Glamourizing Army Jobs and Raising Recruitment Age

[Lightworker]

Was just watching Newsround on CBBC today and they were showing children what a career in the army is like, making it look fun, soldiers dancing, going to combat etc. I was shocked as being a soldier has huge repercussions eg via killing, losing life, handling weapons, PTSD etc. I wish they would raise the age to 25 and stop advertising it on TV as its so misleading. What do you think?

 

[Blah11]

I disagree i think. I mean people aren't totally deluded. With the amount of deaths lately in the wars, I don't think people join up these days not knowing theres a risk of not coming back. It was slightly different when we weren't in an 'active' war IYKWIM? IDK, they get paid well enough with little living costs, they get educated when they finish, a good pension etc too.
25 is quite old. What is it just now? 16? If so, they should raise it to 18 but not as far as 25.

 

[polo_princess]

Whilst im inclined to agree with Blah i do think that there are a LOT of very impressionable young people out there, expecially ones who havent done so well at school and dont know where to go next etc etc

On the flip side though they'd never get through the entire selection and recruitment process without the stark realisation that its not a barrell of laughs, so the whole "glamourising" thing is kinda pointless

 

[beccad]

It'll have to go up to 18 in a couple of years as the school leaving age is going up to 18 soon.

I think it's worth bearing in mind that the percentage of people who are killed is very small. It's not without risks as a job, but I think people are aware of this.

 

[Blah11]

but tbh, most jobs have a risk. police, firefighters, prison officers, even nurses and doctors, not to mention those who work on building sites or in factories. Some might be more of a risk than others but they still hold a risk.

 

[Boony]

If your join up before 18 you need parental permission anyway so its not like they can just sign up without thinking about it properly. Then at age 18 they are old enough to make their own decisions and look into it properly.

I dont really see a problem the training they do prepares for them for it and they can leave whenever they want before they pass out if they really dont want to do it.

 

[welshwarriors]

Hubby is a soldier, he joined whn he was 19 bt I know lots of lads who joined with 16. The deployment age is 18, so nobody under the age of 18 is allowed to go to Afghan etc. even if they want to.
Every newbie is a risk to the boys, it doesnt matter if they are 18, 20 or 25, they will shit their pants 1st time they go into a firefight with the enemy.
The army isnt all about war, its also about education and getting young ppl off the streets. I dont wanna even consider where hubby would be right now if he was in the army due to his upbringing and the area he grew up.
I'm actually a great believer in national service...I believe it would bring structure into a young persons life and get them away from negative influences.

I'm not totally blind to the negative effects a deployment has on a soldier. Hubby suffered frm PTSD and needs time to adjust to family life every time hes away, which normally goes along with hell of a lot of fighting between us.
But for us the positives overweight the negatives....a steady income, low rent, the opportunity to see the world for hubby and us if he goes on a posting abroad, constant educational input (hubby got several licenses, NVQs etc) which might not be available for him in civvie street.

 

[Blah11]

eek, i must admit I do NOT like the idea of national service whatsoever. Actually the thought of it makes me feel sick. I think its been stopped for a good reason.

 

[aragornlover8]

I think that one of the main issues with glamorizing recruitment now is that young people might feel even more influenced to join given the current economic environment in many countries around the world. And the military really isn't for some people; some younger adults may not be given the decision the gravity it deserves. That being said, I have known a lot of military families growing up, and they owe a lot to the military.

 

[angelandbump]

If you look at firement sam for example. It never shows fireman sam pulling dead bodies out of buildings, it also never shows the devastation when a family looses all their belonging. It shows you what a child should see for innocent minds. Just like army men, they have good times and its not all killing people and fighting. Some army men build roads and help when theres flooding ect.

Newsround has young children watching as well as teens and they need to be careful what they show. I used to think police men just caught men stealing and put them in jail... i soon learned that its alot more complicated but i always say, let children be children as they soon grow up and learn that the world isnt so easy...

 

[discoclare]

I don't have any problem with people going into the army at 16. I think they are aware of the dangers of the job, but as others say there are also lots of benefits to having a career in the military.

Regarding National Service (perhaps this should be a new thread / debate!) I would quite like to see it back, for those who aren't working or in education, but in a different format to the old 50s style. I certainly would not agree with compulsory military national service, but a format where there was a choice to either do military or something else local such as hospital voluntary work etc. I don't know how it would work but there are a lot of kids who leave school with few qualifications and no idea what they want to do. Something like this would give them at least a little work experience for their CV and maybe help them make some choices about possible careers. Don't know if it would work in practice though as apparantly the army are dead against bringing National Service back because they don't want to do the training, and I can't see the Police, NHS etc wanting to take all the work of supervising and training National Service recruits either.

 

[discoclare]

^didn't really answer the original question did I?

Well we have a few military people in OH's family and I think generally they have had a pretty good time in the army! It isn't all blood and guts. I do think that kids are aware that there is a possibility of blood and guts etc though as you see it all the time on the news (assuming they watch the news, my parents used to make me watch the six o'clock news and in school we did "current affairs"). I think a bit of glamorisation isn't too bad as generally all you see of the military is depressing (and though I don't watch it I'm sure that Newsround must have covered a lot about Iraq, Afghanistan over the last few years as they usually present quite a clear, but simplified, view of the current news headlines).

 

[Boony]

My DH is in the RAF and most people he knows dont want national service back it would mean training people that dont want to be there and if they dont want to be there they do the job half heartedly so whats the point???

 

[Blah11]

I don't have any problem with people going into the army at 16. I think they are aware of the dangers of the job, but as others say there are also lots of benefits to having a career in the military.

Regarding National Service (perhaps this should be a new thread / debate!) I would quite like to see it back, for those who aren't working or in education, but in a different format to the old 50s style. I certainly would not agree with compulsory military national service, but a format where there was a choice to either do military or something else local such as hospital voluntary work etc. I don't know how it would work but there are a lot of kids who leave school with few qualifications and no idea what they want to do. Something like this would give them at least a little work experience for their CV and maybe help them make some choices about possible careers. Don't know if it would work in practice though as apparantly the army are dead against bringing National Service back because they don't want to do the training, and I can't see the Police, NHS etc wanting to take all the work of supervising and training National Service recruits either.

but those who arent working who wants to be in the military would join anyway?

 

[moomin_troll]

My OH loved being in the army and all the lads in his reg did have fun. yes its a very serious job but i dont no many soliders that dont love it.

I think the age limit is fine as it is being that at 16 you need ur parents consent or u can join at 18, 25 is actualy concidered very old to join the army and is the cut off point in most cases.

its not easy to join the army and they are very good at pointing out the ones who they no wont be able to handle the job, granted they do miss the odd tw*t lol

our soliders dont get paid enough for the work they actualy do but it can give u a great life

 

[Blah11]

My OH loved being in the army and all the lads in his reg did have fun. yes its a very serious job but i dont no many soliders that dont love it.

I think the age limit is fine as it is being that at 16 you need ur parents consent or u can join at 18, 25 is actualy concidered very old to join the army and is the cut off point in most cases.

its not easy to join the army and they are very good at pointing out the ones who they no wont be able to handle the job, granted they do miss the odd tw*t lol

our soliders dont get paid enough for the work they actualy do but it can give u a great life

Most people don't these days unless you're a banker or something!

 

[moomin_troll]

My OH loved being in the army and all the lads in his reg did have fun. yes its a very serious job but i dont no many soliders that dont love it.

I think the age limit is fine as it is being that at 16 you need ur parents consent or u can join at 18, 25 is actualy concidered very old to join the army and is the cut off point in most cases.

its not easy to join the army and they are very good at pointing out the ones who they no wont be able to handle the job, granted they do miss the odd tw*t lol

our soliders dont get paid enough for the work they actualy do but it can give u a great life

Most people don't these days unless you're a banker or something!

true!

i will say one thing tho the army do look after their own. and since my oh died they have been great with me and have helped me anyway they can.
ive even been given a rather gorgeous visiting officer hahaha

the people who join no that they could die in war, and when asked they all have a reason to fight for us

 

[Blah11]

I was about to say that too. I dont think anywhere looks after you as much as the military does. Its not all bad (cept the fighting part, that is bad alongwith being deployed).

 

[moomin_troll]

I was about to say that too. I dont think anywhere looks after you as much as the military does. Its not all bad (cept the fighting part, that is bad alongwith being deployed).

its far from a easy life and comes with lots of downs but then alot of ups.

but it all comes down to we need a army and we need people to fight in it, no matter if we agree with the war or not....which i dont but hey ho!

 

[Avalanche]

What do you think?

I think you sound uninformed.

The recruitment process is incredibly difficult. Even to become a basic soldier you have to pass two interviews in which you are heavily scrutinised, aptitude tests and physical tests. Then there is about a 12-24 month waiting list that you go onto. Then before training starts you have to sit another physical test. Then you have over a year's worth of training, meaning the whole process up until you are a partially trained soldier can be up to three years. At any point in this process you are allowed to leave. Even on the day of graduation, a soldier can leave if they so wish. So after a year of seeing what the Army is all about and they can still walk out the door with no repercussions.

At no point is the Army dressed up as being 'fun' to potential recruits. The seriousness of signing up is hammered home to them. After all, why try and lure people in for them only to leave during training, wasting valuable resources?

Army training is hideously difficult. You are away from family, friends, home and everything you know. You are thrown into a block where you have to get along with lots of different people from different backgrounds. The training is incredibly difficult, and both physically and mentally demanding. There is no illusions of 'dancing troops' and it being fun.

Also, at any point after your training you can still leave. They don't want people serving who don't want to be there. There is up to a 24 month waiting list for a reason. There are plenty of above average candidates who want to be there. Not kids who failed out of school and have no where else to go.

I've been through a lot of Army training, carrying pretty much the weight of a person on my back in the July heat after suffering from sunstroke. I have watched very graphic videos of what happens in a war zone. I have basic training in how to deal with amputees due to the type of warfare we are engaged in. I have sat through briefs on suicide bombers. It's not 'glamorous' and tbh I find the idea that the Army are luring young people in to serve a bit of an insult.

Anyone who I have met in the Army or any other service is proud to serve. Yes, we all have bad days (who doesn't in any job) I will always hate having to get out of my sleeping bag at 4am to go on stag duty. I hate the waiting around, the paperwork. However I am proud to do the contribution that I can and I know everyone in my Regiment feels the same way.

Soldiers do a job that most people would probably be thankful for that they don't have to do. We need to recruit people, and we do need to advertise that fact. It's not 'glamourising' to show the good elements of the job which DO exist. Advertising by it's very nature is designed to appeal to it's focus group. The stark reality is never hidden from anyone at anytime.