Does anyone think there's a real chance of conscription?

[4babycubsx]

I keep hearing the word bandied around and it's starting to turn me into a conspiracy theorist! I have two boys of 'fighting age' (I've two girls too but I assume they won't be first) I don't want any of my children to be sent to war especially someone else's war! You can bet your life Starmers kids won't be sent!

Agree. It's to keep people in a constant state of fear and it seems to be working for some.

Women were conscripted in WW2. I don't think any of them fought on the front line then, (correct me if I have that wrong), but they did back-up jobs.

They ran supply and were spies
Women have been active cleared for front line since 2018

I doubt it but in depends on the circumstances. If we were to be attacked then I'd say it would be very likely but the chances of any country attacking us is slim to zero

Id refuse conscription unless I felt that our own safety and freedom was at risk

People often down play our military capability, we punch well above our weight and are well known to have a very capable and high tech armed forces. I honestly don't think Russia could overwhelm our military if anything I think Russia would be neutralised within a week. However, even with conscription China could probably match the USA...so conscription would be futile as we would run out of people very quickly.

If the UK goes to war on Europe and is threatened itself, obviously there is a good chance of conscription. The government is hardly going to let boys of fighting age sit around (unfortunately, as I have two myself). Ukraine shows that the old style of fighting with armies and huge loss of life is still very much in play. Why would we be the exception? I've always thought if there was a world war starting in Europe.again we would be a primary target to neutralise as we held out last time.

Not that the Chinese would invade us (I assume) but you can see from those huge invasion ships they are practicing on that boots on the ground will be a possibility in Taiwan rather than "cyber warfare" or whatever it is we've been told will be war tactics now. We can't rely on being an island.

Overall I am very worried and not hugely confident that Trump and Vance have things well in hand....

Unfortunately I understand at the moment that any weapons supplied to us by the US can only be used if they agree as they can pull a kill switch. So let's hope Trump is happy to help us (ahem.)

No, because a sizeable and growing chuck of the population wouldn’t dream of taking up arms to defend the UK.

People fight to defend their families and home. I suspect a few young people would still try and stop the Russian psychos if they tried to attack us.

Why do you think the government would want to keep people in fear? Is there a war going on or something? Are the US threatening not to come to our aid.and to pull out of NATO? Is there an increased threat of nuclear proliferation in Nato countries particularly the Baltics? And the only superpower is being run by an orange? Nothing to be fearful about at all.

Well that's true about Trident but not our very capable army, airforce and Navy. I served myself in the Royal Navy and I know that no one should underestimate our reach and capabilities. Russia is a paper tiger and has numbers but there economy is smaller than Spains. Russia can't even breach our waters or air space without being intercepted....and they don't even have a fully functioning aircraft carrier...we have two fully armed battle ready craft with strike groups made up of state of the art destroyers and the worlds best team and finding subs.

If they use ballistic war heads then it's over anyway. No one wins as it's game over. But Russia needs to learn about the west...we value life and freedom and while I'm happy to accept a compromise for peace that will save Russian and Ukrainian lives what we won't accept is the threat of continuous war from an aggressive neighbour

It's good to hear although isn't that a bit optimistic? I understand that our army numbers are tiny, we don't have the right equipment in any area and if we need any it will take years to arrive. We've also.given all our ammunition to Ukraine. I also understand that Trident is potentially obsolete soon as it is so old and we don't have the money to replace it. We clearly haven't invested properly in the last few decades and Russia is currently on a war footing so getting more up to speed. I don't think we can be complacent.

I'm not defeatist by the way. I support vastly increased defence spending and I support our stance on Ukraine.

No. It's different warfare now, with less troops on the ground. The armed forces need people who know what they are doing in modern day warfare.

This!

This is not a now problem. It’s newspapers discussing what could happen in the future. I wouldn’t give it any headspace. It’s going to be a long 4 years of Trump madness. We’ll find plenty of real things to be worrying about.

I think that’s very true, and as other posters have said, warfare has changed significantly over the years. I don’t think conscription is likely but I’m sure plans will be in place in case the government believe it’s necessary. Conscription plans were drawn up during the Falklands conflict, but the world was very different then.

The situation in Ukraine suggests otherwise.

No
Stop scaremongering

No, today’s armed forces are highly trained professionals not the cannon fodder of yesteryear. My dd is in the armed forces and her training was 3 years long before qualified, hers isn’t even the longest period. Any national service or forced joining would be pointless as they wouldn’t even get through the training before their 2 years or whatever is up! Plus they recruit people who actually want to be there.

@WinterMorn

the reality is that Ukraine didn’t have the kind of resources we have at their disposal, our troops are quite different plus we have much better kit!

If you wanted no judgement, then why the Starmer comment?

Why do you think that his sons would not to conscripted?

But the essential dimensions of war haven’t changed, That’s why we are talking about a physical peacekeeping presence.

It's been vaguely talked of... I can't see it working, or not in the way it did in previous wars. As has been said, we're not talking frontline trench warfare, so they don't necessarily need numbers and honestly, this day and age I expect a lot of people would just go 'No thanks, would rather go to prison then go and get killed or kill people who haven't done anything to me'.

It might be different if there were some threat of actual invasion of the country, but I think that's not a likelihood in the UK.

I'm not going to worry about it in the near future though.

I didn't say there is no 'cyber stuff' as you vaguely refer to it, but everyone knows that in Ukraine there are also regular troops including trench warfare.

Agreed. We can no longer pretend that war is just carried out remotely by cyber attacks. Anyone still thinking that hasn't watched the news in the last two years.

We have a tiny number of troops and most of our kit is in Ukraine now. Or are you in the US? In which case you'll be fine.

People need to understand the Russian 1st Army are all gone, wasted by Putin with his cold war era expansion plans....100,000s of men have had there lives taken away, children losing dads, girls losing partners....it's utterly tragic. Same in the Ukraine...graves yards the size of football pitches...for what?

Russia don't have an army to match Britain let alone Europe....

I hope Trumps advisors find a way of showing Trump that Putin can't be trusted and any deal must punish Russia but at the same time allow Putin to walk away without looking like it's a total defeat because that may well see Putin snuffed and someone worse takes his shoes but I suppose there's always a chance his replacement might be more moderate...but my gut says that's unlikely.