Chris the great Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 well, nukes are slightly ironic, as you cant fire em without your self getting destroyed. say we were to fire nukes at russia for what ever reason. a small number could destroy russia but the nukes would be noticed on radar and satalite, the russkies would respond with a nuke strike that would annialate us. thats why theres not much danger of a nuclear war breaking out, as its impossible to win. it also, leands some support to the idea of a massed land attack rather then tactical nuclear attack, which i suppose could theoreticaly happen, though nato and the sturcture of developed contries means that by invading anouther country without justifacation is likly to get you trade sanctions and even military force used against you. unless your invaded by america. so what are my views on national service? i dont think its relevent. war has changed since ww2, huge armies arnt necicarily as powerfull as smaller forces equipt with satalights, laser guided weapons or supiriour range of artilary. i couldnt be called in to the army due to flat footedness, couldent join the airforce due to poor eyesight, im not sure if id be alowed in the navy. theres a load of people saying we should get kids in the national service, dicipline em like that, though i find this offencive. i have spent no time in national service just i have never been arrested, never been in any fights and never vandilised. to treat every one like some type of thug who needs beating down is stupid, the number of people causing the problems are the minority yet are given much more coverage in the newspaper. i will say this though, if our country were invaded, id want to fight back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I'd be a conscientous objector, pip pip. My grandad always tells me how national service taught people manners and respect, which I'm sure it did, but personally I think I've learned those things already. i don't need to go and be woken up at 6am and sent running around all day, thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan_Dare Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Im not forgetting how powerful they are. But the millitary planners (in this country at least) do not plan on using them. there name in this country is not nuclear weapons but a Nuclear deterant. (That isnt just a bit of PR either)They do have a secondry role that they could be used to blow things up. but there primary role is that no one will use nuclear weapons against us. if we ahve nuclear weapons to fire back at them. That is in respect to any hostile nation. Clearly it dosent work against some lunatic or terrarist cell. yeah but what you're saying is that in a second cold war era with a major power that national service should be reinstated. I was just pointing out that in a cold war between two major nuclear powers, armies don't mean shit because that 'deterrent' system, handy as it is, wouldn't mean much. You'd be looking at possible and quite likely large scale nuclear war. It's been that way since the end if the second world war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 yeah but what you're saying is that in a second cold war era with a major power that national service should be reinstated. I was just pointing out that in a cold war between two major nuclear powers, armies don't mean shit because that 'deterrent' system, handy as it is, wouldn't mean much. You'd be looking at possible and quite likely large scale nuclear war. It's been that way since the end if the second world war. No i wasnt saying it should be just that it could be. The armys did matter as neither side are likely to use the nukes. If in the 60s the ruskies had corssed over in to western europe. NATO probably would not have hit back with nuclear weapons. As they would not want to be hit back with them. This is why huge, huge numbers of troops from Britain, America, France etc were posted there. Even today the british army still has 20,000 troops posted to Germany. So yes armys do still have a huge part to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stev2604 Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 For the time being anyway, Ireland is a "neutral" country so we wouldn't be involved in any form of national service. However if some sort of nuclear war did happen we'd still be f*cked, being so close to the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supergrunch Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Due to flat feet, long sightedness and various other problems, I wouldn't be able to join the army, navy, RAF or police force even if I wanted to. Conscripting me would be wholly stupid - I'm useless at anything physical (and dire at FPS games - despite the many times I've played Halo, my kills probably sum to about 20), and would just end up being a burden and/or getting killed. I'd be far better placed working on the tech front or somesuch. However, I'd be a conscientious objector and refuse to do this - yes, this gets you sent to prison, but it's what I'd choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 (and dire at FPS games - despite the many times I've played Halo, my kills probably sum to about 20) Halo is in no way representative of using a firearm... I'm very much against the idea of national service, but if the UK/the EU was invaded, by the damn Russkies, I'd sign up as an engineer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MATtheHAT Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I have been in the Royal Navy for 12 years, and serving onboard Nuclear Submarines that carry the UK's Nuclear Detterent. I can tell you, if WW3 kicked off, and America and Russia fired ALL their Missiles (which is standard precedure in the event of a Nuclear Attack). There would not be anybody left in the world to do national service. But thats not going to happen, the five current nuclear powers (UK, US, China, France and Russia) are starting to disarm, under a treaty signed by all five not to develop further Nuclear weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Due to flat feet, long sightedness and various other problems, I wouldn't be able to join the army, navy, RAF or police force even if I wanted to. Conscripting me would be wholly stupid - I'm useless at anything physical (and dire at FPS games - despite the many times I've played Halo, my kills probably sum to about 20), and would just end up being a burden and/or getting killed. I'd be far better placed working on the tech front or somesuch. However, I'd be a conscientious objector and refuse to do this - yes, this gets you sent to prison, but it's what I'd choose. Conscientious objectors still served. They knew they had a duty to serve there country. But they did not want to be involved in killing. They were normally drafted to medical units. People who refuse to go still get drafted just to millitary prison. And trust me after a few days there you would be dieing to be sent to the front line so you could be taken as a POW. The enemy would treat you better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blender Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 "national service" does not equal "miliatary service" . e.g. in singapore you could just work as an adminstrator. I'd like to see it introduced as an alternative to asbos and youth custody. I think the bigger our miliatary capacity, the more likely we go to war. e.g. we have to ignore zimbabwe, burma etc because not enough forces. we also have to start wars for economic justification of the size of our forces. I know lots of greeks who find it a big waste of time. You dont learn to be a soldier and spend most of your time standing guard. i like the swiss as they get to take their guns home with them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheikah Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 the kind that stumbles around at noon wasted with a blue bottle of cider begging you for 20p. I have noticed that...it's always 20p. It's as if there was a meeting held quite some time ago between the chav elders to decide on the fixed begging amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Huh... freaky, two possible wars hapenning... This will get interesting... and very deadly too... Here in Portugal we don't have a chance, but i don't think they care about us anyway, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Well if its not true that nuclear weapons are used as a detrerant. Why have we never opted to use them? Say against Argentina. They invaded british soil. It was not clear who wold win a conventional campaign. They did not have nuclear weapons to fire back. So Why didnt we just nuke them. Rather than commit to a massive conventional campaign in which we were far from certain of wining? They aren't used as a deterrent, in themselves they are a detterent. Example: Russia won't fire a nuclear missile at us because they know immediately we will retaliate. We won't fire one at them for the same reason. Example 2: No one will invade us who doesn't have nuclear missiles because they know that if they do we can just nuke the hell out of them. If we'd nuked Argentina, they would've full-out declared war on us, their allies would've declared war on us, Russia probably would've just for the hell of it and then a full-scale nuclear war would've happened and we wouldn't be around to talk about it. In regards to National Service, I actually think its quite a good idea, although it shouldn't be for a year, maybe just a couple of months a year from aged 18-20 or something, there are a load of eople out there who would benefit from it, being taught manners. How to treat people with respect and that they aren't actually any better than the people next to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Also, i already picked a gun and had shooting practice (against cans) (There were 10, i sucessfully shot 8, second better, some bastard did shoot all of them ), there's no way a FPS can compare to a real gun, first of all, when dealing with human lifes, you will be nervous, even if you have a sick mind, also, you don't have a real mire, wich means you have to be very good at aiming to actually kill someone, and you can't run shooting and upgrading Perks :P With those united, i doubt i could stand out in the war for more than 5 minutes :'(, unless i was hidden all the time, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Also, i already picked a gun and had shooting practice (against cans) (There were 10, i sucessfully shot 8, second better, some bastard did shoot all of them ), there's no way a FPS can compare to a real gun, first of all, when dealing with human lifes, you will be nervous, even if you have a sick mind, also, you don't have a real mire, wich means you have to be very good at aiming to actually kill someone, and you can't run shooting and upgrading Perks :P With those united, i doubt i could stand out in the war for more than 5 minutes :'(, unless i was hidden all the time, of course. I take it you'd be camping around a corner then? Yeah, shooting a real gun is very different to a FPS. Moving targets are bloody hard to hit. I've been clay-pigeon shooting and when the targets were coming directly towards me I got 6/10, when they were going horizontally (which means they're going up and along, and blown by the wind) I only clipped 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I would like to see a fatass throwing granades randomly and running shooting at people and tea-bagging them, just to get killed seconds later... That would be another excuse for Jack Thompson to ban games, tough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyson Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 cince i liek toaly pwn at all fps inc cod4 i wud detroi every1 if i woz in teh army. srsly itd be liek hedshothedshothedshot!!!!!!1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Anyway, i think that England will not get affected by the current things happening.... The problem tough, will be the more central Europe and the United States... And maybe later, they will get to France, Italy, Spain, England and... :'( Portugal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 That would be another excuse for Jack Thompson to ban games, tough At this point he's pretty much lost any power he once had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MATtheHAT Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 cince i liek toaly pwn at all fps inc cod4 i wud detroi every1 if i woz in teh army. srsly itd be liek hedshothedshothedshot!!!!!!1 lol.....................what?.................have you been drinking again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 At this point he's pretty much lost any power he once had. Great, im already seeing the news. "Young man killed in battle against Russians wjile killing, shouting n00b, teabaging him and shooting at his balls." Edit: MatTheMat, it means: Since i like totally pwned at all fps incluing COD4, i would destroy everyone if i was in the army,seriously,it would be like: HEADSHOT, HEADSHOT, HEADSHOT, HEADSHOT!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 If National Service was bought back into this country, i would join, but force them to kick me out by doing nothing and not listening to orders at all. I'd just sit there and if they got physical then i would attack them back. I'd even walk out of the base and get into fights out and inside the base. Its probably the only way to get out of service without physically leaving the country because you will be traced and forced back to your home country to do the service anyway. Think of it, they are forcing you to do something that you probably don't want to do so get out of it by being as disobedient and un-ruley as possible and force them to kick you out, what else can they do. They can't keep you there against your will can they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyson Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 lol.....................what?.................have you been drinking again? Not this time, was playing the typical "ignorant annoying Xbox LIVE Call of Duty/Halo player" card :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 lol.....................what?.................have you been drinking again? It's a joke. He's taking the piss out of those sorts of people. Seriously why is nobody getting Dyson's jokes recently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Hey, i did get it, and im a 14 years old kid... So, yeah, kinda lame for those who didn't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts