16 year old recruits in UK?

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

In case you didn't notice, they complain about all of them.

I see only two references to nations and their recruitment policies other than the UK. In one line they compare the UK to those countries (the countries they mention are in fact ones that are run by brutal dictators who kill or imprison thousands of their own people every year) and in one line they mention three that have lower recruiting ages.

No where did I see one complaint about the Iranian Basiji using youths for urban pacification, Palestinians indoctrinating children to fight Israel, or the Taliban strapping bombs on to five year olds and telling them that a Koranic verse engraved on a piece of scrap will protect them from the blast of their bomb.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by fireftr18

Here in the US we have our "military academies." High schools with a military type curriculum. We also have JrROTC (Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps). That's a high school level military club.

Just wanted to mention the JROTC and saw you already did, though I think you can join them already in Junior High.

I see only two references to nations and their recruitment policies other than the UK

Perhaps you should look some more about all the different countries (and non state elements)they complain about.
If you want to complain about what a group complains about then maybe looking at what the group complains about will give your complaint more weight that just going into it off one brief news article.
Lets take one sample. Occupied palestinian territories.
Hamas....they complain
Fatah...they complain
PFLP....they complain
Islamic Jihad...they complain
PRC...they complain.

Would you like to do Afghanistan too or maybe Iran or Iraq or Chad or any of the others you think they don't complain about?

[Platapus]

In my first tech school, we had a 16 year old troop. It was a bit young to be thrown in with a bunch of 18-20 year olds.

It would, of course, depend on the maturity of the individual 16 year old. Unfortunately, regulations can't be written like that and must be applied across the board for all 16 year olds.

[Red October1984]

Originally Posted by fireftr18

Here in the US we have our "military academies." High schools with a military type curriculum. We also have JrROTC (Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps). That's a high school level military club.

There's also the Civil Air Patrol of the US Air Force Auxiliary for kids as young as 12.

[Skybird]

16 years is too young to let kids go to vote, candidate for offices, let them drive cars without adult's surveillance, let them get full legal access to hard drinks, fully legalised sexual intercourse without any age restrictions, and so on.

The only two things coming to my mind that seem to be exceptions from this ager scheme, are exposure to religious indoctrination - and exposure to military indoctrination.

I wonder if right the vulnerability of the still not fully formed out character and intellect and the small amount of life experience have something to do with this desire to access the young while they are as young - and suggestible - as possible.

The military should not be allowed to approach anybody below the age of consent. And I think age of consent set at 18 is too low for many things in life and regarding many individuals - at 18, many still are not "adult". I'd prefer 20 years in many cases.

Oh wait - to battle the constantly falling applaus for parties, German politicians in some federal states have made elections accessible for even 16 year old now. Well, the same critical questions as for religion and military apply (ignoring for a moment that I am against a general right for voting anyway).

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Just wanted to mention the JROTC and saw you already did, though I think you can join them already in Junior High.

No you must be in 9th through 12th grade to join JROTC.The Junior part of the name is because ROTC stands for reserve officer training corps.ROTC was established in the 1916 to allow male students attending college to go through military training in order to become officers upon completion of their degrees.This was done to bolster officer corps prior to the inevitable involvement tin WWI.In modern ROTC programs both males and females are allowed.

JROTC as an off shoot of that program these are found in high schools and are intended to encourage students to enlist in the military and to also become officers by either getting accepted into on of the 4 US military academies or by attending any college that has an ROTC program.

Membership in an ROTC program requires that person to serve an 8 year term as an officer in whatever branch the ROTC program was.Membership in a JROTC program comes with no obligations what so ever the person is not required to enlist in the armed forces.

However a person who was in a JROTC program for 2 years gains an extra rank upon completion of basic training and a person that was in a JROTC program for 3 or 4 years receives two ranks upon the completion of basic training.It does not matter what branch the JROTC program represented.

ROTC has over the past 50 years become very valuable as a little over 38% of all officers in each branch attended an ROTC program making it the most common source for a military officer.With modern ROTC programs the member must serve a term as an officer.Back during the Cold War up until the end of the Vietnam War ROTC was a requirement on some college campuses but the people completing at that time where not required to serve as an officer.

I am not sure the contribution of JROTC but I would estimate that at least in my time in the USAF around 1 in 4 people had been in a JROTC program in high school.It must be of some value other wise each branch would not spend the money on the programs.

The most rare type of officer is one who went through OCS officers training school these are all former enlisted.Of course enlisted men can sign up for programs where they are allowed to attend a college full time and go through their branches ROTC program.Additionally each year at the 4 military academies has a limited number of slots for young lower ranking enlisted that get selected by their commanding officer to attend their respective branches this is a very high honor and very difficult to earn less than 1% of enlisted members receive such an invitation.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Originally Posted by Skybird

16 years is too young to let kids go to vote, candidate for offices, let them drive cars without adult's surveillance, let them get full legal access to hard drinks, fully legalised sexual intercourse without any age restrictions, and so on.

The only two things coming to my mind that seem to be exceptions from this ager scheme, are exposure to religious indoctrination - and exposure to military indoctrination.

I wonder if right the vulnerability of the still not fully formed out character and intellect and the small amount of life experience have something to do with this desire to access the young while they are as young - and suggestible - as possible.

The military should not be allowed to approach anybody below the age of consent. And I think age of consent set at 18 is too low for many things in life and regarding many individuals - at 18, many still are not "adult". I'd prefer 20 years in many cases.

Oh wait - to battle the constantly falling applaus for parties, German politicians in some federal states have made elections accessible for even 16 year old now. Well, the same critical questions as for religion and military apply (ignoring for a moment that I am against a general right for voting anyway).

Theres Subjectability in every single part of life. In our schools, in our homes, on the television, children are exposed to frequent ideas all throughout their life. How to behave, what they should do, commercials suggesting what they should buy. Why dont you just throw everyone in a box so they cant be tainted by outside thoughts.

By 18 a person has generally gone through their necessary education. Without the rights of an adult a teen wouldnt progress in life. Without needing to make decisions for themselves, where they want to direct their life, youd be not only be stifling them but theyd grow more and more accustomed to suckling off their parent's financial teet and becoming less accustomed to being on their own.

Personally i think its fine the way it is. Except for the drinking age, which makes absolutely no sense. You're allowed to go get your legs blown off in some hellhole halfway across the world, allowed to wield weapons of war and watch your buddies get killed, to be thrown into battle where its kill or be killed, but GOD FORBID you be allowed to drink (not both at the same time, of course, the military is rightfully merciless when it comes to drinking on the job).

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Skybird

16 years is too young to let kids ... fully legalised sexual intercourse without any age restrictions,

Not here it isn't

I love my country!

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

Personally i think its fine the way it is. Except for the drinking age, which makes absolutely no sense. You're allowed to go get your legs blown off in some hellhole halfway across the world, allowed to wield weapons of war and watch your buddies get killed, to be thrown into battle where its kill or be killed, but GOD FORBID you be allowed to drink (not both at the same time, of course, the military is rightfully merciless when it comes to drinking on the job).

Overseas the drinking age for military members is 18 which allows about 99% of the military to drink if they so desire while overseas.Not in certain countries true but in order to get to them you must stop over in a place like Germany. I have mixed opinions on that to be honest.On the one hand it allows people under 21 not to feel left out at social gatherings.On the other hand it puts a very young person at risk of developing alcoholism.Trust me on this a military dorms/barracks will blow the socks of off any college campus when it comes to drinking.

I can recall getting my first base when I was 18 years old it was in Arizona but they let you drink anyway you just had to avoid the military police and certain senior NCOs and officers that would prowl around.Some guys that I fist hung around with they drank(a lot) every night so waiting to fit in I did as well.After two weeks being still half drunk at roll call I decided that life style was not one I had any desire to continue so I stopped hanging around those guys and only drank on weekends like a more reasonable person.Not every young person makes that same choice.

Part military Esprit De Corps evolves social activities like drinking and I do not see any problem with that the problem is that social drinking and abuse is a fine line that many young people can not separate and they start a bad sometimes life long habit.

The argument is what makes a person an adult and that answer varies.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

Not here it isn't

I love my country!

He means no 25 year old banging a 16 year old.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

He means no 25 year old banging a 16 year old.

I'm pretty sure that that's legal as well

[Red October1984]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

I'm pretty sure that that's legal as well

Would you want your kid to go run off with some 30 year old guy when you're a parent?

That law may not be as great as you think...

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

Would you want your kid to go run off with some 30 year old guy when you're a parent?

As long as the person they were running off with was the right sort, and my hypothetical child wasn't under duress, I guess I would. Why should a parent go screwing around with their kid's love life? Apart from making sure that their lover isn't some homicidal maniac, of course.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

I'm pretty sure that that's legal as well

In Germany? As I understood it at the time I was stationed there the age of consent was 16 with no limitations on partner age difference in other words a 25 year old could legally have a sexual relationship with a 16 year old.



I find it surprising that you would have no problem with a man who was lets say 28 years old want to have sex with your 16 year old daughter.Would that not strike you as an odd relationship one person being 11 years older and also having several years more sexual maturity than a 16 year old girl? I would honest to god split that mans wig open in a most violent fashion; that was a fancy way of saying that I would crack his skull.

In my opinion if one party is below a certain age lets say 18 if the other partner is exceeds the younger age by more than 4 or 5 years there is a morale question ability to the relationship because the younger partner can not possibly have matured enough in regards to intimate relationships not to be manipulated by the older partner.Now once the person is 18 or older it stands to reason that this person has enough sexual relationships to have free will and know what they like and dislike and be able to end an undesirable relationship.

I feel that any person that must interact sexually with a young and sexually inexperienced partner has questionable motives to desire such a relationship.There is some motive for this either they for some reason are unable to have sexual relationship with someone of equal sexual maturity or they are seeking to feel dominate over a younger person in other words have control over them but not in the manner that a willing and sexually mature person that desires a sadomasochistic relationship.A Class III sadist.