To wonder why people aren’t worried about this??

[Mummytotwonow]

https://news.sky.com/story/time-to-think-the-unthinkable-and-consider-uk-conscription-says-britains-former-top-nato-commander-13056148

Sorry if I’ve missed any threads on this.

It’s not just sky news reporting this but for days now in the media this is being raised.

AIBU - to be extremely worried and concerned about this?

Is anyone else not worried?? Are we being prepared ready as “the higher up” know more and the threat is bigger than we’re told.

what age would it be from and to??

l‘m so scared for the world our children are growing up in 😢

I also don't believe we need to worry about a conventional war or a nuclear war but it is wise to prepared for all eventualities because that is a safeguard in itself. Please go to the Ukriane threads and ask the incredibe main contributers any questions because they will be honest, sober and give you an informed answer.

To be fair a lot of Russians like the UK, we have many Russian students in our private schools.

No, you said I had an old fashioned and sexist attitude. See above.

And I've backtracked on nothing. Feel free to show me otherwise.

Yes! Please read the Ukraine threads. They have been a godsend for me and so informative/ well balanced.

@CoatRack would you rather be in Ukraine fighting than here?

No, I couldn't give a toss about Ukraine.

Why do you ask?

People did not take that view in the first and second world wars - many parents wanted to but the propaganda battle won. It would happen again. The propaganda battle across Europe would win out in terms of people signing up. They'd start with volunteers and the public's reaction to that- turning them into heroes- would influence more to sign up. By the time conscription came it would be seen as a duty. The right-wing Press would support it all with nationalistic fervour. The male dominated influences like football and other sports would support it because that's what men do when the opportunity arises to look like they are tough and they'd all join up. And all those who are influenced to follow things and believe things by idiots like Daily Mail, social influencers, celebs social media accounts, SCD, IACGMOOH, Twitter, Facebook etc would believe this propaganda too. You might think you wouldn't but you would. Before you knew it you'd be worried but proud and waving them off on their training.

It wont happen

You’d get your robber’s cruelty from your quote, which you seem keen on

Have you lived under an actual dictatorship? not stuff about U.K. gov but elsewhere?

What a charmer Coatrack is

I fear there is a real possibility of a war in the future, the situation in the Middle East is very concerning as it could draw in Iran and Russia arming other countries too, a world war would be very different now with nuclear weapons and the vast distance they could reach, I wonder if we are being prepared for the possibility of a war in the future, a terrifying thought!

The idea is that preparing for war prevents it.

I worry about the possibility of war. And I realise that if it comes we'll have to fight.

A comparison with Ukraine isn't a very good one though. They are fighting off an invader on their home soil.

We'll have to fight a war on someone else's soil. It's going to take a lot more to convince the British public that a war in the Baltic states, just for example, is just as important to us as the war in Ukraine is to them.

I get frustrated with the "but the government" whinging. A war is so much bigger than a this, and if it comes, they government will be a different one.

You are quite correct to be worried and I have already started teaching my children the absurdity of war and why under no circumstances should they consider submitting to conscription.

It's funny how, when the elites of two nations can't agree, how it falls to ordinary people, who have nothing to gain or lose from the outcome of a war are the ones who have to do the murdering or be murdered isn't it? I wonder if this blithering idiot "General Sir Richard Sherriff" (the one demanding that ordinary people will be made to fight) ever fought on the front line himself? I doubt it, despite being a "professional soldier".

We are not a world power and have not been for decades - Britain needs to accept this fact, get over it and stop interfering. Take a leaf out Switzerland's book - they stayed out of both world wars and is a richer and happier place for it.

There is no reason for Britain to go to war - we are under no threat whatsoever. Don't get me wrong, I feel for the Ukrainians, but up until 1991, they were part of the USSR (largely unwilling) and we weren't considering armed conflict to free them before that, were we?
No doubt someone will start ranting about Hitler and the Nazis and how we had to stop them.
News flash: we didn't have to stop them, they would have fallen all by themselves.
Want some proof? Joseph Stalin, another dictator responsible for the slaughter of millions - who stopped him?

No one. He died. In bed.

I remember watching Threads on the BBC as a child and was terrified of nuclear war and the utter destruction it would wreak. There is no cause, no ideal, no belief on earth worth that.

Analysis of the original article

The question of conscription in the United Kingdom has gained attention from various military officials and experts, including General Sir Richard Sherriff, Britain's former top NATO commander. Sherriff, in a recent statement, emphasized the need to "think the unthinkable" and consider conscription as a measure to address potential threats, especially in the context of the current global situation and defense funding cuts.

Background and Context:
Sir Richard Sherriff's remarks come in the wake of the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. He highlighted concerns that even if Russia were to be defeated in the war against Ukraine, there remains a significant risk of Russia attempting to rebuild another empire and potentially engaging in conflicts with other former Soviet countries, including NATO members. This, he argues, necessitates a robust and well-prepared military force to deter potential threats and maintain peace in the Euro-Atlantic region.

Current State of UK Armed Forces:
Sherriff expressed concern about the current state of the UK armed forces, pointing out that troop numbers are in "freefall" and stand at around 74,000, with forecasts suggesting a further decline. He argued that the existing armed forces may not be sufficient to respond effectively to high-intensity conflicts. Moreover, he emphasized the need for effective military deterrence, including both conventional and nuclear capabilities.

Budgetary Constraints and Volunteer Army:
One of the central points raised by Sherriff is the limitation of the UK defense budget. He argued that the budget is not large enough to support the expansion of the armed forces solely through professional volunteer soldiers. He acknowledged the cultural and historical reliance on long-service volunteer professionals in the British armed forces but stressed the necessity to overcome cultural hang-ups and consider alternative measures.

Conscription as a Controversial Option:
While acknowledging that conscription is traditionally viewed as anathema by professional soldiers, Sherriff argued that it might be necessary to "think the unthinkable" given the current circumstances. He referenced the Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Patrick Sanders, who suggested the possibility of conscription in the event of a war with Russia. Sherriff suggested that the UK should explore conscription as a means to bolster troop numbers and readiness.

Reference to Finland's Model:
Sherriff pointed to Finland as a potential model for conscription. He highlighted Finland's practice of universal male conscription starting at the age of 18, with varying service durations for different roles. He emphasized the success of Finland's approach in maintaining a small professional army that can be expanded through mobilization, with a reserve commitment for individuals up to a certain age.

Military Analyst's Perspective:
Major General Charlie Herbert, a military analyst, supported the idea that the UK needs to invest in a capable military to deter potential threats. He echoed the warning that failing to invest in defense now may lead to consequences in the future. Herbert suggested that General Sanders and others are advocating for increased spending to ensure the UK is adequately prepared for emerging threats.

Political Perspectives and Wider Concerns:
The debate around conscription has also entered the political arena, with senior Tory MP Tobias Ellwood expressing concerns about the current global situation and warning of a "1939 feel to the world." He emphasized the need for increased military spending and preparation for the challenges ahead.

Government's Stance and Future Considerations:
While there is a growing call to consider conscription, Downing Street has, at least for now, ruled out any move towards a conscription model, maintaining that army service will remain voluntary. The government's position suggests that conscription remains a controversial and challenging option that requires careful consideration.

Conclusion:
The discussions around conscription in the UK highlight the complex challenges and threats facing the nation, particularly in light of the evolving global geopolitical landscape. General Sir Richard Sherriff's call to "think the unthinkable" reflects the gravity of the situation and the need for a comprehensive reassessment of defense strategies. Whether conscription becomes a viable option will likely depend on ongoing evaluations of the military's capabilities, budget considerations, and the perceived level of threat to national security. As the debate continues, it is crucial for policymakers, military officials, and the public to engage in informed discussions about the potential paths forward in ensuring the country's defense and security.

I've given zero indication that I'm keen on anything in particular. The quote is an alternative to the "road to hell is paved with good intentions" phrase.
Sorry for trying to insert a bit of culture.

Regarding dictatorships, are you one of those people who thinks that criticising one thing means that you are automatically fully in favour of the other?
The world is not black and white, and we are not necessarily the 'good guys', even if we are the 'better guys', for now.
I fail to see how that is an objectionable position.

CS Lewis's quote raises important considerations about the potential dangers of well-intentioned tyranny. Let's delve into the meaning and implications of this quote.

Lewis begins by highlighting the concept of a tyranny that is sincerely exercised for the supposed benefit of its victims. This idea challenges the commonly held belief that intentions alone are sufficient to justify actions. Lewis suggests that even with good intentions, a tyranny can be exceptionally oppressive. This assertion prompts us to question whether the end justifies the means, particularly when the means involve a form of control or interference in the lives of individuals.

The comparison drawn between a tyranny for the supposed good and the rule of "robber barons" adds depth to Lewis's argument. The term "robber baron" typically refers to powerful, unscrupulous individuals who accumulate wealth and power through ruthless and exploitative means. Lewis implies that, despite the cruelty of the robber baron, there may be a certain degree of respite – a temporary cessation of cruelty when compared to a tyranny that is supposedly driven by moral considerations.

The essence of Lewis's argument lies in the notion that those who seek to impose their version of morality on others may become relentless in their pursuit. The "omnipotent moral busybodies" are portrayed as individuals who, fueled by the belief in their moral superiority, will continue to torment people endlessly. The term "busybodies" suggests not just a concern for morality but an intrusive and meddlesome nature, further emphasizing the intrusive aspect of the tyranny.

The phrase "torment us without end" underscores the perpetual nature of the oppression inflicted by those who claim to act in the name of morality. The conscience approval aspect adds a layer of complexity. The tormentors believe they are justified in their actions, and this self-righteousness can make them immune to the suffering they cause. This raises profound questions about the subjective nature of morality and the potential for abuse when moral convictions become the basis for wielding power over others.

In contemporary contexts, this quote can be applied to various scenarios, such as government interventions, paternalistic policies, or even social and cultural movements that seek to enforce certain moral standards. The warning about the dangers of unchecked moral authority serves as a reminder to critically assess the actions of those in power, even when their intentions are ostensibly benevolent.

In conclusion, CS Lewis's quote serves as a thought-provoking commentary on the potential perils of well-intentioned tyranny. It encourages us to question the legitimacy of authority that claims moral superiority and highlights the enduring torment that may result from such tyranny. The quote prompts reflection on the delicate balance between individual freedom and the pursuit of collective well-being, urging us to be vigilant against the encroachment of those who would oppress under the guise of benevolence.

You've argued me to an utter standstill there. Bravo.

I still can’t believe that there are people who believe that Russia wants to invade Britain 🤦🏻‍♀️ y’all getting conscribed so that US & NATO can annihilate a threat to the balance of power. Putin asked to join NATO when he first came to power, the answer was clear “we don’t want you here”. Russia has been purposefully excluded from international deals because no one wanted to deal with it. It found new allies. The balance started tipping. Why can’t anyone see a bigger picture? Russia and China alliance is a threat to the current balance of power… of influence. Russia doesn’t want or need British land.

No problem CoatRack, it’s a free one just for you.

You are completely and utterly wrong.

one of my closest friends is Russian and her brother was conscripted. He thought he was just going to have some training for a year and then leave. He was taken to Ukraine and not told what was happening. It was a shock to him to be fighting the Ukrainians, who to Russians are like Welsh or Scottish to us. Honestly, the UK government as bad (as it is)is not the same. Russia really treat their male population as fodder to be thrown in the meat grinder and jail the opposition leaders.

re Covid, virtually every country around the world regardless of politics all had scientists who were agreed on the reality of the virus and proposed similar measures to reduce deaths. It wasn’t a UK government only exercise while the rest of us overseas watched on in disbelief. We all had lockdowns!

For me, it's not the possibility of war that's interesting (as I think it's unlikely in the manner discussed here) but how people are claiming they'd react if it did.

(Although of course we don't really know what we'd do until it actually did happen).

It crazy to see people saying they'd just roll over and also those with the "why should I fight for my freedom" attitudes.

Indeed correct, people are sheep, unfortunately and will go along with it. Ordinary Britain's have nothing to gain or lose from stupid wars, only death, grief, mutilation, mental and emotional trauma, etc. Those who have everything to win or lose will be nowhere near a battlefield.
It's like me arguing with a neighbour over a border, then threatening them with my Dad and older brother, so the neighbour threatens me with his Dad and his brother's and cousins. If it's so important, fight your own fights, because I won't.

'Free' is certainly an appropriate measure of value in this case.

I eagerly await any kind of tangible contribution from you, though I'm not holding my breath.