Vote 1

[exfarmer]

Originally Posted by Estreeter

National service will be compulsory for 12 months for ever male at some stage between ages 20 and 40

I take it you're over 40 then and will be exempt?

[palo5]

Originally Posted by billybunter

... Even some IRA men joined the British army to get trained.

Of course

Almost all the Afghan army join to get trained (and steal weapons) too. But then they will disappear. If you only lose 30% in a year, it is possible you are doing well. But only statistically, because they will all be against you in the end

[billybunter]

Originally Posted by exfarmer

I take it you're over 40 then and will be exempt?

Never been national service or the draft over here. Too much hassle.

But yes i'm too old now. But imagine some young hoodie having to yomp for 20 miles. All those spliffs would be coming back to haunt him

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by exfarmer

I take it you're over 40 then and will be exempt?

Almost, Yes over 40, But I'll go straight to General and order 50 push ups and 100 sit ups and 20 mile hikes and cancel all leave for everbody, just because I had an itchy butt

Originally Posted by billybunter

Why are females exempt?

I'd prefer soldiers who were drafted to concentrate on the enemy and not the ass on some chick.
Soldiers who sign up out of free will, different story.

[exfarmer]

I'm all for national service and think that it's a great idea.
Now that I'm too old to be included.

[billybunter]

Originally Posted by Estreeter

Almost, Yes over 40, But I'll go straight to General and order 50 push ups and 100 sit ups and 20 mile hikes and cancel all leave for everbody, just because I had an itchy butt



I'd prefer soldiers who were drafted to concentrate on the enemy and not the ass on some chick.
Soldiers who sign up out of free will, different story.

We need cooks, laundry girls etc.

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by billybunter

We need cooks, laundry girls etc.

That's sexist and discriminatory BB

[savage560]

Originally Posted by george anson

Triumvirates or power sharing generally has a bad record in history.

One guy stabs the others in the back........

Politics is a sordid grubby mess. Riddled with incompetents the world over who are generally in it for their own vanity and not the betterment of their fellow human beings.

And as in times ancient and modern it seems in order to have influence politically one must accrue a great amount of wealth. You see it in the USA and you see it in Russia.

And you see it here in the UK too where the phrase 'we're all in this together' will become a weapon to bash Cameron over the head with. Much like the meaningless , vainglorious assertions of his predecessor the wonderful Jesus Blair.

It's a stakeholding society or words to that effect in which we all have a stake.... Of course we do as he rides off into the sunset with his loathsome spouse leaving everyone else to pick up the pieces.

It was a joke!Oh, yes its far better to have one man in charge,like Stalin, or Hitler ,Bonaparte maybe?

[trailmaster]

I could not be a good politician because I would act like a demagogue, or a dictator. My neighborhood is very violent, and if I were a politician I would like to clean out all the nasty gangs, thieves, armed robbers, car thieves, car jackers, vandals, druggies, burglars, and all the rest of the nasties by being just as nasty as them. I would have gangs of men armed with pump shotguns who would roam the streets and kill any baddies they see. I would have atttack dogs go after gang members and tear them up. Anyone caught trying to steal a car would be crucified to the nearest tree. You get the picture. I would be a vigilante politician.