, “Supreme Commander” of the army knows about life. I won’t let him choose how I die.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
It's time to "think the unthinkable" and consider introducing conscription to ready the country for a potential land war, Britain's former top NATO commander has said.
General Sir Richard Sherriff, ex-deputy supreme allied commander of the military organisation, warned that the UK defence budget is not big enough to expand the armed forces alone.
"Britain's armed forces have traditionally and culturally relied on long service volunteer highly professional soldiers with huge experience - and that is really the way we would all want it to go on."
The head of the British Army said UK citizens should be "trained and equipped" to fight in a potential war between NATO and Vladimir Putin's forces.
Major General Charlie Herbert, a military analyst who has served as a senior NATO adviser, said Sir Patrick was trying to "provoke a debate", nationally and within government, about the size of the army and the defence budget.
"There's a 1939 feel to the world right now," senior Tory MP Tobias Ellwood told Sky News on Wednesday, warning conscription was a possibility.
The original article contains 1,120 words, the summary contains 175 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
First: a general thinks war is imminent? What a surprise.
That said, 74k troops does seem pretty low.
I think conscription has some value because if anyone can get called up at any time then a broader swath of the public has an incentive to oppose war. An all volunteer army means you've primarily got people who want to fight (not ideal from a favoring peace standpoint) or those who are economically disadvantaged, and who disproportionately bear the brunt of hawkish foreign policy.
Of course a warmonger is going to advocate for conscription, but they are only going to want this until AI soldiers are ready to go.
Nah, they'll still be pushing people towards the deathbots as population control.
There is of course another option, which is to fully arm, equip, and support Ukraine, now.
They can and will win with sufficient support, and its a far better investment than waiting for things to get far worse (and far more expensive).
Money spent supporting Ukraine now, getting them to victory, represents a material savings over having to further spend later to fix the mistakes we've made in failing to fully support Ukraine up until now.
Noble class first.
That is the basis of nobility, is it not?
The king can lead the charge. Give him a horse and a sword like the good old days.
I'd love to see that wizened old cunt try to mount a horse wearing a full set of plate or chain mail like the kings of yore wore to battle 😂
I thought kings don't wear armor?
They are always ready to kill your kids in defense of their interests. Them and their kids? Not so much.
We can help them with that.
Can't we just take all of the sociopaths from the banking industry and stick them on the front line?
As long as we put the health insurance execs, the pharma execs and the big ag execs right there with them.
"Could we try offering actual support to our soldiers and competitive pay and benefits, and eliminating toxic military cultures, to increase recruitment?
No. It is the people who don't want to ruin their health and their life for minimal benefits in peacetime who are wrong."
We do see that's the general's goal, right? He doesn't actually want conscription; he wants funding and attention.
Who the fuck is the UK going to have a land war with, exactly?
I think instability of the world at the current moment is being acknowledged by military brass throughout NATO as having the potential volatility to see current regional conflicts expand considerably. Middle East, Taiwan, NK (unlikely but a bit of a crapshoot always), Ukraine, etc. Throw in the wild card that is Trump and his rhetoric surrounding NATO and Europe combined with his embrace of Putin and Russia/dictorial aims in the US and you’ve got several things that would have you worried presently. His job is to make sure the UK is ready to address any situations that arise I think statement is more publicly acknowledging that troubled waters COULD be on the horizon.
I never get why people who were handed a gun and told to march off and die over there wouldn’t just turn the gun around at the person sending them to be killed?
Like does anyone feel like the shit state of the world, where the elite class are giving us a worse quality of life than previous generations is worth sacrificing ourselves for?
this was a big problem the last time the US tried to use a slave army in Vietnam.
World War I had that happen several times actually, look up the Christmas truce.
Or just pay them all enough that people join.
No volunteer army will ever be able to fight a war with Moscow. We don't need conscription now, but we need to be aware that we might need in 5-15 years time and be prepared.
Bullshit. Russia's military is stretched thin and its economy in tatters to the point that it won't recover in decades "just" from fighting Ukraine+a shitload of material assistance and sanctions from the West.
If it ever comes to direct war between Russia and the West, especially if that's during the next few decades, the current forces of the West will absolutely annihilate Russia WITHOUT having to force the unwilling to kill and get killed.
Unless of course Putin snaps and uses nuclear weapons, in which case there won't be people alive to conscript.
I hope you are right.
So... time to consider conscription.
I think the government would find it difficult to make all the young people go. If they all protest, what are they going to do, put them in our overcrowded prisons?
This is a horrible time in history to be a pacifist 😮💨
Fuck them all. I’m not fighting their meaningless war…
What does “Sir Richard Sheriff”, “Supreme Commander” of the army knows about life. I won’t let him choose how I die.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
It's time to "think the unthinkable" and consider introducing conscription to ready the country for a potential land war, Britain's former top NATO commander has said.
General Sir Richard Sherriff, ex-deputy supreme allied commander of the military organisation, warned that the UK defence budget is not big enough to expand the armed forces alone.
"Britain's armed forces have traditionally and culturally relied on long service volunteer highly professional soldiers with huge experience - and that is really the way we would all want it to go on."
The head of the British Army said UK citizens should be "trained and equipped" to fight in a potential war between NATO and Vladimir Putin's forces.
Major General Charlie Herbert, a military analyst who has served as a senior NATO adviser, said Sir Patrick was trying to "provoke a debate", nationally and within government, about the size of the army and the defence budget.
"There's a 1939 feel to the world right now," senior Tory MP Tobias Ellwood told Sky News on Wednesday, warning conscription was a possibility.
The original article contains 1,120 words, the summary contains 175 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
"We need a slave army." --The good guys
Where's Sir Humphrey when you need him
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Where's Sir Humphrey when you need him
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
First: a general thinks war is imminent? What a surprise.
That said, 74k troops does seem pretty low.
I think conscription has some value because if anyone can get called up at any time then a broader swath of the public has an incentive to oppose war. An all volunteer army means you've primarily got people who want to fight (not ideal from a favoring peace standpoint) or those who are economically disadvantaged, and who disproportionately bear the brunt of hawkish foreign policy.
Of course a warmonger is going to advocate for conscription, but they are only going to want this until AI soldiers are ready to go.
Nah, they'll still be pushing people towards the deathbots as population control.