Irish army compulsory?

caseyann

Seen as so many people complain about the people on the dole and ones who havent got jobs and long term dole.
What do people think of bringing in measures such as Army compulsory for those who arent going to college or haven't got jobs after the first year out of school? And those fit enough and no work long term and young enough to go into army compulsory also.
Something similar to Norway?
Without ofc been shipped off to some war somewhere.
Would it work.They learn a trade get paid and and learn some amount of responsibility.
Would it work?

BluePlanet

What's it got to do with the Irish Economy?
Seems more like a Politics issue.

I'd wager it costs the public pursue more to pay for a soldier than the dole.

Nijmegen

1. The army doesn't want to become a creche for 20something year olds. No more than 8,000 of them at least.
2. It costs more to run any system like this - social service or military service

The arguments are much the same as "work for the dole", except maybe (say the people advising it) the army puts manners on them.

Anyone who thinks that needs to spend 5 years in the army.

mikemac

We have a volunteer, professional defense force

It's not their job to look after young unemployed people who don't want to be there

caseyann

Nijmegen wrote: »

1. The army doesn't want to become a creche for 20something year olds. No more than 8,000 of them at least.
2. It costs more to run any system like this - social service or military service

The arguments are much the same as "work for the dole", except maybe (say the people advising it) the army puts manners on them.

Anyone who thinks that needs to spend 5 years in the army.

Not five years in army,Two years.I believe is Norwegian amount.
That way they are been paid and not getting the hard earned tax payers money for nothing.Thats what people are complaining about isnt it.They are sitting on their arses getting free money.Within a year of leaving school if they havent found college or work Army is compulsory.
Is it cost effective? And could it work?
People are only talking about cutting people off at the knees not solutions to the problem.They dont get work or college,they know army is there for them to gain skills or make a life out of the army if they find it to be something they like.
It works in Norway.

caseyann

feelingstressed wrote: »

We have a volunteer, professional defense force

It's not their job to look after young unemployed people who don't want to be there

They have no choice in Norway.

Nijmegen

caseyann wrote: »

Not five years in army,Two years.I believe is Norwegian amount.
That way they are been paid and not getting the hard earned tax payers money for nothing.Thats what people are complaining about isnt it.They are sitting on their arses getting free money.Within a year of leaving school if they havent found college or work Army is compulsory.
Is it cost effective? And could it work?
People are only talking about cutting people off at the knees not solutions to the problem.They dont get work or college,they know army is there for them to gain skills or make a life out of the army if they find it to be something they like.
It works in Norway.

The army does not put manners on you. Let me dispell that myth. If anything, it teaches you a lot about tribal life, factionalism and keeping your head down.

Secondly, it costs more than the dole - you'll need to pay them for a full week, you need to train them, feed them, etc... At what utility to the country....?

Thirdly, you'd prompt even more of a brain drain as you give 20somethings another reason to leave the country if they can't find anything after the schooling we've just paid to put them through.

caseyann

Nijmegen wrote: »

The army does not put manners on you. Let me dispell that myth. If anything, it teaches you a lot about tribal life, factionalism and keeping your head down.

Secondly, it costs more than the dole - you'll need to pay them for a full week, you need to train them, feed them, etc... At what utility to the country....?

Thirdly, you'd prompt even more of a brain drain as you give 20somethings another reason to leave the country if they can't find anything after the schooling we've just paid to put them through.

Does all Norwegians want to be in the army?
Did i say puts manners on you,most Irish people have manners.Most Irish lads have to much energy and need to off load it somewhere as they have no outlet.
For those who really do not want to go into the army gives them incentive to get a job or go to college.
No one gives proper suggestions of how to help or give incentive and protection to people on the dole to escape the poverty trap,only to go into another one.With low pay as there isnt enough high pay to go into.
Two years of compulsory Army with training and maturity and responsibility.After two years and graduation some may go on to stay in army and such services and others truck drivers engineers etc...
I see no loss as the country is already paying for them to do nothing.

gbee

One big problem:

Irish Army some 22,000.

Irish School Leavers some 60,000.

The tooling up would be massive, however, it could be accommodated in some of the large vacant institutions around the country.

I suggest, as I did in another post, to send all 16 years old's on military camps for their transition year, otherwise know as doss year or gap year.

Fill that gap I say.

BluePlanet

So what, we'll subsidise a "military career" for a new generation of spongers?

That will bring on loads of other crap we have to pay for as well.
Militaries don't come cheap.

Then we'll get a chorus of those that want to fully participate in NATO and pressure to signup to that particular arms-trading club.

No thanks

caseyann

gbee wrote: »

One big problem:

Irish Army some 22,000.

Irish School Leavers some 60,000.

The tooling up would be massive, however, it could be accommodated in some of the large vacant institutions around the country.

I suggest, as I did in another post, to send all 16 years old's on military camps for their transition year, otherwise know as doss year or gap year.

Fill that gap I say.

Break down how many go to college have work when they leave fairly quickly or have work during school to go onto have during college or while waiting for college placements.
And then ones who leave the country and the amount gets smaller.

Not all 16 year olds do transition year,I avoided it like plaque:D

caseyann

BluePlanet wrote: »

So what, we'll subsidise a "military career" for a new generation of spongers?

That will bring on loads of other crap we have to pay for as well.
Militaries don't come cheap.

Then we'll get a chorus of those that want to fully participate in NATO and pressure to signup to that particular arms-trading club.

No thanks

That wont happen so dont worry about it,Irish want to go they would be few and far between Luckily.:D

Nijmegen

You guys need to sort your figures. Firstly, the army is no more than 8,500 and the whole military is no more than 12,000 or so full time, with a reserve element that is shakey at best in its numbers.

For those who really do not want to go into the army gives them incentive to get a job or go to college.

This year we turned away several thousand CAO applicants for college courses. And getting a job is not really something you choose to do these days. Or have the 300,000 people we've added to the dole queues lately been misinformed?

Two years of compulsory Army with training and maturity and responsibility

Again, the army produces none of these things in all people. Look at the drafted US Army for Vietnam, or the great good old days of National Service in Britain, that certainly prompted a golden age of little crime and... Ohh.

I see no loss as the country is already paying for them to do nothing.

If they decide to emigrate to dodge the draft, we've spent 20odd years educating them and lose out on 40odd years of productive work from them, presuming the recession ends before 40 years.

And you will have to outlay more than the dole to house them, feed them, train them, clothe them (the army does all these things, by the by), and then it costs money for them to do anything (a single artillery shell costs €1,500.)

And err, what would we do with them? They'd be handy come a flood, but are we planning on taking a province of Afghanistan over or something?

Corsendonk

caseyann wrote: »

Not five years in army,Two years.I believe is Norwegian amount.
That way they are been paid and not getting the hard earned tax payers money for nothing.Thats what people are complaining about isnt it.They are sitting on their arses getting free money.Within a year of leaving school if they havent found college or work Army is compulsory.
Is it cost effective? And could it work?
People are only talking about cutting people off at the knees not solutions to the problem.They dont get work or college,they know army is there for them to gain skills or make a life out of the army if they find it to be something they like.
It works in Norway.

Have we discovered oil like Norway? Your talking about a major capital investment, uniforms, equipment, training, housing.

Norway spent nearly $7 billion in 2008 on defence or 1.3% of GDP
Ireland spent $1.5 billion in 2008 on defence or 0.6% of GDP

I suppose we could borrow more money ............

caseyann

Corsendonk wrote: »

Have we discovered oil like Norway? Your talking about a major capital investment, uniforms, equipment, training, housing.

Norway spent nearly $7 billion in 2008 on defence or 1.3% of GDP
Ireland spent $1.5 billion in 2008 on defence or 0.6% of GDP

I suppose we could borrow more money ............

It says other than that in the link i found.
€1,077,000,000, 0.58% ,2008
Is it a good investment is the question? I dont see any one in this country offering any solutions or incentives to anyone.
In order to create anything they have to invest when there is nothing been put on the table is it a good idea?

gbee

caseyann wrote: »

Not all 16 year olds do transition year,I avoided it like plaque:D

So did my son, and he went straight into the cadets after the leaving, he's now in 1st year in Galway as 2/Lt.

Corsendonk

Not really.

Your just paying for people on the dole to wear uniforms unless you wish to bulk up equipment defence spending which isn't cheap. Seening that we have consistently underspent a couple of years of defence spending at say $10 billion might be able to expand the armed forces enough to accomdate the extra staff but then your looking at an expanded budget of say 5 billion to maintain those forces. There is a reason why alot of countries have scrapped or reduced compulsory forces to moe to the professional army model. Cost!

Havent we got FAS to train people? Are you looking to duplicate spending?

caseyann

gbee wrote: »

So did my son, and he went straight into the cadets after the leaving, he's now in 1st year in Galway as 2/Lt.

Congratulations to him and you Must be proud :cool:

What you think? a way to go for people who dont know what to do with themselves and possibly no college for them? Get them away from dole lines?
Not everyone is going to be accepted either.
How good is training i heard mechanics etc... is very good?

ILA

There was no transition year in my school up to last year, when schools are now being forced to introduce it.

I think the current system of Junior Cert to Leaving Cert to College is just fine, I made it and am now studying for a Law degree. There should be no dropping out permitted until the completion of the Leaving Cert, either the Established or the doss vocational one done by Youthreach.

caseyann

Corsendonk wrote: »

Not really.

Your just paying for people on the dole to wear uniforms unless you wish to bulk up equipment defence spending which isn't cheap. Seening that we have consistently underspent a couple of years of defence spending at say $10 billion might be able to expand the armed forces enough to accomdate the extra staff but then your looking at an expanded budget of say 5 billion to maintain those forces. There is a reason why alot of countries have scrapped or reduced compulsory forces to moe to the professional army model. Cost!

Havent we got FAS to train people? Are you looking to duplicate spending?

Fás doesnt seem to be working for everyone and it is also limited places.The cut backs on the dole would almost surely pay for the people who get into the army,and the ones who want to avoid army at all costs will be forced to go work or have to go into the army.Again cutting back on dole.Dole should be last available option unless recently lost job or sick or to old.
No choice but to contribute and not sit around for no money?

caseyann

ILA wrote: »

There was no transition year in my school up to last year, when schools are now being forced to introduce it.

I think the current system of Junior Cert to Leaving Cert to College is just fine, I made it and am now studying for a Law degree. There should be no dropping out permitted until the completion of the Leaving Cert, either the Established or the doss vocational one done by Youthreach.

Youth reach do not get me started on them,They should be quashed.

gbee

Corsendonk wrote: »

Cost! Havent we got FAS to train people? Are you looking to duplicate spending?

Well, if thought out correctly, we are trading one cost for another, don't have the figures so it's probably still cheaper to have them on the dole.

gbee

caseyann wrote: »

Congratulations to him and you Must be proud :cool: What you think? a way to go for people who dont know what to do with themselves and possibly no college for them? Get them away from dole lines? Not everyone is going to be accepted either. How good is training i heard mechanics etc... is very good?

Yes, super. The cadet ships is very difficult, I was delighted he got through the preliminaries, 2,000 for a class of 35 + a few reserves, I think you need a dedication to join the cadets ~ there are a lot of obstacles and one needs sheer determination and an ambition to succeed [+++]. So it's not really open to everyone to have a go.

The army or navy is a fine choice, though, and it is character building despite what some are saying in similar threads, it's a fine career to go into as a young man and come out in his early forties with essentially another lifetime ahead of him or her with a pension to fall back on too.

c_man

For a political viewpoint, I'd have to lean on the libertarian side of the fence and say that to me, conscription is nothing more than a few years forced slavery.

Aside from that, I can't see it making any economic sense. How many millions would need to pumped into this scheme (to increase the size of the armed forces to triple at least?). How exactly is a recent college graduate (or anyone for that matter) supposed to be able to find and be available for work while out on maneuvers at the curragh

djpbarry

caseyann wrote: »

That way they are been paid and not getting the hard earned tax payers money for nothing.

From the state’s perspective, they are being paid for nothing, because we have no use for an expanded armed forces.

caseyann wrote: »

Thats what people are complaining about isnt it.They are sitting on their arses getting free money.Within a year of leaving school if they havent found college or work Army is compulsory.

Or we could reform FÁS and train these kids to do something useful?

caseyann wrote: »

Is it cost effective?

Nope. I’m no expert, but I’m guessing that training and maintaining a soldier is far more expensive then keeping someone on the dole. Your essentially arguing that we should save money on welfare by spending far more money on defence – it doesn’t make any sense.

caseyann wrote: »

And could it work?

I doubt it – we’ll just see more young people driven out of the country.

caseyann wrote: »

...they know army is there for them to gain skills...

These skills cannot be obtained outside the army?

caseyann wrote: »

It works in Norway.

Does it? Based on what metrics?

caseyann wrote: »

Most Irish lads have to much energy and need to off load it somewhere as they have no outlet.

Sport? And why are we focussing solely on Irish ‘lads’?

caseyann wrote: »

For those who really do not want to go into the army gives them incentive to get a job or go to college...

..or emigrate.

caseyann wrote: »

No one gives proper suggestions of how to help or give incentive and protection to people on the dole to escape the poverty trap...

I have stated several times on this website that I would like to see effort concentrated on helping people to ‘upskill’, which includes a major overhaul and modernisation of FÁS.

caseyann wrote: »

I see no loss as the country is already paying for them to do nothing.

You see no loss? How about the huge losses incurred by training a whole bunch of soldiers we don’t need?

caseyann wrote: »

It says other than that in the link i found.
€1,077,000,000, 0.58% ,2008

That would be approximately $1.5 billion, wouldn’t it?

caseyann wrote: »

The cut backs on the dole would almost surely pay for the people who get into the army...

I’d love to see some figures to support that claim.

caseyann

c_man wrote: »

For a political viewpoint, I'd have to lean on the libertarian side of the fence and say that to me, conscription is nothing more than a few years forced slavery.

Aside from that, I can't see it making any economic sense. How many millions would need to pumped into this scheme (to increase the size of the armed forces to triple at least?). How exactly is a recent college graduate (or anyone for that matter) supposed to be able to find and be available for work while out on maneuvers at the curragh

Slavery you dont get paid or given education.
Many a Norwegian benefits from said conscription and the country benefits from that.

If you see what i said leaving school not college,If they havent found work or joined a college within a year have to join the army.And the long day layabouts who are obviously no intention of working.I put it for them to be given assistant work with bin men street cleaning and cleaning up canals etc.. for the money they receive from the dole also.But no one seems happy with that.
People just want to cut them off the dole altogther and starve them and make them turn against the country altogether building great animosity.
At least i am putting out ideas that actually could work.

c_man

caseyann wrote: »

Slavery you dont get paid or given education.

The key being you don't get a choice.


I just don't see it working at all.

caseyann

c_man wrote: »

The key being you don't get a choice.


I just don't see it working at all.

After a year of sitting on your ass,it gives incentive if you dont want to be forced into army,get a job.

caseyann

djpbarry wrote: »

From the state’s perspective, they are being paid for nothing, because we have no use for an expanded armed forces.
Or we could reform FÁS and train these kids to do something useful?
Nope. I’m no expert, but I’m guessing that training and maintaining a soldier is far more expensive then keeping someone on the dole. Your essentially arguing that we should save money on welfare by spending far more money on defence – it doesn’t make any sense.
I doubt it – we’ll just see more young people driven out of the country.
These skills cannot be obtained outside the army?
Does it? Based on what metrics?
Sport? And why are we focussing solely on Irish ‘lads’?
..or emigrate.
I have stated several times on this website that I would like to see effort concentrated on helping people to ‘upskill’, which includes a major overhaul and modernisation of FÁS.
You see no loss? How about the huge losses incurred by training a whole bunch of soldiers we don’t need?
That would be approximately $1.5 billion, wouldn’t it?
I’d love to see some figures to support that claim.

Its not my job to get the figures.It was a question that you obviously dont agree with.But if the numbers are off the dole.

Training them into other skills while doing things around the country and gaining confidence and self achievement.

We all would like to see that,but havent Fás got the bad guy banner over them at the moment?

c_man

caseyann wrote: »

After a year of sitting on your ass,it gives incentive if you dont want to be forced into army,get a job.

Not all people on the dole are there for lack of trying to get work. I'd be very surprised if you don't know anybody who's been searching for a job for over a year.

caseyann

c_man wrote: »

Not all people on the dole are there for lack of trying to get work. I'd be very surprised if you don't know anybody who's been searching for a job for over a year.

For over a year after school? And with no view of college.ok widen it to two years is that better for you? Then you have become a long term unwilling collector and might be happy with a stint in the army.
Again in case does not refer to those who have been made redundant in recent times.

djpbarry

caseyann wrote: »

Its not my job to get the figures.

Might that because you know they don’t add up?

caseyann

djpbarry wrote: »

Might that because you know they don’t add up?

It might because it would take me ages to do them out and i want to be paid for that

c_man

Leaving aside everything else, do you not think that such a move would dilute the army? Would cadets get proper instruction when the instructors have to deal with tens of thousands, a lot of whom we'd have to assume would have no interest in being there. Could they be kicked out etc.?

caseyann

c_man wrote: »

Leaving aside everything else, do you not think that such a move would dilute the army? Would cadets get proper instruction when the instructors have to deal with tens of thousands, a lot of whom we'd have to assume would have no interest in being there. Could they be kicked out etc.?

Well all needs a whittle down,and i doubt tens of thousands will even make it that far in,due to medical and mental stability etc.. and also the extra effort to get jobs rather than join the army.The amounts who end up in army would lessen.

Kevo

They do something similar to this in Austria. They have the option of civilian work for 9 months or the Army for 6 months. Everyone has to do regardless of whether you have a job or not.

caseyann

Kevo wrote: »

They do something similar to this in Austria. They have the option of civilian work for 9 months or the Army for 6 months. Everyone has to do regardless of whether you have a job or not.

How does that work out?




Also not to mention they are paying taxes while in army.

Nijmegen

This is all based on opinions with no facts.

I tried discussing the economics a bit back. Let's try again.

I recall reading a USA Today article that in the US, the cost of training a regular GI is $50,000. In the UK, their own figures put the annual unit cost (not the full cost) of training a soldier at 19,000GBP per year.

We wouldn't have their economy of scale to work off of, either.

It also costs more to run your military overall the more troops you have. You need more vehicles, more facilities, and you need more for them to do.

Again, I remind you that the cost of firing one single artillery shell for real is €1,500 for the shell. An artillery battery contains about 6-8 guns, with about 8 crew to each gun.

So, to have one exercise of an artillery battery will cost us €9,000 for every shell they fire and over €300,000 to train the crew to fire it, not to mention the cost of the guns themselves and all the other support and logistics troops for it.

In an infantry unit, the bigger mobile anti-tank weapon they use is the Javelin missile. The unit itself costs $125,000 and each missile costs $40,000.

Now, in both cases you can use cheaper training rounds, but eventually you have to train them to use the real deal.

The cost of running a military is massive.

The utility to a country like Ireland is minimal.

The Brits spend roughly €125,400 per head per year on their military, all in. We spend about €105,000.

Del2005

Do you not think there is a reason why most countries have moved away from forcing people into their armed forces? What do you do with someone who refuses, jail then?

gbee

c_man wrote: »

Leaving aside everything else, do you not think that such a move would dilute the army? Would cadets get proper instruction when the instructors have to deal with tens of thousands, a lot of whom we'd have to assume would have no interest in being there. Could they be kicked out etc.?

Let's be clear here. If you join the army you are NOT a cadet. A cadet candidate is applying for a commissioned positioned, ie an Officer.

ALL cadets go to cadet school after an intensive interview process, after three month basic, equivalent to two years for the PTE regular [Army Soldier] they go on further courses for 18 months to several years for each of the three services, Army, Navy, Air Corps. They NEED a University Degree either before applying for or during the early years of their carers.

The Army does not have as much criteria for enlistment.

Now, if you keep your point to the enlisted privates and NCO's then you do have a point and it is envisaged that such a move could negatively impact on the Army.

The training courses are separate, the Cadets get a three month intensive induction to basic, classes are small, 25 to 35, that would not change significantly. These NCO's do not train regular troops. There are two cadet classes, a senior and junior, they run separated by a year, but otherwise concurrently and inter-react. Effectively a Cadet is not ready for duties for three to five years depending on his entrance qualifications.

The regular Army recruits are run in platoons of about 30, in times of expansion many can run concurrently, after six months basic training the recruit passes out and is ready for duties immediately.

liammur

caseyann wrote: »

Seen as so many people complain about the people on the dole and ones who havent got jobs and long term dole.
What do people think of bringing in measures such as Army compulsory for those who arent going to college or haven't got jobs after the first year out of school? And those fit enough and no work long term and young enough to go into army compulsory also.
Something similar to Norway?
Without ofc been shipped off to some war somewhere.
Would it work.They learn a trade get paid and and learn some amount of responsibility.
Would it work?

Great idea.
Can you imagine the number of accidents we'd have, on top of the claims for deafness etc. LOL !

c_man

gbee wrote: »

Let's be clear here. If you join the army you are NOT a cadet. A cadet candidate is applying for a commissioned positioned, ie an Officer.
...............
Now, if you keep your point to the enlisted privates and NCO's then you do have a point and it is envisaged that such a move could negatively impact on the Army.
............

Yup, I meant your second part there.

Mr Benevolent

A very expensive idea.

Corsendonk

I think the OP is getting a bit confused between the army and a community service type organisation. I rather have a specific community service organisation rather than teach people how to kill each other, you might end up with some taking them skills into private practice.. OP you keep mentioning mental stability, have you actually ever talked to some of them in the FCA?:D

peasant

I was in the army, pretty much against my will (although I could have chosen to do some social work instead).

It was back in the day when the war was still cold, the wall was still up and Germany had 1/2 milllion men under arms at all times, most of them conscripts.

Leaving aside all the economics of it, I can tell you from my personal experience that as a conscript in the army you learn nothing other than:
-keep quiet, don't stick out
-switch off your brain
-shout: Sir, yes, Sir
-dispense with all notions of individuality
-being bored, bored to tears

oh ..and you learn your way around small arms and to shoot at things

All very useful skills that will transform you into a valuable, contributing member of society ...not!

The only positive thing I personally got out of my time in the army was a truck driving licence ...but even that hasn't helped me one bit in my chosen career path since.

Hare brained idea if I ever heard one.

Corsendonk

peasant wrote: »

The only positive thing I personally got out of my time in the army was a truck driving licence ...but even that hasn't helped me one bit in my chosen career path since.

Hare brained idea if I ever heard one.

Alot of the big distribution companies here about 3-4 years ago started sending over their chief driver evaluators over to Poland to recruit drivers. Most of the candidates had licences from the army........brutal drivers, even the best couldn't reverse a truck to save there lives.

mgmt

Conscription:eek:


HELL NO

Giving an army too much importance in a society is suicide.

Nehaxak

Not much to say on this myself other than the only way I could see it working would be to create a completely Defence forces managed civilian humanitarian sub-set of the Irish Defence Forces, with funding provided to it by diverting all government funds currently given to Irish NGO's to this instead.
The Irish Defence Forces would provide the security, logistics, transport and communications for the worldwide operations but would pull talent from the civilian population, both from professional trades required but also from those in the country who just want to work hard for a suitable and rewarding cause.

Could cater initially for worldwide emergency situations in the short-term, maybe a rapid response with a follow-on of possible water and sanitation establishment projects and of course distribution of emergency accommodation and food/utensil provision when required.
There's an awful lot more though that they could do, once established, trained and all working well together.

Wages wise for those involved would not rise above whatever the standardised wages applied to the Defence forces themselves are and all involved would have to adhere to defence force disciplines at all times.

Given we are a neutral country and that our defence forces are well respected world wide, along with a long history of our own civilian population involving themselves in one way or another with humanitarian needs - I'd see it as a perfect match.

However, you can't just force people from the dole into something like this, or the defence forces, you would need to recruit for it. Bet you'd get at least 100,000 applications in a week though, I'd be one of them.

johnnyskeleton

Is there something to be said for reducing the army's numbers massively?

It's costing us about 1bn per year which could easily be reduced by half or more by:

1. Reducing the number of senior ranking officers
2. Reducing the number of enlisted men
3. Closing some barracks
4. not buying in new machinery.

Essentially, strip the Irish Defence Forces down to a basic coast guard, air rescue and a few troops for whatever overseas committments we have. Keep the reserves higher so that there are some soldiers available in the unlikely event of a war, and replace their guard and ceremonial duties with civilians or volunteers.

Obviously this is not ideal, but I think it should be explored for possible savings measures.

Long term, while I don't think people should be required to join the army instead of the dole, I think that army service should try to get lots of people to do 2-3 year tours just after school/college and then they go off and do other things. This would reduce the wage bill as they could be paid low wages for those years and then wouldn't get increases as the years go on or a pension. For many young people, earning say 10k per year but getting free food and board is a good way to get a bit of seed money for later in life. Obviously I'm forseeing a future where the dole pays nowhere near 10k p.a., so there would be an incentive for the unemployed, who are interested in joining the army, to join.

Poccington

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Is there something to be said for reducing the army's numbers massively?

It's costing us about 1bn per year which could easily be reduced by half or more by:

1. Reducing the number of senior ranking officers
2. Reducing the number of enlisted men
3. Closing some barracks
4. not buying in new machinery.

Essentially, strip the Irish Defence Forces down to a basic coast guard, air rescue and a few troops for whatever overseas committments we have. Keep the reserves higher so that there are some soldiers available in the unlikely event of a war, and replace their guard and ceremonial duties with civilians or volunteers.

Obviously this is not ideal, but I think it should be explored for possible savings measures.

Long term, while I don't think people should be required to join the army instead of the dole, I think that army service should try to get lots of people to do 2-3 year tours just after school/college and then they go off and do other things. This would reduce the wage bill as they could be paid low wages for those years and then wouldn't get increases as the years go on or a pension. For many young people, earning say 10k per year but getting free food and board is a good way to get a bit of seed money for later in life. Obviously I'm forseeing a future where the dole pays nowhere near 10k p.a., so there would be an incentive for the unemployed, who are interested in joining the army, to join.

Barracks have already been closed, with more closures to come. We're steadily losing numbers through natural wastage.

The DF has steadily been downsized through the years to the size it is at now. Unlike most of the Public Sector, we downsized ourselves during the Celtic Tiger era.

Sorry but you won't get people joining low paying jobs just because it's the Army. We don't get free food and board either, we pay for it.

mgmt

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Is there something to be said for reducing the army's numbers massively?

It's costing us about 1bn per year which could easily be reduced by half or more by:

1. Reducing the number of senior ranking officers
2. Reducing the number of enlisted men
3. Closing some barracks
4. not buying in new machinery.

Essentially, strip the Irish Defence Forces down to a basic coast guard, air rescue and a few troops for whatever overseas committments we have. Keep the reserves higher so that there are some soldiers available in the unlikely event of a war, and replace their guard and ceremonial duties with civilians or volunteers.

Obviously this is not ideal, but I think it should be explored for possible savings measures.

I'd support reducing the Irish Defence Forces. The IDF should be solely used in the protection of Ireland. We should not send them overseas.

• Navy: Protecting Irish fishing rights, stop the flow of contraband into this country. Sea rescue.
• Army: Backup civil authorities. Maintain the ability to tackle terrorist organisations.
• Aer Corps: Scrap it.

If we go towards mandatory membership we would head towards a jingoistic society like the USA and the UK were the military is too important in everyday politics and the Generals can tell the civil leadership to **** off (Gen. Petraeus to Obama recently).