Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
I don't think you have even half thought about the possibilities. National service does not in any sense mean send them to war or to serve with our full time military.
Kids will have the option (when leaving school) to either go, full-time military (3.5 years minimum term) or NS (2 year minimum term).
Those who choose NS won't be thrown in with any full-time servicemen, they will have their own barracks, bases and operational training areas that won't interfere with our full timers.
During the minimum 2 years, the recruits have similar study options to that of a college. For example recruits can do A-Levels, Btecs, GNVQ's and the rest.
During the two years, the recruits will not only have study options, they will have daily exercise drills to stay fit and healthy, general/military (British) history education and team building skills in order to help kids integrate with other people.
I've got so much more to say on the subject but I don't want to waste my time and let it fall on deaf ears.
All I say is put me in charge and I will turn it around.
This is great stuff. Why involve the military at all? We could build institutions in major cities whereby 'recruits' could further their educations, and we'd provide leisure facilities, and barracks, or we could call them something civilian friendly, like halls of residence or something. We could make these institutions more vocational and affordable to all. You could learn about the history of medicine, or art, maybe even military, and these kids would meet other similar minded people. Instead of 'National Service', we could call it higher education, or College, or even university. If we make it so it's an attractive proposition, easy to get into, and well funded, it would be available to all not just the wealthy, or those that got straight A's in everything. I think I get it now (other than the military bit....).