So pissed off at tories putting military youth groups into deprived area schools

[trashcanjunkie]

We live in Newcastle. Yes it's a deprived area. I feel aghast at the fact the only half decent comprehensive school in our area has a cadet group based at school, with fucking army wankers there recruiting kids. The whole army campaign to get them young and 'make them better people' boils my fucking piss. They're cannon fodder who will likely get shipped out to oil wars, and left up shit creek without a paddle, wanting for basic kit etc. Then they either get blown to pieces, die, or come home horrifically injured or psychologically shattered. Now the government are rolling out another military type program and are putting money into sending them into schools in deprived areas.

Fwiw I've nothing against youngsters learning discipline or survival skills etc. I just have an issue with recruiting cannon fodder from 'us plebs'....

Weirdly ds1 has come home saying he may look at the Navy after college

Never shown an interest before but a friend of his has been talking about it (another is thinking of the army)

I did just google it...shame he hasnt got any interest in dentistry, the scholarship for that is awesome

middle class school and college in a village no one has visited the school but it is a naval area so masses of friends have some sort of link

Ipity . .
Yes I do think that having an opinion formed from experience is different to having an opinion formed from something you have read about/heard about, and yes having experienced something will give your voice more weight.

"Fawning gratitude" - well that seems quite goady to be honest, but I absolutely think that the public should be appreciative of the forces yes! But I didn't say that we shouldn't discuss and share opinions

Hattie - that doesn't allow for the clearly massive conflict of interest that occurs by allowing to those carrying out military intervention to be viewed as the best judges of that intervention.

There's also the issue of Iraq and Afghanistan not being empty spaces, the people there have opinions about Western military intervention too.

Ipity . .

Maybe I'm not writing down my point very well; I think that there is a difference between the opinions formed from someones direct experience and opinions formed by someone reading/hearing about an experience.
Also where do I say that only westerners have an opinion on military intervention? Ive made it clear that I think anyone who has been directly involved has a stronger voice than someone who had not- I never said that was only applicable to Westerners- I'm quite interested in why you thought that

Ipity . .

Posted too soon, sorry,
I do think that the conflict of interest is a good point, for example it will be interesting to see what information/sources the Chilcott inquiry uses, and of course what conclusions, in its unbiased opinion, it makes.

Gooseberry, yep totally. I did mean that. I have absolutely no beef with those who have joined the army.

It's not all being blown up, shooting and killing.

I'm not sure if anyone has said this, but as little as last year Royal Navy personnel were deployed on RFA Argus to eradicate Ebola from Sierra Leone. They didn't manage it in the 6 months deployment. But five months after returning home SL was an Ebola free zone because of the treatment centres and other wonderful humanitarian acts 820 squadron arranged and executed. Often working 18 hours a day, they missed their family Christmas, birthdays, parents evenings, bath times... Oh what you miss out on! But it's worth it. Imagine saying you helped change the world for the better and saved lives. I'm enormously proud of my amazing husband.

Yes but your child is far more likely to kill or be killed in the military rather than in accountancy.

Yes, of course service personnel do some pretty amazing things. They have to do something between wars!

It's like air crew serving us tea and selling duty free- we all know that they are really there in case there's an emergency. The services are there to fight and to support fighting forces. It is disingenuous in the extreme to sell it as seeing the world and learning a trade.

Only certain roles in the military carry the possibility of killing.

And in terms of being killed at work, that's more likely for builders, farmers and fishermen. If you include deaths by suicide as well as occupational hazard, you can add in doctors, vets, dentists and pharmacists too. And for deaths by murder the high rates are builders and publicans.

"It is disingenuous in the extreme to sell it as seeing the world and learning a trade"

But they haven't actually done that since the famous Not The Nine O'Clock News piss take in the 1980s.

Though of course the learning a trade bit was and is true. The Armed Forces is the single largest provider of adult education/training.

Fenny I loved your post :) I am so thankful that there are people like your husband who are willingly put themselves in those situations. I would be immensely proud of anyone close to me who had been involved in something like that.

It is disingenuous in the extreme to sell it as seeing the world and learning a trade.

They don't do that. The men and women are very helpful in the careers offices. They don't sit there eyeing up vulnerable targets passing by in the streets like some sort of child catchers. The people who go to see them actually go voluntarily.

The youngsters aren't stupid. They know what joining up means.

About the different opportunies joining up from a posh school vs deprived one: yes if you go to a posh school you can be an Army officer or join daddy's merchant bank. If you are from a deprived background and have no qualifications, you can join the rank and file, or mop floors at the merchant bank. The difference is that in 20 years' time, you're likely to still be mopping floors at the bank, whereas in the Army even if you join as the lowest of the low, if you have talent and determination you will probably be a highly skilled NCO or have got a commission, and are likely to be doing a job with much more responsibility, skills and pay than you would have achieved on your own in civilian life.

The difference is that in 20 years' time, you're likely to still be mopping floors at the bank, whereas in the Army even if you join as the lowest of the low, if you have talent and determination you will probably be a highly skilled NCO or have got a commission, and are likely to be doing a job with much more responsibility, skills and pay than you would have achieved on your own in civilian life.

Hmm... where do all those homeless ex-servicemen come from then?

Or the ones with long term disabilities or PTSD?

While for some people from deprived backgrounds the army can be a great career, for others with less mental resilience, active service experience hasn't done them many favours in life.

I was listening to some heart breaking ex - army accounts on the radio the other day. One retired man suffered greatly from PTSD and depression. He was selling his medals, including a military cross, as a kind of therapy. He'd served many years in Northern Ireland, and Afghanistan. He'd lost many friends in wars, but he'd lost more colleagues suicide. They don't seem to get the support they need in the aftermath of coming home from horrific situations. If they have life changing injuries, or mental illness as a result of their service, they don't seem to get any help. He was on edge all the time, in constant fight or flight mode, couldn't enter a room without scanning it for the biggest threat, felt obsessive about vehicle registrations, and had OCD from being trained into such a routine for years. He felt proud of some of his medals, as he saved the life of an injured enemy soldier. But he felt shame for others, which he received after a 13 day battle, killing many people.

Another ex - soldier put his medals in the bin, as he felt shame, and that no body cared what he had done. He wouldn't tell his children that he'd ever been in the army.

It was incredible to hear these voices and these stories, as they don't seem to have the opportunity to be heard. Every body talks about the training and the opportunity for young people, but the retired soldiers seem to be swept under the carpet.

I didn't say an armed forces career was a guaranteed golden ticket to happy ever after. I know that PTSD is a big deal and lots more resources need to be dedicated to sufferers. Still, if the alternative is an insecure NMW job or unemployment for most of your life, that's not been proven to bullet proof you against mental and physical health problems, drug and alcohol abuse or homelessness either.

This is the issue. Once upon a time there were a myriad of trades young school leavers could join that would provide them with skills and a lifelong income. Joining the forces wasn't the sole route out.

That society and social mobility seems to have regressed from this is a massive concern.

Joining the military should not be someone's sole option in life.

Well, you know, given that the forces recruit from all walks of life, there will be all sorts of people join up. They will all get paid the same, treated the same, and be expected to live their own lives. Some of them will piss all their money up the wall, spending every last penny, every last month, on beer. Some will realize that the army won't be there to provide their housing forever, and so will save some of their wages, or even, y'know, get a mortgage (nice regular income - that choice open to everyone) in order to have somewhere to go after their service ends. Some of those will get married, have a few kids, shag around or drift apart, and then get saddled with maintenance. Same as any other career (divorce rates being slightly higher - for all sorts of reasons).
The army can't actually force people to make sensible choices with regards to their wages or any other aspect of their private lives, including alcohol consumption (although don't get me started on that).
So, there always will be homeless ex-servicemen. Same with any other job. It's just that housing is a less pressing matter for some folk, who get used to the idea that someone else is responsible for providing a roof over their head and then expect the government to continue to do that.
There may or may not be some correlation between soldiers who are suffering from PTSD and entwined alcoholism, or other MH issues, and who are therefore incapable of making that connection and making adequate provision during their service, but the homeless serviceman thing is way more complicated than those army wankers not looking after their own. At some point there has to be personal culpability, or reliance on the welfare system for those incapacitated by MH. And every single service leaver has the option of full resettlement support for two years prior to end of service. There are a fair few who turn down all the options, take the money instead of the resettlement courses, and make their own decisions. Getting a job is hard for everyone. Being homeless is tragic for everyone. And I'm actually irritated by the focus on the military, because for the most part, ex-servicemen's homelessness could have been averted years earlier by a good dose of common sense. I saw way too many lads pissing their wages up the wall every month, cushioned by the fact that they were provided for in every aspect of their lives. Hindsight is a fabulous thing though. And no one focuses on twenty years of spending vast amounts of cash on booze - it's only the six months in Afghan which renders the rest of the story irrelevant. Sigh.

I'm ex-mil. Joined as an officer. Was indeed a cadet, but not through school. And I definitely didn't go to a private school lol. My parents have a CSE in beekeeping between them lol, so I'm afraid I don't have well heeled parents to have smoothed my path either. Dh got blown up. It happens. Got to see a whole heap of the world that I wouldn't have otherwise though. Had never been abroad before I joined up.

All that aside, the military is alarmingly akin to the fabulous catch-22, Gord bless Joseph Heller. It didn't quite manage to kill dh, but not far off. How we laughed when we discovered that the special forces insurance scheme didn't cover his injuries from being blown up, but would pay out if you broke your leg at footie

That is very true and it is sad that options are so limited for so many people. I just don't know how a decent number of well paid, fulfilling, secure jobs with good progression opportunities are going spring up in deprived areas. The government can support apprenticeships as much as they want, but if there are no ships left to build, for example, what are all the newly minted ship builders going to do? If there are no new factories and other commercial buildings getting built, what are the plumbers and electricians and carpenters going to do?

Those saying that their kids' schools are private and have cadets....your children won't be steered in the same direction as the kids from the comps will. Your kids have a chance to be officers etc.

Thanks

Also, from my years of experience with the navy equality seems important. Many comprehensive backgrounds just as likely to be officers (ranks as opposed to rates). Like anything it seems to depend on intelligence, tenacity, skill, desire for fulfilment and, obviously, hard work. Some jobs are more likely to go to a war. Other jobs are more likely to make the decisions for the workforce: deployment and promotion. I would happily be a proud mother if my sons wanted to join the Royal Navy. But admittedly I'd want to see them in engineering or medical roles. I perceive these as fulfilling. I wouldn't like them to be pilots. This is all based on experience.

And, FYI, my husband as never shot at anyone. And he has been deployed in conflict.

Matt, any kid has a chance to be an officer.
Any kid.
But it is interesting that so many people are keen to prove otherwise. It's just the usual British insistence that class is everything, and ignorance about the reality.
Sure, there are some regiments stuffed full of ruperts. (I haven't heard that for years lol). But other corps where you'd be hard pressed to find an officer that didn't have a comp background. They are all real people you know. Coming from exactly the same schools as the soldiers. There are also families with brothers on different sides of the gaping chasm of the rank divide. Hilarious. They still talk to each other and everything, being related. Am obviously using dudes as they do still form the majority of service personnel. Other sexes (and indeed genders) available at any barracks near you.

So the people out trying to protect YOU and our country are 'army wankers'? How fucking lovely.
My DH was a member of cadets through school and certainly wasn't from a deprived area although he didn't get brilliant grades, he did it because he wanted to. He was then 'cannon fodder' for 7 years, doing tours and sacrificing himself for our country, including yourself. He's now been put through uni and has a very specialised, highly paid job that allows me to look after our children and not go out to work. We live abroad and have an amazing life.
How disrespectful of you to insult people that care so much for our country that they are willing to put themselves in danger.
I couldn't be more proud of my DH and his career, and would be just as proud if DS chose to join up one day.