DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: _JS on January 07, 2008, 02:11:09 PM
-
Ex-soldier calls for "honest" recruitment
By Alexis Akwagyiram
BBC News
The government has denied claims by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust that the British armed forces glamorise war to boost recruitment.
BBC News spoke to a former soldier to consider his views.
Barry Donnan was in the Army for six years, during which he served in the first Gulf War, Belize and Northern Ireland.
He was medically discharged in 1993 after developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Mr Donnan, from Irvine, Ayrshire, believes more should be done to highlight the life-threatening dangers that new recruits could face, arguing that military recruitment does not focus enough on the gritty realities of modern combat.
The 36-year-old agreed with the view, expressed in the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust report, that "vulnerable" teenagers were being encouraged to serve without realising the full implications of their decision.
The report from the Quaker organisation, which holds pacifism as a cornerstone of its religious beliefs, says recruits are unable to make informed choices about enlisting and that children are being targeted.
(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44036000/jpg/_44036681_barrydonnan.jpg)
Ultimately, you're there to kill or be killed
Sharing his own experience of joining the armed forces at 16, Mr Donnan said he "naively believed it would be an adventurous lifestyle" and had been told that he could learn a trade after two or three years, only to find there were few such opportunities.
"At 16 you can't join the police, can't drink alcohol, can't vote, yet you can join up [to the armed forces]," said Mr Donnan.
"At that age you aren't switched on to the world. Parents of those under 18 should be involved in interviews, workshops and film shows to make it a mutual decision rather than one being made solely by a 15 or 16-year-old."
The trust suggests many young recruits leave when they discover the reality of life in the military and says a 2007 survey found 48% of soldiers had found army life to be worse than they had expected.
We are truthful for two main reasons - one is that we have a moral obligation to be so but the other one is that it's not in our interests to paint a distorted picture
- Bob Ainsworth Armed forces minister
Mr Donnan agrees, citing recruitment adverts as a contributory factor.
He says the adverts are "appalling" and attract "half-hearted" people who are not aware of the realities of warfare, adding that it makes more sense to provide a "more balanced and honest" depiction of military life.
"Ultimately, you're there to kill or be killed," he said.
"If people want to take the step to join, we need to be honest and show them the reality - people would appreciate that," the former soldier said.
"We'd also retain soldiers who are there because they want to be, not half-heated ones who want to leave because they're there on false pretences."
His comments echo those made by Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth, who said recruitment needed to be based on truth to ensure that military personnel were fully motivated.
'Rounded picture'
However, Mr Ainsworth rejected the notion that the recruitment process was in some way disingenuous, stressing that efforts were made to ensure information was "factual" and a "rounded picture" provided.
The minister said: "I think we are truthful for two main reasons. One is that we have a moral obligation to be so but the other one is that it's not in our interests to paint a distorted picture.
"We do not want people joining the armed forces who are not motivated, who are not capable of undertaking the training that we want them to undertake and doing the job that we ask of them at the end of the day."
The report says many recruits enlist without fully understanding their legal obligations and that recruitment literature fails to mention how, unless they leave within six months of enlisting, minors have no legal right to leave for four years.
The men and women currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing a very, very good job under very difficult and demanding circumstances
- Barry Donnan
It recommends sweeping changes, including a radical review of recruitment literature, phasing out recruitment of minors and new rights for recruits to leave service.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) says many of the report's claims are "out of date, incorrect and ill-informed" and denies children under 16 are being targeted.
However, Mr Donnan sees the perceived problems cited by the trust as being the fault of the MoD and the government.
"It all comes back to politicians and chiefs of staff. It's just bad management," said the former serviceman, who insisted that he was not "sinking the boot" into the armed forces.
'Poor housing'
"The men and women currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing a very, very good job under very difficult and demanding circumstances."
He said friends still in the armed forces had told him morale was low "due to a lack of equipment and lack of medical care", as well as "poor housing".
Mr Donnan argued that an alternative recruitment approach focusing on the realities of combat, particularly the risk of death or injury, would cut recruitment costs as it would remove the need to replace young servicemen and women who are keen to leave.
He said money could them be spent on improving the lives of serving personnel by providing better housing, equipment and pension benefits.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/7174982.stm
Published: 2008/01/07 16:04:00 GMT
? BBC MMVIII
-
Anyone who is unaware that joining the military means potentially going to war with all of the attendant risks is an idiot.
16 is rather young to be joining the military. I would suggest that 18 be the minumum age. Though two years is a bit arbitrary, anyone who has ever raised teens knows that those particular two years involve a lot of changes. If Brits are allowed to send 16 year olds to war, that's a bit much. But if they expect recruiters to emphasize the negative, they are, well again, idiots.
It is absolutely true that parents need to be involved with those sorts of decisions. I am ex-military and three of my children have expressed an interest in the military. I told them that it was a great profession, but if they joined they had to understand that they would almost certainly be getting a guided tour of the middle east, with the possibility of coming home in a body bag. But none of them said "Really? Gosh, I didn't know being in the Army was dangerous!
As to career opportunities, I can't speak for the British army but the US miltary teaches hundreds of different transferable job skills. I have my current job because of the training I received in the military. Like a very large percentage of the military, I was not a Combat Arms soldier (Infantry, Artillery, Armor) but rather a Combat Service Support soldier (in my case Communications-Electronics). I can't imagine that situation is much different in the British Army.
Bottom line is, this is just a case of a person complaining because life got tougher than he thought it would. Waah.