Try the political quiz
+

Filter by type

Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.

91 Replies

 @9L2X73Lanswered…11mos11MO

18-25 would be more appropriate, only for repeat offenders and it should be a shorter period of time e.g. six-eight weeks

 @9CPQT8Yanswered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but include other emergency and public services for those not wishing the military.

 @9LLGXN3Greenagreed…10mos10MO

Thats actually something I haven't thought about before, why is it that people discuss compulsory military service and not any other jobs that protect and serve the country? I don't agree with compulsory military service because I wouldn't want to fight and die for a government that doesn't represent me, but I would absolutely work for the NHS if given proper training.

 @9MHCS4BGreen answered…9mos9MO

offer service, or military or social, caring at a good rate of remuneration to encourage civil and civic pride and commitment

 @9NXHMFTanswered…8mos8MO

There should be more encouragement and opportunity for skills development/education and work experience for all 18yr olds with more support and resources provided to enable this. Taking part should be compulsory but the right to choose what.

 @58M8D8Vfrom Southampton  answered…4yrs4Y

 @B2QWQBNanswered…3 days3D

I think rather than forcing people to join the army, they should incentivise it more because forcing someone to do something they don’t wanna do can be way more of a liability they they are better off encouraging people and have legit reasons recruiting is important and the recruiting numbers are unfortunately down however forcing 18-year-olds do one year is not a way to go and can be more of a problem specially for security

 @B2NHBD6answered…5 days5D

No but young offenders, homeless individuals and the unemployed should be encouraged, make the army cool again

 @B26KLRQWorkers of Britainanswered…1mo1MO

No use of the military. It is an imperialist feature and young people are manipulated into thinking the military is a badge of honour to join when it only brings horrors to everyone and stirs up more corruption

 @B22684Zanswered…2mos2MO

Yes, however, military service should be the only national service that should be paid. Military shouldn't be compulsory but citizens should have the option to help in more community based projects and cleanups

 @9ZGMHNYLiberal Democratanswered…3mos3MO

No, because our armed forces could support the huge amount of people who would join, training then takes months which is waste of resources for a years contract and finally soldiers who lack a want to serve their country won't be good at it.

 @9YN6HZPanswered…3mos3MO

For those that are not seeking employment, and should be given a choice of military training or education and skill development.

 @9WQKFWKanswered…3mos3MO

I believe Military Service should be one factor in which individuals should be granted the privilege to vote, so I believe 18 Year Old Citizens should attend at least 1 year minimum service in the military.

 @9VM3W6Manswered…4mos4MO

Yes, for those who do not pursue education or employment and with less focus on military training and more on life skills and after 1 year it becomes more military type training

 @9V2XP9Qanswered…4mos4MO

Yes, they should serve a term for those who do not have a further education or career path and also for criminals who are willing to correct their ways

 @9QLJVR3Liberal Democratanswered…7mos7MO

If they havent got a career or education plan in place, National service (not necessarily military) should be served before anyone is eligible for any benefits.

 @9QL8323answered…7mos7MO

Rather than military service I think 18 year old citizens who do not pursue employment or further education should do mandatory NHS service - work fir the NHS in a band 2 role such as a cleaner, support worker, house keeper etc.

 @9QK4DMVanswered…7mos7MO

Yes but only for those who do not pursue further education and employment and should focus more on education and skills development

 @9QJWJ69answered…7mos7MO

No, but they should provide at least 3000 hours, non-military, community service in a branch of their own choosing, e.g. volunteering in Health care, litter picking (and other environmental assistance) or volunteering on something else non-military. They should be able to choose to serve this part-time over more years if they prefer, it doesn't have to be done full-time in one year, but has to be served by their 21st birthday otherwise they have to serve the remaining hours full-time from their 21st birthday onward.

 @9Q8TRSNReform UKanswered…7mos7MO

Should be community (volunteering within public services, charities, community projects etc) or military service so can choose.

 @9Q8NJJTanswered…7mos7MO

All Individuals should be enrolled in community service programs from high school. They should also be in A compulsory sporting or extra curricular activity to help train their minds, keep them healthy and off the streets.

Each activity they do, they should receive credit they can cash in later on for higher education orc training, this way they're encouraged to do more extracurricular activities.

 @9Q77S2Ganswered…7mos7MO

No, but it should be encouraged, but not required, and let it remain a choice for 18 year olds. But it would be important to let them have a "taster/introduction day" to see what it would be like in the military, it should be encouraged and be introduced in secondary schools to promote national security and let us have the option to help defend the country.

 @9Q6R8ZZanswered…7mos7MO

Yes, for all men once 18 though weekends only like reserves so people can continue persuing their degrees.

 @9Q6HFGTanswered…7mos7MO

No. There should be a choice of further education, employment, community service for a year or military service. No-one should ever be forced into the military.

 @9Q6BSYRanswered…7mos7MO

Yes, not necessarily martial in its focus, but focussing on fitness, resilience, mental strength. Ideally training people for an active, healthy life removing a burden on the NHS further down the line.

 @9Q264S3 answered…7mos7MO

The idea of national service is, in and of itself, a good one but service doesn't need to be military necessarily. I would favour a broader societal service which could include time in the military.

 @9PXSVDSanswered…7mos7MO

Joining the part time reserves should be a condition of studying for a degree. Plus an additional two years (for a total of five) as a non active reservist liable to recall.

 @9PVSY8RWorkers of Britainanswered…7mos7MO

Yes and if they don’t want to they have to volunteer for 3 days evrymonth of community service for 18 months

 @9PT47P5answered…7mos7MO

No, national service should be reintroduced, but not limited to military service, it should also include options for public sector and civil service roles.

 @9SKBZR9Greenanswered…5mos5MO

No, but with an option to partake in a year-long course less focused on military training and more focused on education and skill development. Perhaps this could be something offered at schools either taking the slot of a lesson or as an after school activity

 @9R4RSQTanswered…7mos7MO

No, serving should be an option, but there should be some focus on education and skill development, not just the training, however for three years if they choose to serve, and they should serve in the medical core and then when they are 21 then they can choose whether they want to go into full-time military service

 @9Q3LHQKanswered…7mos7MO

Yes, at least one year but only for men, if they have a criminal record at any age under 40, they should be required to do at least one year as well.

 @9P7G5V3Greenanswered…8mos8MO

No, it should be a choice but could be focus on skill development (or could count towards training in some other forces type role with basic training) so it’s a learning experience that benefits both parties to encourage participation.

 @9P75D7RLiberal Democratanswered…8mos8MO

All young people should be required to undertake some level of public service that is of public use not necessarily military service

 @9P6LYBDConservativeanswered…8mos8MO

Yes, people born now (2024) should do 4 years of military service, from the age of 16, this would include university-style education as well as PT and all the regular military training. fighting age would remain the same at 18 and at 20 they are given the option to remain in the forces, continue their education (no fees) or start an apprenticeship.

 @9NWVWCDanswered…8mos8MO

Should only be open to British born children, as it would increase chances of terrorist infiltrating the ranks

 @9NS7VWYanswered…8mos8MO

Rather than force people to sign up for 4 years minimum, 18-24 year olds should be given the option to perform 1 year in the armed services as a form of national service. Rather than forcing them to do so.

 @9NRBFWHLiberal Democratanswered…8mos8MO

Not enforced but offered as an option to all with extra encouragement to people who have started to build a criminal record or who have not gone into employment or further education.

 @9NQSW9Lanswered…8mos8MO

Only for those not in education or employment and are physically fit unless they can be utilised in local offices if they're fit enough to do office work. (I'm a wheelchair user and was at college/university from leaving school and have been in f/t work since I was 20, I have just cut my hours due to my disability deteriorating)

 @9NMW924Greenanswered…8mos8MO

No, young people have already sacrificed a lot previously by giving up their childhoods during COVID to protect the older generations

 @9NJXNNKanswered…8mos8MO

Yes, but it should be an option within a broader National Service including emergency services, waste processing and farming.

 @9NJVBP2answered…8mos8MO

Service should be a choice, not an obligation, and think about the feelings of regular service people - why should they get stuck with everyone else's spoiled children?

 @9NFPN3CSDPanswered…8mos8MO

Yes, if they are suitable for service, if not defer it if possible; also, focus more on education and skill development for that young age group.

 @9NFMDQVanswered…8mos8MO

Possibly, but depends very much on the terms and conditions of such service. Are they for 'home use' only, would they be deployed outside of UK?

 @9N882Y6answered…8mos8MO

Yes, but for those who are not seeking further education or employment but focus less on military and more on education and skill development

 @9N7QHC9Animal Welfareanswered…8mos8MO

No, 18yo’s are not the same anymore. They’re too sensitive, too coddled, too comfortable. They wouldn’t cope. We would lose them as quickly as they went in. Maybe if they had a decent of training and desensitisation first

 @9MV7WWNanswered…9mos9MO

Yes, but there should be an option to do civic service instead i.e work in a hospital or old people’s home.

 @9MRML96answered…9mos9MO

yes, lack of respect and discipline in society needs addressing. This would be a blunt tool though, the issue goes so much deeper and starts at very early childhood

 @9PN6X8Panswered…8mos8MO

No, but youth offenders or those that don't seek higher education or employment should be required to do so.

 @9PN6W4QLiberal Democratanswered…8mos8MO

Only if you change the education system. What happens to University if everyone spends a year in military service?

 @9PHD699answered…8mos8MO

Paid employment within a field of interest that contributes to the economy should be highly encouraged as an alternative or prelude to university.

 @9PFLDLGanswered…8mos8MO

No, but we should require 18 year olds to volunteer in a public service sector (police, fire, ambulance) or charity sector.

 @9PF4LPPanswered…8mos8MO

National service is a good idea, but volunteering locally should have equal value. Military is not appropriate for everyone

 @9P265L3Libertariananswered…8mos8MO

Yes, but teach the youth trades to build properties that will be specifically available for them and other young people/first time buyers.

 @9NWVV74answered…8mos8MO

No service should be a choice rather than an obligation, but it could be incentivised during and post service, and open to more people to provide opportunities and a vocational step-ladder

 @9NPBCLVanswered…8mos8MO

Yes but only basic training to provide the population the ability to rise up in the event of invasion.

 @9NNK5MPanswered…8mos8MO

Yes, but only if the question was expanded to include options such as community service e.g. with the fire brigade etc

 @9NGWVBWIndependentanswered…8mos8MO

Offer alternative eg education online, vocational college , counselling services , trauma informed educational settings to help regulate and grow in confidence- something ti help all -

 @9NC3Z7XConservativeanswered…8mos8MO

Yes, I do believe that we should do this as we are at such disadvantage to other countries as basic training is roughly 6-8 weeks and if there is a risk then at least more people will have the training and skills to defend our country and that way we don’t lose as many lives.

 @9N62DYWanswered…8mos8MO

Yes but it should be paid and with added incentive of having their university fees paid for with 3 years of service

 @9N3PGPXLiberal Democratanswered…8mos8MO

In theory I'm not wholly against the idea, but I've yet to see a viable model proposed. One with optional non military service to the community as an alternative with a focus on education and skills, which is properly funded and isn't just the odd weekend a month, properly paid etc. could be doable. It shouldn't be every 18 year old - there should be rigorous medical, fitness and psychological tests - particularly for the military option. It should prioritise those without employment or further education. Overall, the position is nuanced.

 @9N2BXWZanswered…8mos8MO

Bringing back a year’s National Service for all youngsters could be a good thing. But do not make it purely Of Military bias. It could be used for helping local government, councils etc.

 @9M5DD8HGreenanswered…9mos9MO

People should be encouraged to be more self sufficient, learn to defend oneself, support your community etc.

 @9KR5SC3answered…11mos11MO

no, but 18 year olds should be required a couple of weeks of weapons training and self defence classes.

 @9JKKYL9answered…1yr1Y

Everyone has a duty to defend the country, but forcing them to serve is not going to solve military issues.

 @9JHYPPSanswered…1yr1Y

Yes, all able citizens should perform national service, but allow conscientious objectors to do their service in the paramedics/NHS, fire/rescue services and civil defense organizations.

 @9JDNGYDanswered…1yr1Y

I believe it should but with exceptions. Those not pursuing education or employment should be required. those with mental or physical disabilities should not, and those joining another force like police should not.

 @9JCGP82answered…1yr1Y

Military, no, national service, yes. If 18 year olds do not have further education or apprenticeship or work options, some form of national service should apply, which could be anything from litter picking to council work to anything that will benefit the country.

 @9JBZT7NGreen answered…1yr1Y

I would not be opposed to a national civil service proposition, to allow all young people experience in government, and a reference. It should be paid, and not interrupt education, so only full time if they wish.

 @9HWWX39answered…1yr1Y

Yes, those attending university for a STEM degree should be able to defer until after uni where there degree can be applied to their service period

 @9H99Y3Ganswered…1yr1Y

Only if they've passed relevant psychological tests. Some people would absolutely benefit from it, while to others it can be seriously detrimental.

 @9GD4NGNanswered…1yr1Y

Everyone needs to provide a service to the nation in some way. Some choose the military, volunteer, teach etc. In my opinion. Children need to expand their horizons so they can have something to offer the country. More on education and upskilling the population.

 @9G5MCLJanswered…1yr1Y

Yes, at least two years. Especially for those who are starting to build a criminal record and those who do not pursue further education or employment and while service should be a choice instead of an obligation generally speaking, in this case, incentives will be offered and those who do not pursue further education or employment can be given less focus on military training and more focus on education and skill development as to help there development if they prove themselves. Those that extend their service due to their rank, position and job will be incentivised further.

 @9FXZ4LPanswered…1yr1Y

No but make a program whereby if a 18-20 year old does 12 months of service they get a government voucher to pay off half of there university fees if they pursue university after service

 @9FD28JXWomen's Equalityanswered…1yr1Y

I personally think if you force someone into training and doing something they don't wish to do they won't furfill to their upmost potentioal as I would do the service however I wouldn't want to be in a negative environment of other people being negative due to forced service training. However it would help to lover the gaining rate of people being overweight and obeese.

 @9DCWFC2answered…1yr1Y

Yes to service but not necessarily military. Options could include other public services.

 @9D9DL47answered…1yr1Y

No, but make it mandatory for exclusions and anti-social behaviour - make sure support networks are in place

 @9B34GTKanswered…2yrs2Y

Yes if unemployed after education for 3months or over or have a police record by 16

 @9Q39JR6answered…7mos7MO

Yes, but include other emergency and publichealth/social care services for those not wishing the military

 @9P4LMDJLiberal Democratanswered…8mos8MO

No. UK military would struggle to train a large number of short term service people. It should be a option if the geopolitical situation deteriorate further.

 @9L9RF7SLiberal Democratanswered…10mos10MO

Yes, but it should be national service of which military service is one option. Those entering medical, teaching and other social professions will be exempt.

 @9KRXG6Ganswered…11mos11MO

No but a year of part time community service completed between 16 and 18, made up of discrete time periods around work and training.

 @9PM5386from Virginia  answered…8mos8MO

Yes to a public service year that would include a military year option, provided it is for everyone.

 @9P4VP83answered…8mos8MO

Yes, however not strictly militarily. It should incorporate service in other public service sectors as well.

 @9L879JSanswered…10mos10MO

YES!!!

because you need to insure that loyalty to the country and that every citzien can be trained to maintain and use firearms

again something we can learn from ISRAEL because if everyone is fighting to defend the country the loyalty to other countries might waver

anyone who doges it without a valid reason should be on a watch list.

 @9Q3NTBF answered…7mos7MO

Not completely opposed to choosing if it’s military or community volunteering, volunteering in NHS or food banks. Building life skills is part of that.

 @9PMBBXYanswered…8mos8MO

National service should happen - should be kids not going into higher education or employment but it should not be military based. Kids should do care work, community work etc instead

 @9PCVXR6answered…8mos8MO

Yes, but National service should be over 18months and a choice in public service such as military, hospitals, schools / prisons / community care.

 @9CJDV7Zanswered…2yrs2Y

Perhaps, sounds like it could be a good idea. I am old enough to remember my mother saying “you wait till you do your military service”. But I was not quite old enough to try it.

 @98PZPHGLabouranswered…2yrs2Y

No, social service should be run instead, helping emergency services or community programs

 @947TBV3Reclaimanswered…2yrs2Y

everyone should recieve military training, not necessarily undergo military service.

 @93S2FHBanswered…3yrs3Y

There should be compulsory community service but not necessarily military service

 @93RSNRDanswered…3yrs3Y

 @8ZFJ88Ganswered…3yrs3Y

They should chose by choice. No forcing, no pressure as certain teenagers do often go off to the army for work.

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...