Fox condemns NUT for considering banning armed forces going into schools

A motion before the National Union of Teachers' Conference seeks to ban the military from going into schools.  The teachers backing the motion accuse the armed forces of trying to "lure" youngsters from deprived areas into the military.  The armed forces say that the visits simply aim to raise awareness of the military in society.  Liam Fox, Shadow Defence Secretary, has condemned the move:

“If this goes through it will be a kick in the teeth for our boys on the front line.  They should concentrate on improving the standard of education for British children instead of undermining British forces at a time when they are so overstretched.”

Comments

[James Maskell]

I disagree with Fox. Schools shouldnt be recruitment camps for the military and its not undermining the military to keep it out of schools.

Why would the armed forces be going to schools if it were just to raise awareness? Of course its to attract recruits early on. Awareness can be attracted easily without a direct visit, interfering in education.

[Will Stobart]

Damn right we should condemn it. The only thing the armed forces do is visit schools to raise awareness of what a jab in the armed forces entails, the way that other employers should if they're keen on new workers. That the army, RAF and navy are the only employers willing to speak about their jobs with children shows the immense value and respect shown by them towards the young, other employers should learn from them. It is one thing we can do to stop the cycle of unemployment in some areas where children would otherwise never grow up to get a job.

[Will Stobart]

James, the army do not interfere with education. They visit, hold a presentation completely seperate from the normal course of the day and then ask students whether some of them want more information and hold special sessions for those that do.
There is nothing sinister about them, I went to them myself and from that decided that a job in the military was not for me. You should also appreciate that in some areas a job in the military is the limit of people's ambition and that removing these visits might result in some people never realising what a job in the army could do for them.

[Tony Makara]

Our armed forces should be allowed into schools to explain their role. In my boyhood I thoroughly enjoyed reading 'Commando' war story comics and watching war movies on TV. This is the sort of thing that boys of school age revel in. Not out of a love for violence or war but as a way of reading about brave heroic role models. My dad was a soldier and as I boy I well remember being amazed by the way he was able to build a shed in a day or do 1001 other tasks, all learnt in the army. Being a soldier isn't just about fighting. Our soldiers make fantastic role models for young people, and I'm sure visits by servicemen and women would bring a great buzz of excitement to the school day.

[Margaret Hemmings]

Frankly I would bring back conscription.

That would be the easiest way to fix our broken society.

Todays youth is in need of discipline and a sergeant major based in schools would soon bring order.

Schools should liaise more closely with the military. Imagine if we could use play grounds as parade grounds. Teach our youths the discipline of marching rather than running riot.

This looks like an opportunity for Liam Fox to promote both the military and discipline in schools. Dr Fox, don't miss this one! Kill two birds with one stone.

[Sean Fear]

James, all sorts of employers visit schools. There's no reason for the armed forces to be treated any differently from any other employer.

[Milton]

I wonder do the armed forces go to public schools and recruit? Have the been to Eton lately?

[Mark Hudson]

Sean Fear, dead right.

I would prefer those teachers who have proposed this motion - or support it - to be used by our boys for target practice.

[Umbrella man]

The NUT would probably prefer the Muslim Council of Britain to come into our schools and say how terrible the British state is.

[Mavis Davis]

@ Margaret Hemmings

I do always enjoy your contributons to this blog.

I don't always agree with you but you know your own mind and have firm beliefs. I admire that.

Ever thought of writing your own blog or applying to the 'A' List for candidates.

Not sure about conscription but I like your idea of 'Playgrounds to Parade Grounds'. Great slogan!

Perhaps someone from CCHQ could follow this up.

[Tony Makara]

Margaret Hemmings, The Army Cadets is a great organization and one that gives youngsters status, a sense of belonging and a challenge in life. Sadly these days so many of our young are inclined to drift and organizations like the Cadets are just not publicized enough. While I don't agree with your call for conscription Margaret, I would like to see greater promotion for the Cadets. Perhaps TV adverts to let the young know that the Cadets is available.

[Mark Fulford]

I wonder do the armed forces go to public schools and recruit? Have the been to Eton lately?

Milton, I'm not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic. Many public schools, including Eton, have their own cadet forces. How much closer to recruitment or more "been to Eton" do you want?

[Harry Benson]

20 years ago I spent the last year of my short service commission visiting schools as a Schools Liaison Officer. All this involved was giving a short presentation with slides on the role of the armed forces and some history of NATO. I personalised it with some stories and pictures from my experience as a helicopter pilot first in the Falklands war and later on a navy frigate. Question time invariably brought out both thoughtful and feisty contributions. The content will have changed 20 years on but the principle is likely to be the same. We visited schools simply to provide information about the role of the military. It was recruitment only in the sense that talking about any career will interest some. Schools liked us coming because we provided context for subsequent discussion.
However I quite liked the overexcited NUT description on Today this morning about sending in the young and attractive. Not sure it applied to all my colleagues ...

[Margaret Hemmings]

@ Tony Makara

Station the cadets in schools!

I would make it obligatory to be a member of the cadets.

Army officers/sergeant major types should then be seconded. Use half the lunchtime on cadet/military training.

I should copyright this idea before someone from CCHQ takes it up.

[Iain]

With up to half of teachers leaving the profession after three years, I am not sure if the NUT should be the ones to be criticising the military for misrepresenting their profession, for with their miserable staff retention it would seem the teaching profession’s propaganda is far from the reality of they find in the class room.

[Milton]

The difference with recruiting at public schools and state schools is of course that no one at the public school will go into the army as a private and few at state schools will go in as officers. The Conservatives should be about social mobility not trying to keep some outdated class system alive.

[Barney Hexham]

@ Milton

And where to you suggest we get the canon fodder from?

Margaret Hemmings. Your on target yet again.

[Bill]

I think all schools should be visited by the armed forces; but then again I reckon we would all benefit from school children being able to join a school combined cadet force. Better still society as a whole would benefit from compulsory reserve forces training at the age of 18 to be supplemented on an on going annual basis on the Swiss model.

[Serf]

The teachers backing the motion accuse the armed forces of trying to "lure" youngsters from deprived areas into the military.

They think a life of petty crime supported by benefits is the answer.

If our schools were not so dire, youngsters from deprived areas would have many more opportunities. As it is, trying to remove one of the few they have is irresposible in the extreme.

[Bill]

Re " few at state schools will go in as officers." What evidence do you have for that assertion: I know plenty of officers who went to state schools. Just look at the schools listed in the Telegraph for the Soverereign's parade.

It is a little known fact that the forces have always been one of the most enlightened employers in the country. They have had to be in order to get the people in the right numbers and with the right abilities to defend our country. The forces were half a century ahead of supposedly cutting edge private sector employers in terms of their selection and assessment procedures.

[Lee Chamberlain]

Yet another disappointing and daft idea from the NUTers, who I cannot help but feel would be the first against the wall if the armed forces were not there to protect them or the first to collaberate if it saved their skins.

I just dispair that these jokers are trusted to educate our children in a balanced way.

[Sean Fear]

"The difference with recruiting at public schools and state schools is of course that no one at the public school will go into the army as a private and few at state schools will go in as officers."

I don't know what the relevance of that point is, but it is factually incorrect.

[Yet Another Anon]

The NUT are a bunch of Liberal and Anarchist troublemakers and should be banned.

Perhaps there needs to be a national programme for the MoD (Army, Navy, RAF, civilian support) and the Police to go into schools right down to kindergarten to do a mixture of recruitment and other things, educating about what they do and the need for having Armed Forces, the neccessity sometimes of war and of having nuclear weapons and even the neccessity of using nuclear weapons in certain circumstances - but that the Armed Forces are not all about military force and showing research work that the military do and how the police and army help out.

Recruitment in schools should be to all areas of the armed forces, schools should have military and police involvement in their running.

Children are the voters of the future and if the NUT get their way then the armed forces will struggle to recruit and be even more neglected in terms of funding in the long term.

[Veritas]

Milton, you are talking nonsense. The school you went to might determine which regiment you join, but the comparison you make is wholly spurious.

[Mark Fulford]

The difference with recruiting at public schools and state schools is of course that no one at the public school will go into the army as a private and few at state schools will go in as officers.

Milton, there is a link between public school and rank but it’s a false argument to say that the link is a result of prejudice in recruitment or selection procedures. The reason why there aren't many public school privates is exactly the same as why there aren't many public school shop floor workers – (perhaps unfairly) their background gives them other, more attractive, opportunities.

[Tony Hannon]

I think this is one of the examples where people think they are talking about the same thing but actually are not.

Armed Forces should be allowed to speak to teenage schoolchildren about a career in the forces but they should not glamourise what is often a very difficult and dangerous job.

They should be allowed into schools irrespective of the wealth of the students because serving one's country should be seen as a noble thing to do no matter what class you're from - for that reason and others, they should not be allowed to disproportionately or exclusively visit poorer schools.

It should also be made clear to school leavers that serving your country is not the exclusive preserve of the military - firemen, nurses, doctors, politicians (admittedly, not all of them!!), teachers and third sector workers should all be held up on careers days as laudable examples of people in public service.

I'm sure we all agree on that.

[rightsideforum]

I don't think it's the first time they've had a moan.

If anything, it should be mandatory that the military visits each school and speaks to each child, if only to tell them about what they do and foster the sort of admiration we should have in society for our bravest.

Maybe the government should teach the NUT a lesson - hand over their 10% wage demands to the military and make it compulsory for each school in the land to open their doors to the military for one day a year.

I don't seem to hear them complaining about the contaception they can hand out in schools. The military are an easy target, even for do gooder teachers who are getting too big for their boots along with pretty much every other public sector 'union' going.

How about they bother to ask the children what they think of these visits - I'll bet they are met with near unanimous approval.

[Bill]

I can still remember many years ago being asked by a student infant teacher what I wanted to do when I grew up. And I can still recall her disbelief and horror on my respondintg that I wanted to be a soldier.

[Tony Makara]

"the Armed Forces are not all about military force and showing research work that the military do and how the police and army help out"

Yet Another Anon, this is very true. We rarely hear about the humanitarian work done by all branches of the armed forces. Although in recent years some of the recruitment adverts have quite rightly been based around the humanitarian theme. I like to think of our armed forces as the backbone of our nation. They have a greater array of skills than any other profession and they are never closed for business. Anytime there is a crisis at home or abroad they will be there in number, making things right.

[London Tory]

I have often wondered, certainly since Blair took us into Iraq, as to what percentage of the Armed Forces actually voted Labour. I would suggest it is less than 10%.

It says it all about Labour's priorities that the mums and dads of our Iraq forces are having to send out batteries in parcels for their son's torches, while every week Society Guardian belches ever more greedily as its pages are crammed with ever more worthless, client-state non jobs.

Under Labour, you are better off being a Male Cottaging Welfare Adviser than a Sergeant Major.

[IRJMilne]

Quite what is wrong by recruiting for the army in "deprived" (that is to say, poorer) areas? The army probably gives these people as good a chance of a better life as any they could get.

Really - how awfully dreadful - luring youngsters away with the prospect of doing something useful for their country and earning a decent wage in a secure job, in a profession admired by the majority of decent British subjects, though, unsurprisingly, not by a chunk of the NUT.

[Bill]

Re Tony's view that "I like to think of our armed forces as the backbone of our nation." Too true.

[DavisFan]

SOUND.

[Malcolm Dunn]

A ludicrous idea from the NUT but not a suprise. There is absolutely nothing wrong James Maskell with the the Armed Services going into schools to recruit.The State needs more troops and schools can provide the manpower, it is not in any way a dishonourable profession.
Off Topic ,Tim I would look quite carefully at some of the recent posters to Conhome, I think this site is being infected with trolls again.

[Bill]

Re Mr Makell's comment "interfering in education". Yeah, right. Not.

[Alan Carcas]

Why be surprised at the latest nonsense from the NUT about the army going into schools. The teaching Left-wing have always been against the forces of law and order going into schools, even to the extent of banning the police. And we wonder why there are so many unruly kids about.

[RobD]

What a shame, teachers should be actively recommending the young men and women most suited to the various roles in the armed forces rather than trying to stop them even knowing these opportunities are available. These people are a critical influence on the hearts and minds of the next generation, they should not be able to introduce their left (or right) wing bias into the classroom.

[Miranda]

Coming back from London to Yorkshire on the train late one night I overheard a long conversation from two very young soldiers on their way home to an estate in Dewsbury - which has it's problems.

They were joined in their conversation by a young Leeds University postgraduate. It was obvious that the soldiers had joined the army to get a decent job and a decent trade - but neither regretted it as they discussed their skills and achievement. I couldn't help but observe how they were far more mature in their outlook than the student - even though they were younger. And the student was obviously quite impressed with their skills.

The army had given boys with little hope of a decent life under Labour a fighting chance. As indeed it has always done. As someone else has said, what is the NUT's alternative for such boys, after they have given them one of the poorest educations in the Western world? Benefits on a sink estate in Dewsbury where family life is a travesty?

As I got off the train I passed by the boys, smiled and thanked them for the job they were doing - I'm too much of a 'certain age' for it to have been taken the wrong way. I suggest we all do more of this.

[Conservative Homer]

I was educated partially at a private school, representatives from the army came along every year to give out information about careers, no one attacked them for seeking to take advantage of us, and a fair few of my friends did join the army and are enjoying it. As for what Milton says it an insult to everyone who has worked their way up from the bottom.

Not every career with the armed forces means going directly to the front line, in fact most dont. Its just another career option. Simple as that. Nothing is pushed unduly on people, and no one is taken advantage of.

Again, the NUT show themselves up for the out of touch fools they are by putting their largely misfounded idealism before pragmatism. If only they showed the same concern for vunerable youngsters being recruited by the likes of terror groups. Only the NUT seem to have a problem exclusively with those who want to protect us.

[Iain]

"Again, the NUT show themselves up for the out of touch fools they are "

And gives us a good indication why our state schools are the PC mess they are.

[London Tory]

@ Miranda

Well done [and said].

Unfortunately, using utterly insiduous tactics, Labour has all but destroyed what was left of national pride. In London we have Livingstone celebrating St Patricks Day, but not St Georges Day. We have Margaret Hodge, under pressure in Barking from the BNP [you reap what you sow, Margaret], suggesting that you can cure ethnic tensions by inviting immigrants to sit down and chat with locals over tea and biscuits [yes, really]. And you have Labour MPs who supported the Iraq war condemning ex Chief's of the Defence Staff as "Tory stooges", when they complain about lack of resources.

I can only repeat that Labour basically does not give a Four X for our Armed Forces because they know they don't vote for them.

[George Hinton]

Radio 2 had a piece on this at lunchtime with Patrick Mercer and Brennan the NUT woman.

Brennan made the point that school children at the target age, 16, are not able to make a measured decision, and came out with the usual socio-economic drivel as well as saying that they did not have the reasoning and logic. Surely in that case, Brennan has admitted to the total failings of her membership to actually educate and inculcate our youth, apart that is from the usual leftist propaganda and human rights mantra.

Schools are a natural port of call for forces recruitment, where else are they supposed to go, the courts and prisons?.

Such is the failure of so many state schools that youth entering the forces are given a second chance, a chance to learn a skill and become adept, gain further education, become responsible adults and distance themselves from wilful influences.

This is yet another example of leftist class warfare and attempt to undermine the fabric of our society. The NUT should concentrate on education and actually trying to achieve the same level of success that public schools enjoy, rather than engage in small minded petty politics. Perhaps they should insist that their members raise their game, rather than engage in leftist rhetoric. A pox and plague on 'em all.

[Richard Weatherill]

Whilst (as usual) I agree with Liam Fox, am I the only one to find the style of "a kick in the teeth for our boys in the front line" a bit grating? All too often, these Tory press releases use language that manages to sound both pious and outdated. Does any normal person use the phrase "our boys in the front line" these days - and what about the "girls"?!

[ChrisD]

"Brennan made the point that school children at the target age, 16, are not able to make a measured decision, and came out with the usual socio-economic drivel as well as saying that they did not have the reasoning and logic."

That reminded me of a discussion on this very subject not that long ago on Radio 5. One caller, who was a former soldier, made the point that any youngsters in this day and age who did not realise that a career in the military could be extremely dangerous were not wanted or required.

Richard Weatherill whether you like or not, this teachers union is insulting the many men and women who recruit for the armed forces. But even worse, at a time when many soldiers are risking their lives, this lot would rather portray them as something dangerous and not to be trusted around children.
Have we come that far in Britain, that we would see it as shameful for them even to go into schools to tell children about the military and the careers available? What message does that tell the relatives of our serving military personal.
Liam Fox does appear to be picking up the lingo, the front line is exactly that! I am really encouraged to see Liam Fox being so passionate about the men and women of the armed forces, we need someone to fight their corner. Browne and that awful Ainsworth are more interested in protecting the governments image, mores the pity.

[Jonty]

I tend to agree with the comments that conscription, (for a shorter period than previously) would sort out most of the undisciplined youth. I saw, at first hand, many years ago, how rigid discipline brought the unruly to heel and very quickly. It was the making of most of them too.
Let the military into schools and set out what life is like in todays armed forces.Those pupils who show an interest can take things further.
As for the Cadet Forces, they do a fantastic job. Our grandson is a member of the Air Cadets and loves it. He spent his summer holidays at 3 camps...in the Midlands, at RAF Boulmer and at HQ BAOR. He is training to fly a glider now. Not bad for 15.

[London Tory]

The other factor here is that Liam Fox is a disappointed and possibly disaffected man, who feels outside the Cameron Tent.

Personally I think I.D.S would make a superb Secretary of State for Defence in David Cameron's first cabinet.

[David Belchamber]

I am not really sure why the NUT is even debating this subject as it is really nothing to do with them? It really frightens me that this union has anything to do with schools in the first place but their annual conference does explain a lot about what is wrong with so many schools.

[Iain]

"Brennan made the point that school children at the target age, 16, are not able to make a measured decision..."

So the NUT are going to be against 16 year olds getting the vote?

[Patriot]

Before 1997 I would have supported military visits to schools, as a balanced part of a program of informing students on career opportunities. Our armed services have always been, and continue to be,proud and honourable men and women.

However, I have to put my hand on my heart and say that, since '97, I would oppose any efforts to recruit schoolchildren into military careers.

Why?

Because I know that our soldiers, sailors and airmen are being deprived of the support and care they require and deserve to carry out the onerous duties we ask them to do. And because they are being asked to risk their lives not in the defence of their country, but in the pursuit of wars which I believe future historians will come to regard as illegal.

I do not want my sons and daughters, or any one elses, coming home in body bags to further someone's political career.....

[Christina Speight]

One of the first jobs the army has to do - and they are brilliant at it - is to spend time and money bringing the recruits' basic education up to scratch. It's not a social service but with modern weapons you have to have basic maths and English.

There was a report recently from Warminster on this very subject.

The NUT should try doing its own job properly first!

[Richard Weatherill]

ChrisD - I think you must have misunderstood my earlier post. As I (thought) I made clear, I entirely agree with Liam Fox's point and believe that the NUT motion is shameful. All I was questioning was the hackneyed phrasing of the press release from Fox's office (and CCHQ press releases in general).

[ChrisD]

Richard, you did make yourself clear, and having reread my post I can see I was not!
Apologies.

I honestly believe that we need Liam Fox to use blunt language when dealing with this type of socialist cr*p. Let Labour spin it, I just want our party to use honest language.

[Richard Weatherill]

Thanks Chris - apology accepted. I agree with you that the Party must use plain language. My complaint was that Fox's press release, rather than being "blunt", sounded a bit trite.

[Jack Stone]

Warmonger Fox at it again!

[Sean Fear]

The usual drivellous response from Jack Stone. If he had his way, the Conservative Party would be indistinguishable from the SWP.

[ChrisD]

"Warmonger Fox at it again!"

Jack, I have no doubt that I would disagree with Liam Fox on certain aspects of Foreign policy, but in this instance you are being unfair to him. He is taking the correct stance for the right reasons, give credit where its due.

[Christina Speight]

ChrisD - Have you ever known Jack Stone be anything but unfair to anyone of remotely patriotic views?

[John]

In the Yorkshire Post, Patrick Mercer talked about kids that looked painfully young and how in the Army they have grown old before their time. These 19-year old youngsters are having to kill and to face the prospect of being killed, they die not to protect their country but to fulfil corporate greed (oil) and military strategy.

Most understand that 9/11 was an inside job and that WMD in Iraq was nothing more than a casus belli to invade Iraq. When a youngster lured into believing that life in the Army is for him and excitedly says "Mum, Dad, I’m going to join the Army", never really understanding in a few short years he will be sent to the front line to grow old before his time and perhaps die long before his time after that declaration his parents must live from the day he embarks a life filled with an insidious loss of peace of mind.

Teachers unlike impressionable kids from deprived areas know and understand the horror of war and they know the Army is dreadfully overstretched and in need of front line soldiers but is it right that our kids be used to support wars for corporate greed and military strategy rather than in true defence of the realm?

To those that say Teachers’ ought not ban the military from going into schools to entice their pupils into military service and those that recruit in Schools the words of that old soldier Wilfred Owen come to mind.

"My friend, you would not tell with such high zest to children ardent for some desperate glory, that old lie: Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" (it is fine and sweet to die for one’s country)

[Jack Stone]

Christine. It is not patriotic to want to encourage young kids to go off and get themselves killed fighting in wars we shouldn`t be involved in.

[Bill]

Re "Most understand that 9/11 was an inside job": if they do that explains a lot. As for "Teachers unlike impressionable kids from deprived areas know and understand the horror of war": do they? How so? What special knowledge do they have? When I was at a very good state school in the 70s my TEACHER asked me to check his spelling and grammar. The rot had already set in.

[Patriot]

John, you and Wilfred Owen said it far more eloquently than I did earlier, but those are my sentiments exactly.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

"I should copyright this idea before someone from CCHQ takes it up".

Posted by: Margaret Hemmings | March 25, 2008 at 11:16

And some useful postings by Tony Makara.

Don't bother, Marge - there wont be any rush by CCHQ, but pleased to know that Fox has spoken up against this anti- patriotic back stabbing. Now what are the Conservatives going to do on defence spending - Major cut it?

PACIFIST - so no politics there then?
I heard the female union NUT(TER) under questioning state that she was a confirmed pacifist.

This debate by NUT has given the BBC propaganda dept another opportunity to introduce the "Illegal Iraq" syndrome yet again (Peter Hitchen's will be pleased). Now if only they could combine it with climate change and global warming the BBC's cup would runneth over (I am sure the Bash Britain Corporation are working on it). I can see the headlines: "World threat: "British Army Boots leaving Huge Carbon Footprints in Iraq".

I have said it before and I will keep on saying it: The BBC is a menace to Britain - NUT has merely provided a bullet.

[ChrisD]

"To those that say Teachers’ ought not ban the military from going into schools to entice their pupils into military service and those that recruit in Schools the words of that old soldier Wilfred Owen come to mind."

I was never a fan of poetry at school, but the work of Owen and Siegfried Sassoon certainly left their mark on me.
But back in my day, the teachers tried to encourage me to open up my mind and to think for myself by allowing me to form my own opinions.
This is a teachers union dictating what/who should be allowed inside a school based on a rather unpleasant premise.
Sadly, the men that fought in the first world war were not brought up with a radio, television or the world wide web in their bedroom to give them the perspective that our children can get for themselves outside the school.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

"My friend, you would not tell with such high zest to children ardent for some desperate glory, that old lie: Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" (it is fine and sweet to die for one’s country)

Posted by: John | March 25, 2008 at 19:11

Having been a Regular soldier I know that squaddies would laugh at being accused of dying for "glory", but dying to save their comrades in arms and for their pride in their regiment - now that is something different.

[Sean Fear]

Jack, piss off. Several family members and friends have served in various wars, and it's thanks to people like them that you're free to spout your drivel.

[Geoff]

Sean Fear, my father had a few people shoot at him in his service and I worked at the Navy Hospital patching a few people up. Both of my grandfathers pointed aeroplanes in the direction of other aeroplanes which also had guns during a minor disagreement in the 40's.

All of us have absolute contempt for Stone's views and those of the NUTters. I suggest treating Stone with the contempt he deserves by not feeding the trolls.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Good posts @ 20.42 and 21.18 gentlemen.

[Chips of Brookfield]

I'm a teacher. The NUT are bonkers. We have the army, navy and airforce in our school. The kids know what's going on. They join up and get a great life. I have several ex-pupils on active service, one is only 18. They love their life, dangerous as it is. Some have even been back into school to recruit.

My only moan is that the BBC keep saying "teachers vote" - no they have not - a small group of nutters have voted. What's even more ironic is that the NUT is dominated by primary teachers who know bugger all about what the amry, navy and airforce say when the come into secondary schools.

[FM]

As an ex Head I would urge that you do get the NUT into perspective. They are mainly a primary school union with the vast majority of members non active -only joining for insurance and job protection. Their activists are a minority of mainly left wing keenies who are prepared to give up holidays to go to conferences. My experience is that most hard working teachers (the majority) would completely reject the NUT view and support heads who I am sure will continue to welcome our armed forces into schools as I did.

[John]

In times when the likes of Adolf Hitler are knocking on our door and liberty is in peril upon our sacred shores then it is right that youngsters take up arms against a sea of troubles lest we be no more.

However, the poem by Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, reminds us that a soldier’s life is no small coin that it should be spent upon anything other than defence of the realm. They are human beings that have but one life in all eternity, they love and are loved.

"We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields"

To recruit kids into the armed forces to give them the prospect of a better life is one thing but the Army needs replacements for those sent home in body bags, it needs "Boots and bayonets" on the front line and it is going to schools to recruit them, not to fight and die in defence of the realm, but to be spent like small coin defending the interests of the powers that be.

The Middle East with two-thirds of the world’s oil and the Afghan pipeline is just part of those vested interests.

The greatest curse for parents is that their children should die before them. Do not believe all that the government tell you and know that evil hides itself most effectively under a cloak of goodness, evil hides not just in darkness and shadows, but in lies and deceit (WMD) using kindness, terrorist attack and patriotic fever to steal the world’s

[Jack Stone]

What we should be trying to do in all parts of the world there is now conflict is doing what was done in Northern Ireland and get all the waring parties together to talk and negotiate peace.This is the only way we will bring peace. You will never make the world a peaceful place by war.
The armed forces should be there only to defend us if we are attacked or our interests as a country are put in jepody.
None of the conflicts our troops are involved in at present are by any stretch of the imagination anything to do with either.
We can keep talking about building the army up, spending more on defence, encouraging young kids to go and die for what amounts to nothing or we can think and talk about how we can bring peace.
I know what I choose, sadly it seems that many on this site are only interested in fighting wars and losing more of our young kids.

[Sean Fear]

You ignore the fact that we had troops in Northern Ireland who forced the terrorists to negotiate.

Now, run away and play.

[Geoff]

Jack Stone's only experience of point-and-click is Windows. Other much braver people wear a uniform and use point-and-click guns - he benefits but without any personal risk because we will be defending his school playground if it all goes The Shape Of The Pear.

On another thread Sam points out that (and he most generously says that it should be irrelevant) Tim's family have served extensively and that Sam is serving our country in the TA. I say that because I'm annoyed about his modesty.

Our Party stands for freedom of expression and Labour doesn't. Let's not forget that truth. Many years ago when I made a random University look ugly by my presence I attended Freshers Day. I should be allowed to see the Countryside Alliance with a stall next to one of the less firebomb-them-all animal groups and us next to Labour; CND on the next stall to the Carpet-Bomb Iran Club.

It's my choice in a free democracy which membership cards I walk away with that afternoon.

Leave Stone to his own antics. Troll-feeding is bad for our karma. Freedom of speech isn't quite the same thing as deliberately stirring.

[Ross McKay]

Kick our Armed Forces out of schools?
On the contrary, the ones who ought to be excluded are 'teachers' who lack all sense of loyalty to Queen and Country - they've been beavering away with their cultural marxism garbage for years.
Am I right in thinking these latest NUT creeps are identical to those who object to the 'pledge of allegiance' plan?