-
That article makes it sound like choosing a military career is a death sentence aimed at poorer kids which is simply not the case
Except statistically young people from poorer/disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to join the army in the first place, and troops under 18 are more likely to die in combat. So while it would be hyperbolic to call it a death sentence aimed at poorer kids the notion clearly isn't total bullshit.
Fox-
Not to mention what happens after they leave the forces.
Uprooted from their support network to join up, uprooted from that support network when they wash out.
Fun times.
-
I'm not sure where that stat has come from but I'm pretty sure that troops under 18 are not deployed on the frontline so it seems a bit unlikely.
Personally I know a fair few people from school (all boys comp in a fairly disadvantaged industrial town) who went into the army and came out having developed as a person much more than if they'd stayed in the same town doing some crap (or more likely no) jobs.
I don't agree with recruiting at 16 but you do need the parent's permission as well. Also another two years of forced education isn't necessarily going to benefit everyone (although I'd suggest apprenticeships would be more beneficial).
NotThamesWater
aggi
This military targeting youngsters thing is a total non story. It boils my piss.
A lot of private schools have a formal arrangement with the army so tend to visit them rather than the other way round.
That article makes it sound like choosing a military career is a death sentence aimed at poorer kids which is simply not the case. Total bullshit.