Army Reserve Restructuring

[Remius]

There is defiantly a political current in our education system.

And certainly an activist agenda that has embedded itself in it.

 

[Eaglelord17]

A few problems:

1. Cadets offers a chance to be military adjacent, without being military for kids whose parents wouldn't allow them to sign-up for the reserves. You'd likely sour quite a few if at 16, two years before being able to make their own choices, you cut them loose and said "too bad, sign-up when you're old enough".

2. Cadets corps exist in places without a convenient reserve unit. You'd sour those kids against the military by cutting them loose years before they can join.

3. Most of the programs that draw people into the Cadets programme are only available when you're 16+. Things like international exchanges, power pilot, etc...

1) I think the amount you lose to choosing to carry on with Cadets is greater than the amount you would lose by cutting loose at 16.

2) If it isn’t a military program how would it sour them? At the end of the day we need to decide if we want a military themed daycare or if we want to actually use this program to help create troops. If it is the former I see no reason to carry on with it. If it is the latter then we should be aiming them towards the military whenever possible.

3) I don’t see a ton of value in those programs for the country if they aren’t going on to actually serve. One Reservist is more valuable than a 18 year old cadet with para wings who decides to never carry on into military service.

 

[daftandbarmy]

1) I think the amount you lose to choosing to carry on with Cadets is greater than the amount you would lose by cutting loose at 16.

2) If it isn’t a military program how would it sour them? At the end of the day we need to decide if we want a military themed daycare or if we want to actually use this program to help create troops. If it is the former I see no reason to carry on with it. If it is the latter then we should be aiming them towards the military whenever possible.

3) I don’t see a ton of value in those programs for the country if they aren’t going on to actually serve. One Reservist is more valuable than a 18 year old cadet with para wings who decides to never carry on into military service.

The US, and other countries, has no equivalent cadet program to ours and yet they seem to do OK with recruiting.

Just sayin'

 

[FJAG]

The US, and other countries, has no equivalent cadet program to ours and yet they seem to do OK with recruiting.

Just sayin'

The UK does. They do okay. They have some 38,000 army cadets, 13,000 sea cadets and 34,000 air cadets.

The US runs the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) program in high schools with over 3,200 JROTC units of which over 30% join the military. The estimate is that there are more than 500,000 students enrolled in the various services of the JROTC.

I agree they aren't equivalent to ours. They appear better from what I can tell.

 

[Kirkhill]

1) I think the amount you lose to choosing to carry on with Cadets is greater than the amount you would lose by cutting loose at 16.

2) If it isn’t a military program how would it sour them? At the end of the day we need to decide if we want a military themed daycare or if we want to actually use this program to help create troops. If it is the former I see no reason to carry on with it. If it is the latter then we should be aiming them towards the military whenever possible.

3) I don’t see a ton of value in those programs for the country if they aren’t going on to actually serve. One Reservist is more valuable than a 18 year old cadet with para wings who decides to never carry on into military service.

Actually, if you think about it, the Baden-Powell's Scouts and Guides were training soldiers. They still teach firearms safety and shooting.

Their original uniform was expressly military in cut. As was the Boys' Brigade.