You see Syndyre, the minute that it is not an 'across the board' policy it becomes a selective one, or even a discriminatory one at that.The "rot" doesn't include me and a lot of people I know which is why I would object to it being across the board. Its rather totalitarian if you ask me. Do you think this would even help? And would it really be as idealistic as you or is it more likely to be an ANC indoctrination course?
I just object on principle to anything that takes away people's right to choose. Offer incentives for people to go there sure, maybe if you spend a year doing that you'd be entitled to a government loan for university etc. Or make it mandatory for people convicted of crimes as youths, just don't make it mandatory for everyone.You see Syndyre, the minute that it is not an 'across the board' policy it becomes a selective one, or even a discriminatory one at that.
Idealistic maybe, but a place where young South Africans can get together and work together for the benefit of the greater team and the unit that they are in.
In that type of environment where you are pushed to your limit and beyond you quickly realise that social barriers and preconceptions are taboo and if you want to make the journey easier and even enjoyable for yourself and the ones around you, you have to work as a team.
We can all learn from each other. I really believe that and it is when you put people under stress in a managed environment that you often see the best in them and more importantly, they see the best in themselves.
I dont support any combat or weapons training at all, but an endurance camp or something through the military for all young South Africans is a smashing idea.
There is certainly value in this idea when one looks at national unity and a common identity as South Africans.
Also considering the fact that the AU wants to form a peace keeping force it is an ideal opportunity to expose the youth the the military lifestyle. Those that feel drawn to it could look further to careers in the military.
Fair enough and great ideas.I just object on principle to anything that takes away people's right to choose. Offer incentives for people to go there sure, maybe if you spend a year doing that you'd be entitled to a government loan for university etc. Or make it mandatory for people convicted of crimes as youths, just don't make it mandatory for everyone.
Sounds like a good idea. It could even be incorporated into a wider program that offers camps etc. during long school holidays to those who want to go. The big challenge is keeping it non-political, you don't want it to become an exercise in indoctrination.Fair enough and great ideas.
A voluntary program then that reflects the demographics of that specific region with benefits to those that complete the course successfully.
Benefits could be perhaps preference on bursaries or even a job in a government department, god knows we need people there that can pull together for the greater good of the country.
I just don't trust governments, this one particularly, to keep it non-political. It could be a good idea as long as it was voluntary, although they already have some sort of voluntary option available now, maybe they should publish it and add some incentives.I don't think politics would play any roles, it's not a history course but a course in life.
If you speak to anyone that did time in the military they will probably say things like, never again, waste of time, 2 years for what etc, etc. All very true comments with oodles of merit.
However, a large number of them will also say though that although they would never ever do it again, during training they learnt a whole lot about themselves and the people they were with and that that part of it is invaluable.
That now is what the target has to be.
Pipe dreams perhaps, but good ones hey.
I totally agree, give people a reason to do it.I just don't trust governments, this one particularly, to keep it non-political. It could be a good idea as long as it was voluntary, although they already have some sort of voluntary option available now, maybe they should publish it and add some incentives.
There was a discussion about this on 702 about an hour ago an old guy phoned in and told the story.Exactly, use a whip if they've been convicted of crime and you want to put them in a different program, just don't apply it to everyone.
/ me sniffs @ BTech
smells like ****
/me conludes that Btech must be an @sshole
who's ROFLMAO now ?
I didn't mean a literal whip but I know what you mean.There was a discussion about this on 702 about an hour ago an old guy phoned in and told the story.
How back in the day a young white guy raped a black girl, and he had to get a whipslashing for 2 years every month. Anywayz the old man said that he met the "rapist" again a few years ago again and the guy told him that it wasnt the whipping that got him but the anticipation of waiting for it to happen every month and he never did any crime after that again.
The comment was made because of the waterkloof 4 rehabilitation/punishment.
But corporal punishment is ruled out by our constitution these days
It may be good for some people but I really don't think it should be mandatory. Even if it is implemented now I'm sure I've missed it by a few years but if they tried to drag me into something like this I'd be heading for the border so quickly...I think a years community service for youngsters is a great idea, teach them a trade and get them to work for the community, they can even build stadiums for 2010 or lay sleepers for the gautrain, work in hospitals and police stations, fix roads, trek bossies uit, in fact anything that a community needs. At the moment we have compulsory community service for doctors and medical professionals anyway and whether they like it or not it does give them experience. Too many of the youngsters leave school and become sluipskutters and aimless cellphone clutching souls with no righting, discipline or job prospects, it may even be good for them! I dont think military service is a great idea though, we dont want them all playing with guns, they will end up killing all of us. I also think that it should be instituted for girls too, and I am pleased to say the only ones who wont have to do it will be pale males because they dont want us here anyway. I do know however that most of the richer people will send their kids out of the country so fast your head will spin.
I did my 2 years and it was bad, but when I came out I was a much better disciplined person than when I went in. Most ex SADF guys did better at their studies than those who went into them straight after school. Unfortunately we were only available for 9 months of a year, the rest of the time we were nailed with camps for 12 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers#Major_themesStarship Troopers is a political essay as well as a novel. Large portions of the book take place in classrooms, with Rico and other characters engaged in debates with their History and Moral Philosophy teachers, who are often thought to be speaking in Heinlein's voice. The overall theme of the book is that social responsibility requires individual sacrifice. Heinlein's Terran Federation is a limited democracy with aspects of a meritocracy based on willingness to sacrifice in the common interest. Suffrage belongs only to those willing to serve their society by two years of volunteer Federal Service (there is no draft)—"the franchise is today limited to discharged veterans," (ch. XII), instead of anyone ("...who is 18 years old and has a body temperature near 37 °C."). There is an explicitly made contrast to the democracies of the 20th century, which according to the novel were flawed (and collapsed) because "people had been led to believe that they could simply vote for whatever they wanted . . . and get it, without toil, without sweat, without tears." Indeed, Col. Dubois criticizes as unrealistic the famous U.S. Declaration of Independence guarantees concerning "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Are these people really the majority? Hopefully not but even if they are I still don't think the other people that aren't going around assaulting others etc. need to thrown into the scheme. We're also assuming that this is magically going to make people into upstanding, respectable citizens, is there any evidence of this at all?While a forced conscription may be unpleasant in todays south africa it might not be such a bad idea, youngsters <21 seem to have no respect for themselves, their parents, the law or their country.
Looking at the Waterkloof 4 and other incidents that I have seen and heard of, makes me think that it is neccessary in order to instill a sense of social responsibility in citizens.