Message to all the rioters .......... . u wanna be big men and fight to the death , well get your sorry little arses on the next plane to Afghanistan and stand alongside real men , they're called soldiers and they are fighting a war unlike you bunch of pathetic wastes of space !!!!
We've all seen them. Trite pieces of regurgitated propaganda masquerading as social commentary like the one above appearing in our news feed on various social networks. Perhaps some of your contacts expressed support for one of the pages set up by the BNP demanding that the government „bring our troops home“ and unleash them onto the streets.
The contrasting imagery of soldiers and rioters jolted my memory of something I had read a while back about the armed forces recruiting most of their enlisted men and women from deprived areas. So I did a little research and came across a report called „Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom“.
One of the findings of the report confirmed what I had suspected:
„Non-officer recruitment draws mostly on young people from 16 years of age living in disadvantaged communities, with many recruits joining as a last resort.“
But this was only the start.
The UK is the only country in the European Union which recruits minors as young as 16 into its armed forces. Although under 18s are required to provide written consent from their parents or guardians, the report found that neither the recruit nor their legal guardians were provided with enough information about the risks of service in the armed forces, or the rights and responsibilities of enlisted men to be able to make a fully informed decision.
For example, they are unlikely to be told that male soldiers under 20 years of age face a 50% greater risk of suicide than those of similar profile in the civilian population, or that there is a disproportionately large number of suicides among discharged veterans who have seen combat. 20% of soldiers want to leave the army at the earliest opportunity, but must wait until they have served up to six years due to terms of service which the House of Commons Defence Committee’s Duty of Care report of 2005 criticised as ‘unnecessarily restrictive’ and ‘counter productive'.
In the knowledge that joining up is not a career decision without drawbacks and certainly not one to be taken lightly, we might ask who is a typical recruit into the ranks of our glorious armed services.
„While roughly 45% of all young people leave school with 5 GCSE subjects graded A-C, only 17% of all Army recruits in 2003–04 had English at A-C level, with the figure for Maths at about 10%. On average Army recruits have 0.9 of a GCSE at grade A-C.“
„The army’s own research suggests that up to 50% of recruits have literacy and numeracy skills at Entry Level 3 (equivalent to those of an average 11 year-old) or Entry Level 2 (equivalent to an average 7 year-old).“
The contrasting imagery of soldiers and rioters jolted my memory of something I had read a while back about the armed forces recruiting most of their enlisted men and women from deprived areas. So I did a little research and came across a report called „Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom“.
One of the findings of the report confirmed what I had suspected:
„Non-officer recruitment draws mostly on young people from 16 years of age living in disadvantaged communities, with many recruits joining as a last resort.“
But this was only the start.
The UK is the only country in the European Union which recruits minors as young as 16 into its armed forces. Although under 18s are required to provide written consent from their parents or guardians, the report found that neither the recruit nor their legal guardians were provided with enough information about the risks of service in the armed forces, or the rights and responsibilities of enlisted men to be able to make a fully informed decision.
For example, they are unlikely to be told that male soldiers under 20 years of age face a 50% greater risk of suicide than those of similar profile in the civilian population, or that there is a disproportionately large number of suicides among discharged veterans who have seen combat. 20% of soldiers want to leave the army at the earliest opportunity, but must wait until they have served up to six years due to terms of service which the House of Commons Defence Committee’s Duty of Care report of 2005 criticised as ‘unnecessarily restrictive’ and ‘counter productive'.
In the knowledge that joining up is not a career decision without drawbacks and certainly not one to be taken lightly, we might ask who is a typical recruit into the ranks of our glorious armed services.
„While roughly 45% of all young people leave school with 5 GCSE subjects graded A-C, only 17% of all Army recruits in 2003–04 had English at A-C level, with the figure for Maths at about 10%. On average Army recruits have 0.9 of a GCSE at grade A-C.“
„The army’s own research suggests that up to 50% of recruits have literacy and numeracy skills at Entry Level 3 (equivalent to those of an average 11 year-old) or Entry Level 2 (equivalent to an average 7 year-old).“
Using information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Welsh Assembly Member Leanne Wood showed that the army was 50% more likely to visit schools in the most deprived areas of Wales than to visit those in less deprived areas, and further research has shown that army recruiters deliberately target schools in deprived areas.
Little surprise, then, that most non-officer recruits joined up after an extended period of unemployment or after being able to find only casual work. One study found that 40% of recruits reported that they had taken the Queen's shilling only as a last resort.
Little surprise, then, that most non-officer recruits joined up after an extended period of unemployment or after being able to find only casual work. One study found that 40% of recruits reported that they had taken the Queen's shilling only as a last resort.
Now, leaving aside moral or ethical considerations, the armed forces does offer an opportunity of employment for marginalised young people who would otherwise face little prospect of gainful employment. Although it is a significantly lower percentage than in civilian employment, 64% of military personnel reported that they were satisfied with their jobs. However, the report points out that this „glosses over the injustice of young people being forced by circumstance to make career choices from a position of socio-economic weakness“ and that this „ also suggests that defence of the realm depends on the existence of a socio-economic underclass“. How shameful that our government exploits the desperation of young people and provides them with no legitimate way to make a living other than to take a job where they risk:
- A one-in-five chance of, if a young woman or a woman of low rank, having a particularly upsetting experience of unwanted sexual behaviour directed at her.
- A one-in-six chance of contracting post-traumatic stress disorder if involved in more than five firefights.
- A one-in-seven chance of feeling that he or she has been discriminated against in any 12 month period.
- A one-in-ten chance of being bullied during initial (Phase 1) training.
- A one-in-eleven chance of working a 70-hour week.
- A one-in-thirteen chance of being bullied or harassed in any 12-month period of his or her service, on average.
- A one-in-thirty chance (if a woman) of being sexually assaulted one or more times in any 12-month period.
- A one-in-thirty-five chance of being discharged for ‘service no longer required’ (i.e.being made redundant) on average in each year of service after training.
- A one-in-fifty chance of becoming homeless after discharge.
So, our brave and honourable servicemen and women in Afghanistan have more in common with the „mindless thugs“ destroying their own neighbourhoods in the major urban centres of England during the past few days than one might think. Both have chosen to act out of desperation in an effort to escape the hopelessness of their environment. Both perpetrate violence, destroying property and livelihoods and ending lives in the process. If destroying the homes and businesses of strangers in North London is, in the words of David Cameron „sickening“ and „criminality, pure and simple“, what is so honourable about destroying the homes and businesses of strangers in Kandahar? Somehow, I don't think Afghans enjoy seeing their homes, livelihoods and communities obliterated by youths from Britian's most deprived areas any more than the residents of Clapham or Salford do.
