Should HM Government reintroduce National Service?

[Jonny]

National Service has been implemented twice in the history of the United Kingdom. Once, from 1916-1920 in order to provide men for the First World War, and again from 1939-1960 in order to help the Second World War effort. After the end of the Second World War, National Service was extended in order to help with national crises such as the Korean War and The Malayan Emergency. National Service required all healthy male subjects to aid the war effort - usually in military service. However, other provisions were provided for conscientious objectors and those unfit for active duty, for example in vital industries such as coal mining or hospital work. National Service gradually began to wind down from 1960, with the last National Servicemen leaving Her Majesty’s Armed Forces in 1963.


The question is: Should HM Government reintroduce a year of compulsory National Service for all healthy male and female subjects, aged 18-25 - whether it be Military Service, work for the NHS or charity work?

Arguments FOR National Service:

• In difficult and testing times across the globe, all nations require a large army ready to be called to duty.
• National Service teaches young people necessary life skills including discipline, team building and cooperation.
• National Service encourages pride in ones nation, society and community. It is important to give back to your country - especially one which provides you with a free health service, education and the safety net of benefits should you find yourself unemployed.

Arguments AGAINST National Service:

• It will cost lots of money to plan, organise and implement - money which the country does not have in the current climate of cutbacks.
• The military does not want conscription: it requires professional, trained, dedicated soldiers.
• HM Government does not have the right to coerce citizens into anything.

For this debate the top debater will receive 50c (which can be traded for HC/Builders club on habbo), Top debater userbar, any VIP from our wide selection & 100 tokens.

Enjoy!

[scottish]

No.

In difficult and testing times across the globe, all nations require a large army ready to be called to duty.

We're not in a war.

National Service teaches young people necessary life skills including discipline, team building and cooperation.

So does any decent job.

National Service encourages pride in ones nation, society and community. It is important to give back to your country - especially one which provides you with a free health service, education and the safety net of benefits should you find yourself unemployed.

It's not free, taxes pay for it.

[FlyingJesus]

Nah the costs farrrr outweigh the bonuses, and we're not a nation that relies on huge land forces (because we're relatively small) so it wouldn't really be of any military use to have a load of half-trained folk wandering around. I know there are non-military options with NS but the same problems arise there really - not everyone's suitable for the jobs and it would be enormously expensive and admin-heavy to sort it all. Besides, people who are forced into stuff generally don't do a good job of it and can even cause problems through carelessness that could put people in danger if it was weaponry or health service related work