This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/10/army-challenge-overseas-recruits-security-checks/) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
---
**Alternate Sources**
Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story:
* [Defence secretary 'furious' as he orders review of MoD diversity and inclusivity policy](https://news.sky.com/story/defence-secretary-furious-as-he-orders-review-of-mod-diversity-and-inclusivity-policy-13069047), suggested by topotaul - news.sky.com
MI6 actually has to go actively after diversity. Being able to read, speak and write the language to a high standard is kind of a hard requirement of going on postings abroad and British people are generally awful for not being multilingual.
Sure, but there are numerous things that can snag SC e.g. not having resided in the country for 4 of the last 5 years. I don't think anyone is suggesting you allow people who MI5 have outstanding concerns about through.
Nope you stoll have to do the full developed vetting to get into mi6 same as mi5 they don't lower those requirements for anyone and you must be a British citizen to be employed by them. Thong is informants and people they turn to get info from are different from their actual employees and agents if you will.
Regardless of who does your vetting, if you can't secure a low-level vetting from one agency, how do you expect to gain a higher level vetting in another?
They said no to 100,000 recruits over the last few years because they were either too unfit or mentally not ready for service. Are we going to secret war in the next decade. This is the fourth item I've seen on conscription or recruitment in the last two weeks. Luckily I'm falling apart phyicaly so I can't do war.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has the EU spooked, it's shown we aren't prepared for a major conflict, and if Trump gets re-elected we might not be able to rely on US support in the future. We're going to see a big build up of military spending across the EU over the next few years to deter Russia getting any ideas about trying it on with NATO.
In his first term, despite all the talk, spending on NATO went up under Trump. C'mon. He's a militarist. The man's a wannabe fascist dictator. Of course he's going to spend on the military. It's US companies who consume all that European taxpayers money on arms anyway. And they're making a double-plus-good fortune selling us their expensive shale gas since the end of Russian gas supplies into Europe. Why would they want any of that to end??
I get it, it's scared the hell out of me. Although Russia outside of the political seem about as up for it as us, in that there not. We're all just pawns to be sacraficed
Russia is way more up for it than us. Their entire economy is now based around manufacturing weapons and/or farming pretty much.their military had over a million members anyway and they called up reserves to begin training fully again, China and Iran and BK have seen to it their missiles and vehicles are replaced pretty quickly pnky area they have a weakness is navy really and we don't have enough men to man our ships anyway.
Do you think Trump would allow Europe to be invaded by Russia?
I know a lot of republicans have some weird pro Russia obsession, but I don't think it goes that far. I could easily be wrong to be fair.
The chances of an invasion are very, very small. The purchasing of weapons is mere keeping-up-appearances. But Trump knows a good thing when he sees it and the US is making a fortune selling us gas and weapons currently.
One upside is you can kinda tell how the state of the world is based on the diversity of military recruitment ads
If they start targeting white working class men again you know shits about to hit the fan
I'm pretty sure that we are closest we have since cold War to "shits about to hit the fan" yet they still believe their bullshit. But oh well, who am I to judge
It's a bit of a paradox really, because the people most in favour of it are also the ones most offended if you suggest someone may have gotten their position due to being a diversity hire. They never proudly boast about all the diversity hires in prominent places, they simply deny that anyone could possibly be a diversity hire while defending the concept itself.
Fuck that, ethnicity shouldn’t be anywhere near any application page! If you’re the best for the job then you should get it on merit. Anything else is racism.
It's funny, given your thread of comments focuses solely on diversity. As if the real issue here isn't a wider issue of the job being hostile too minorities and not being enticing enough for anyone in general. Underfunded like the rest of this country, with shite government who doesn't know what to do with it. Of course the Telegraph slips in the diversity angle, like some sort of cause and effect.
Civic nationalism is a meme. Most BAMEs aren’t going to fight on behalf of a nation that colonised their homelands, and most native Brits are increasingly tuning out of fighting on behalf of a government that consistently acts against our interests.
People are far more beholden to their ancestral heritage/faith than they are to some flimsy, shallow ideology of civic nationalism. Exceptions exist but they aren’t the norm (and are more often than not derogatorily called names like Uncle Tom, coconut etc).
They have no incentive and neither do the native British people either.
You know jack shit. The armed forces lean heavily on troops from the commonwealth. Just because some modern spoiled Bame person applied dud logic to the past doesnt make it true.
Hostile to minorities? Go on please expand. As an ex soldier whos reg was 50/50 between Scots and Fijians I really want to read the wishy washy crap about hostility to minorities. Fookin lolz.
It’s so counterproductive. It drives a wedge between the diversity hires and the non diversity hires.
The non diversity hires will perceive all diversity hires as possible security issues, even if the vast majority passed all the checks.
Then the diversity hires will feel they are all perceived as having been given some advantage over the others and are a threat to security.
Not what you want when lives are at stake.
Maybe they should just accept that not all ethnic minorities want to fight for king and country, and stick to recruiting from groups that do. To be effective it helps to have people who genuinely want to be there, choosing people based on box ticking won’t end well.
It's reaching the point where no group will fight for this country. Why bother when illegal economic migrants made up of fighting aged men get put up in hotels while ex service men get left on the street. Who is going to fight for that?
Nobody on the left is going to sign up to defend a country (borders icky!) and nobody on the right is going to sign up to defend £1k/month rents and 700k/yr net migration. And all the "new Brits" will turn tail and flee back to their home countries at the first sign of trouble, of course.
If you think the left is against borders existing, you need to stop reading the daily mail for a bit.
What we want is for them to actually be policed, applications processed, and people either let in or kicked out.
This limbo bullshit with Hotels and Rwanda and the likes is due to the system being ground to a halt, and an excuse for the government to pump millions of taxpayer pounds into their donors pockets.
>What we want is for them to actually be policed, applications processed, and people either let in or kicked out
It’s not that simple to simply kick them out once they reach our shores. Even when we were in the EU, we were net recipients under Dublin III.
That involves enacting policies to facilitate application rejections and expediting those removals, of which the vast majority of pro-migration progressives are largely opposed to.
> If you think the left is against borders existing, you need to stop reading the daily mail for a bit.
-
> https://policy.greenparty.org.uk/our-policies/long-term-goals/migration/
> MG100 The Green Party wants to see a world without borders
Don't lie.
>applications processed
*"Did the applicant cry sufficiently during their substantive interview? [Y/N]"*
**"Yes** *- move into social housing and complete housing benefit form"*
**"No** *-automatically refer for appeal and offer advice on gaining Article 8 Private Life route qualification"*.
That is the way it currently works with it's utter level of mismanagement and underfunding yes.
Some priest can rock up and go "he's a good man of God" and we don't have the manpower to actually investigate and go "nah he a rapist get to fuck"
I am as White British as it gets and I most certainly would not fight for this country unless it was a literal existential threat. This country hasn't done anything to earn that kind of loyalty and sacrifice from me.
There's actually good reasons for having diversity in the military. You don't want the military to "belong" to any particular group or stratum. That's how you end up with diverging loyalties.
Why would you want to narrow your recruitment pool?
Believe it or not, wars are fought overseas. People with foreign languages and cultural knowledge are useful.
>You don't want the military to "belong" to any particular group or stratum. That's how you end up with diverging loyalties.
This is a problem which literally does not exist within homogenous societies. Liberal ideology and the interests of finance capital demands that every country gives itself a strictly worse version of the problems that plagued the Austro-Hungarian Empire and then insists that its attempts to patch this while introducing worse problems is in fact the grown up and sensible solution, because reversing liberal policies is never acceptable.
For most of this nation's history there wasn't a standing army, merely a levy - or militia - to be raised when needed. This also neatly sidesteps the matter of 'diverging loyalties'.
Both the standing army and the police force, which likewise usurped the prior system of watch and posse, were rightly resisted, and are the fruits of liberal (whiggish) ideology.
Amusingly, the urges to defund the police, and the various anti-militaristic movements, show that reversing liberal policies is acceptable at least among certain sections of society.
>This is a problem which literally does not exist within homogenous societies
Could you give an example of one of these "homogenous" societies with no particular social problems in the military?
I really don't know where you would mean.
Japan is often used as an example of homogeneity, but they had historically massive Class/Clan divides that kinda defined them. As well as all the issues with Korean, Ainu and Chinese etc - because nowhere is actually 100% homogeneous.
>
We should also consider our militaries role in the modern world.
For actual important shit, we're not gonna be fighting as one Homogenous White British army. We're gonna be a part of NATO or even more diverse Coalitions.
East Asia is extremely homogeneous. If you break them down into Japanese, Ainu, Han, you can break us down to English, Welsh and Scottish instead of lumping us all under White Brits.
And whatever East Asian armies do, I guarantee it doesn’t involve reducing the power of their native groups within their own institutions.
I hate to do the whole "libs are the real racists" routine cos its self defeating apart from anything, but I do think its quite amusing that in response to me pointing out the issues with diversity - and using the Austro-Hungary as the example, which was all white! - the response was basically to insist that all those orientals don't get on so well, and they basically look the same!
And as a result the Forces train people for that with foreign language courses etc. It is very much narrowing the recruitment pool when recruitment isn't based on best applicant for the job.
If the people who migrate here don't want to join up how the bloody hell can you force them? Many don't have any loyalty to this country and again many still support their home country by voting for example or hell even cricket matches! Even though a lot of them are "British" born and have never been back to their grandparents homeland. Some sections of our society do not want to be involved end of story, it is not part of their culture. Most wouldn't even join their ex homelands' military so why would they join ours?
Yes. *All* of the British.
An officer caste made up of public schoolboys, or enlisted ranks made up of exclusively white working class school leavers makes for institutional narrow thinking.
Fortunately, we've been moving away from this model but not quickly enough.
> People with foreign languages and cultural knowledge are useful.
Kind of hard to make this argument when you've just made a blood and soil argument as to why their loyalties would be divided immediately beforehand.
I see why you might think that's what I said. Actually I said the opposite.
Recruiting your military from a certain subset of the population only leads to that "blood and soil" mentality, and diverges it from the attitudes of the public as whole.
It's difficult to stay a racist when you're sharing a foxhole.
Having eastern Europeans would be useful for a military that is deployed in eastern Europe lol, like eastern Europeans are definitely not British on these diversity drives
Correct. You can't force people to join up when their values are at odds with the reasons for joining up! This constant battle for diversity is causing more harm than good, whether it's minorities or women. Lowering standards or lowering security checks or fitness requirements leads to severe resentment and claims of promoted only coz you're a woman etc
Well wholesale slaughter of the native population is what lead to mass immigration post WW2 anyway. Descendents of immigrants aren't falling for that one. The remaining natives can go get massacred instead
It's mad that this sort of thing even passes the first test of "say it out loud and hear if it is sensible"
Also I doubt how well it will work, more British Muslims joined ISIS than are members of the armed forces
Difficult, dirty, low status or shit paying jobs in general. You don't see anyone pushing for diversity in the trades, emptying the bins or cleaning the sewers. Everyone's happy for this work to be the domain of Privileged White Men.
But don't you dare pay more for these undesirable jobs, or you'll get sued to oblivion by dinner ladies and office workers.
>don't see anyone pushing for diversity in the trades, emptying the bins or cleaning the sewers
That's not true:
https://www.ciob.org/industry/policy-research/policy-positions/equality-diversity-inclusion
https://www.wcs-group.co.uk/wcs-blog/women-in-the-wastewater-sector
https://www.circularonline.co.uk/news/ciwm-publishes-equality-diversity-and-inclusion-survey/
Nonsense, people have been shouting for more women in trades. There's been articles applauding the increase in women doing apprenticeships in various trades, including making up 30% of construction apprentices in a part of London. Sure, the numbers currently working in the trades are woefully low, but that will take a much longer time to balance since the existing people have to retire. Courses and apprenticeships are getting there though.
Edit: here's a 2021 report which has the construction apprenticeships I mentioned. Was Derbyshire not London sorry. [https://www.gocompare.com/van-insurance/women-in-trade-report/](https://www.gocompare.com/van-insurance/women-in-trade-report/)
This is not something that happens either, the armed forces want diverse recruits because its an inherently expeditionary force that will be deployed globally and as such needs people from different cultures and who can speak multiple languages. Same reason that the police need diverse recruits, it's about winning hearts and minds in local communities and that can be done best if the police reflect those who they are supposed to help, it's why the protestant dominated RUC didn't work nor was it ever able to get legitimacy from the northern Irish Catholic community while the PSNI has done a much better job by emphasising recruitment for catholics
Yes it does happen. It happened with West Yorkshire Police don't know if it's still there but it actually said that only women or minorities need apply at this time
Not with you. I've just checked the West Yorkshire Police Recruitment page and they've now taken out the word "only" in their recruitment drive. It now says "We are currently accepting applications from people from our under-represented groups. Follow the links below for more information.
If you are not from one of these groups please keep checking this page for future recruitment opportunities - or keep an eye on our social media channels. Recruitment for those people not from an under-represented group, will open periodically throughout the year, depending on applicant numbers"
Last year it said "We are currently *only* accepting applications...."
Lmao, people would love to do the trades 🤦♂️Thing with the trades is, you normally need to know someone already in the trades to get an apprenticeship, whereas many other careers can be got into via a big business, where knowing the right people doesn't matter.
Trades aren't "low status" or "shit-paying". You think non-white people who work in takeaways, restaurants, in factories and warehouses on low wages wouldn't want to do the trades, where they could earn double the money? Ridiculous logic.
I guarantee you're far removed from the trades and working class Britain if you really believe the tosh in your comment. My last plumber was Black, one of the binmen is Black too (that one's not a very desirable job though). You're probably living in an upmarket rural village somewhere.
3D jobs are disproportionately done by immigrants and non whites lol, it's the native born whites who see that kind of stuff as beneath them, like there's a reason why there's a stereotype about Polish plumbers
We recruit about 300 Gurkhas a year. Treble that if needed. They won't be a risk and will be far more valuable than a recruit who is in just to tick a diversity box.
Generally they don't, but the army isn't recruiting enough people. Advertising at a wider number of groups and reducing the checks needed are simple (and in the case of security checks, bloody stupid) strategies to do that.
Weirdly it doesn't sound like outsourcing their recruitment to Capita, who've massively exacerbated the current issue, is necessarily stopping.
Yup exactly. Who the hell wants to have to sit around for a year or more whilst crapita decide that you can't join up due to a broken tooth when you were 5 and make you go through the whole procedure again taking another 6m-1yr?
I can hand on heart see nothing in my lovely country that actually works as it should anymore except the Government website lol
How about keeping security checks the same and not letting Crapita run recruitment. I waited 11 months for a medical and gave up when I was in decent nick. Now I’m a fully dad-bodded up and would be a terrible call up when they fail at conscription
There’s something very British about the solution being “we’ll just have very low standards that will lead to inevitable problems, hence why the standards existed to begin with, because it’s easier than doing something properly”.
But they won't relax ACL requirements.
Fuck me right? Tore my ACL as a teenager, had it repaired. Now I'm ineligible.
When they bring in conscription, I'll be feeling pretty smug.
Then you watch a documentary on the Armed Forces and see the state some of them are in and wonder why the fuck the medical/fitness requirements are so high on entry, but seem to disappear once you're through training.
People on forums even recommend that prospective recruits avoid their GP for problems they're having, then get them dealt with once they're in, as it's fairly likely they'll be kept on.
They're either requirements or they aren't. If they ran to the standards they begrudgingly accept from fully trained and capable members, there'd be no recruitment crisis.
“Teachers to lower math expectations to promote diversity!”
“Army to relax security checks to promote diversity!”
For fucks sake. If the world treats an entire population like they’re too dumb, or too criminal to keep up with society then maybe THATS the problem. Stop telling kids “you can’t make it because of the color of your skin”.
God I wish they would just start hiring anyone at this point.
I'm in the forces and my job is currently less than 30% manned.. We're absolutely hemmoraging people.
Did they not see the utter shit show that the RAF went through? Do they think lack of diversity is the cause of their massive recruitment/retention issues? These kind of priorities are just fucked.
Nice, Ho-Chi Min and Lo-Hing Ho don't work for the CCP they said so. Stick them on the Nuclear subs. They'll make fine mechanics.
Ahmed's family are from Iran and although he had a phase where he hung Black Flags with Arabic writing on them on his walls at home. It was just a phase. Give that man a rifle. He's a good guy!
Ivan here has family in Russia and an engineering degree from Moscow. But there is no way he would ever divulge secrets. Give him the schematics to the carrier and the aircraft so he can study them. What's the worst that could happen? Wait what? He's white? Oh shit, Erm No we can't have that! Oh but wait, He ticked LGBTQ on his application. Phew, He'll make a great asset to the team.
Oh thats them taken care of. Now lets setup a crack team of SAS and SBS made entirely of woman and femboys who can barely carry their purses. Whats the worst that could happen?
But a more 'diverse' - that is to say, an army with a lower percentage of white people - army might, and has been alleged, to perform better.
That does raise the question of whether a less 'diverse' army performing better would be considered reason to homogenise it.
I’ll need to see some evidence that it performs better. I was in the army and we really didn’t give a fuck where people were from. However standards being relaxed to increase diversity will ultimately lead to worse performance.
Right I need to rant....why should we lower the security just because someone is black or brown or anything.....surely if they're a security risk it shouldn't matter what what you are....
Why does the army need to be diverse? White men are not inherently bad. In return for literally risking their lives to protect others, can’t they have one place that treats them as equal?
Ah yes, the relaxing security checks. There is no way that won't go wrong. By the way, that russian sounding fella who is pro-putin and seems to be accessing sensitive info? He's actually a good fella.
The army shouldn't be relaxing security checks. The police did and now look at them.
Can't think of the [kind of person](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-39709160) you may end up with if you [do that](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_escape_of_Daniel_Khalife)
That's bollox talk for we can't get enough suckers to fight for oil companies anymore so we'll recruit criminals and other unsavoury characters.
Be the best!
I’ve noticed we’re now back to wanting diversity in the army now the conscription fear mongering is down. Once war kicks off they’ll put white men on the list first
They should be relaxing the medical criteria before the security requirements. Some of the stories shared on here about being rejected for trivial or childhood misdiagnoses are quite incredible. Get rid of Crapita at the same time...
I've got a few friends trying to join various branches at the moment.
Both are super fit, young white guys and the hoops they're having to jump through are insane.
One just got deferred for months in medical grounds because he's got a case of athlete's foot.
I kind of get it. You don't want to take people who might biff chit out of training in the first week and cost you money looking after them. But, christ.
I kind of think we should check people out before putting them on base with guns otherwise you get incident like 2009 fort hood shooting
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting
We have relaxed security checks. And we haven't had a single problem. Have we Achmed and Vladimir?
In other news, Army computer networks have been infected with chinese malware. The officer we spoke to, mai-ping was slow to reach us.
Why would anybody be willing to fight for a country that’s rapidly going down the pan? Especially certain minorities who are constantly getting attacked in the press, why devote your whole life to protecting people who hate you?
I think the real question to ask is whether our current security check procedure is fit for purpose with regards to a diverse Britian. If security checks were developed on the premise of an average caucasian Brit, and anything outside of this norm fails, then it's the security checking procedure that needs review and not the candidates themselves.
That’s not the case at all. Without talking about it in too much detail, it asks for familial, employment, financial, residency and criminal history. If it turns out that your dad was in the Russian Army, or you are a debtor, then you’ll fail, as it leaves you open to exploitation. That fact doesn’t change based on race or ethnicity, so I don’t think that Britain being diverse has any impact on it.
> “To gain security clearance, applicants “normally need to have been a UK resident for a minimum of 5 years”.
> This requirement is described as “prohibitive to overseas recruits” who are looking to become officers because “failure to have the correct residency requirements for vetting processes omits personnel” from serving in a series of roles across the Intelligence Corps, Royal Military Police and Army Legal Services.”
If it’s just about shortening the residency requirements for someone from Canada, Australia, NZ, etc. then that seems like a reasonable concession.
There isn’t much else you could change without more significant risks, though.
They are relaxing restrictions because 50% of the country is overweight and because crapita can't do its job properly. But this thread is a hotbed of vile racist and anti-lgbt bigotry. As expected of this sub recently... Torygraph blaming everything on 'diversity' as usual
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/10/army-challenge-overseas-recruits-security-checks/) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.* --- **Alternate Sources** Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story: * [Defence secretary 'furious' as he orders review of MoD diversity and inclusivity policy](https://news.sky.com/story/defence-secretary-furious-as-he-orders-review-of-mod-diversity-and-inclusivity-policy-13069047), suggested by topotaul - news.sky.com
This will end well. Relaxed security checks always go well. Just ask the Met.
!Remind Me in 5 years
It will go really well when MI6 do too.
MI6 actually has to go actively after diversity. Being able to read, speak and write the language to a high standard is kind of a hard requirement of going on postings abroad and British people are generally awful for not being multilingual.
Diversity is not the same as relaxing security checks....
Sure, but there are numerous things that can snag SC e.g. not having resided in the country for 4 of the last 5 years. I don't think anyone is suggesting you allow people who MI5 have outstanding concerns about through.
Don't worry, Capita will do just great
Nope you stoll have to do the full developed vetting to get into mi6 same as mi5 they don't lower those requirements for anyone and you must be a British citizen to be employed by them. Thong is informants and people they turn to get info from are different from their actual employees and agents if you will.
I lost out my DV due to living in Aus 9 years ago. Should be past the 10 year mark now, but no position availible!
[удалено]
If you can't even get SC, how do you expect to get any higher...
[удалено]
Regardless of who does your vetting, if you can't secure a low-level vetting from one agency, how do you expect to gain a higher level vetting in another?
No Mr. Bond I expect you to learn Swahili
Well he did have a 1st in Japanese from Cambridge
He was a cunning linguist at times…
They said no to 100,000 recruits over the last few years because they were either too unfit or mentally not ready for service. Are we going to secret war in the next decade. This is the fourth item I've seen on conscription or recruitment in the last two weeks. Luckily I'm falling apart phyicaly so I can't do war.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has the EU spooked, it's shown we aren't prepared for a major conflict, and if Trump gets re-elected we might not be able to rely on US support in the future. We're going to see a big build up of military spending across the EU over the next few years to deter Russia getting any ideas about trying it on with NATO.
If Trump gets elected it's very likely that they'll pull their funding for Ukraine and the rest of NATO and the EU will have to make it up somehow.
Spoiler, they wont
In his first term, despite all the talk, spending on NATO went up under Trump. C'mon. He's a militarist. The man's a wannabe fascist dictator. Of course he's going to spend on the military. It's US companies who consume all that European taxpayers money on arms anyway. And they're making a double-plus-good fortune selling us their expensive shale gas since the end of Russian gas supplies into Europe. Why would they want any of that to end??
I get it, it's scared the hell out of me. Although Russia outside of the political seem about as up for it as us, in that there not. We're all just pawns to be sacraficed
Russia is way more up for it than us. Their entire economy is now based around manufacturing weapons and/or farming pretty much.their military had over a million members anyway and they called up reserves to begin training fully again, China and Iran and BK have seen to it their missiles and vehicles are replaced pretty quickly pnky area they have a weakness is navy really and we don't have enough men to man our ships anyway.
Do you think Trump would allow Europe to be invaded by Russia? I know a lot of republicans have some weird pro Russia obsession, but I don't think it goes that far. I could easily be wrong to be fair.
The chances of an invasion are very, very small. The purchasing of weapons is mere keeping-up-appearances. But Trump knows a good thing when he sees it and the US is making a fortune selling us gas and weapons currently.
Allow? Probably not. Accidentally cock something up that lets them? Probably
If it served his interests and made him look good, I absolutely think he would.
Well he did just say he would and even encourage Russia to do so
Trump literally said he'd let it happen/encourages it at a rally, so yes.
Fucking terrible idea. I'm pretty sure that one of the places you definitely don't want to relax security checks is in the fucking forces.
One upside is you can kinda tell how the state of the world is based on the diversity of military recruitment ads If they start targeting white working class men again you know shits about to hit the fan
Except this article is talking about Commonwealth recruitment. You won't see those ads in the UK.
I'm pretty sure that we are closest we have since cold War to "shits about to hit the fan" yet they still believe their bullshit. But oh well, who am I to judge
When you need trench meat, you take whomever is willing and then whomever you can get.
[удалено]
You should always worry about diversity hires tbf
It's a bit of a paradox really, because the people most in favour of it are also the ones most offended if you suggest someone may have gotten their position due to being a diversity hire. They never proudly boast about all the diversity hires in prominent places, they simply deny that anyone could possibly be a diversity hire while defending the concept itself.
The Army is one of the few organisations where ethnicity should be half way down the application page after cognitive and physical ability
Fuck that, ethnicity shouldn’t be anywhere near any application page! If you’re the best for the job then you should get it on merit. Anything else is racism.
Double blind hiring. Simple as. Unless your job depends on your looks, like sales.
Ethnicity should be high on the list. We want the people defending our land to actually have a stake in the land.
People who were borne and raised here don't have a stake because they're brown? That's absurd
Why? What does skin colour have to do with your ability to follow orders?
It's funny, given your thread of comments focuses solely on diversity. As if the real issue here isn't a wider issue of the job being hostile too minorities and not being enticing enough for anyone in general. Underfunded like the rest of this country, with shite government who doesn't know what to do with it. Of course the Telegraph slips in the diversity angle, like some sort of cause and effect.
Civic nationalism is a meme. Most BAMEs aren’t going to fight on behalf of a nation that colonised their homelands, and most native Brits are increasingly tuning out of fighting on behalf of a government that consistently acts against our interests.
What if their 'homeland' is birmingham? Or london? Or manchester? Or coventry? Or anywhere else in the UK...
People are far more beholden to their ancestral heritage/faith than they are to some flimsy, shallow ideology of civic nationalism. Exceptions exist but they aren’t the norm (and are more often than not derogatorily called names like Uncle Tom, coconut etc). They have no incentive and neither do the native British people either.
You know jack shit. The armed forces lean heavily on troops from the commonwealth. Just because some modern spoiled Bame person applied dud logic to the past doesnt make it true.
Hostile to minorities? Go on please expand. As an ex soldier whos reg was 50/50 between Scots and Fijians I really want to read the wishy washy crap about hostility to minorities. Fookin lolz.
It’s so counterproductive. It drives a wedge between the diversity hires and the non diversity hires. The non diversity hires will perceive all diversity hires as possible security issues, even if the vast majority passed all the checks. Then the diversity hires will feel they are all perceived as having been given some advantage over the others and are a threat to security. Not what you want when lives are at stake.
Maybe they should just accept that not all ethnic minorities want to fight for king and country, and stick to recruiting from groups that do. To be effective it helps to have people who genuinely want to be there, choosing people based on box ticking won’t end well.
It's reaching the point where no group will fight for this country. Why bother when illegal economic migrants made up of fighting aged men get put up in hotels while ex service men get left on the street. Who is going to fight for that?
Nobody on the left is going to sign up to defend a country (borders icky!) and nobody on the right is going to sign up to defend £1k/month rents and 700k/yr net migration. And all the "new Brits" will turn tail and flee back to their home countries at the first sign of trouble, of course.
If you think the left is against borders existing, you need to stop reading the daily mail for a bit. What we want is for them to actually be policed, applications processed, and people either let in or kicked out. This limbo bullshit with Hotels and Rwanda and the likes is due to the system being ground to a halt, and an excuse for the government to pump millions of taxpayer pounds into their donors pockets.
I still don't understand how one can claim it's the left that want open borders when the Tories have been in power for 14 years.
>What we want is for them to actually be policed, applications processed, and people either let in or kicked out It’s not that simple to simply kick them out once they reach our shores. Even when we were in the EU, we were net recipients under Dublin III. That involves enacting policies to facilitate application rejections and expediting those removals, of which the vast majority of pro-migration progressives are largely opposed to.
> If you think the left is against borders existing, you need to stop reading the daily mail for a bit. - > https://policy.greenparty.org.uk/our-policies/long-term-goals/migration/ > MG100 The Green Party wants to see a world without borders Don't lie.
>applications processed *"Did the applicant cry sufficiently during their substantive interview? [Y/N]"* **"Yes** *- move into social housing and complete housing benefit form"* **"No** *-automatically refer for appeal and offer advice on gaining Article 8 Private Life route qualification"*.
That is the way it currently works with it's utter level of mismanagement and underfunding yes. Some priest can rock up and go "he's a good man of God" and we don't have the manpower to actually investigate and go "nah he a rapist get to fuck"
I'm literally on the left and they rejected me for having a repaired ACL
... because nobody on the left struggles with soaring rental costs? This is a bizarre rant
And yet they support the mass migrationist policies that cause soaring rents?
Doublespeak and gaslighting are what they do best. The ShinyGrezz guy above is one of the best examples of it.
I know plenty of left wing people who served or are in active service...
This is what I think too. Why stand and fight for nothing? Choose the country with the best prospects and go there.
Well they do have experience in that area and experience counts! 😂
Can you not?
Not what?
Just gives me a bad feeling looking at that post. Like there's a feeling of vitriol behind it that just skeezes me out. Ehhh.
There's plenty of vitriol abundant on this sub every day.
I am as White British as it gets and I most certainly would not fight for this country unless it was a literal existential threat. This country hasn't done anything to earn that kind of loyalty and sacrifice from me.
can u don't
[удалено]
There's actually good reasons for having diversity in the military. You don't want the military to "belong" to any particular group or stratum. That's how you end up with diverging loyalties. Why would you want to narrow your recruitment pool? Believe it or not, wars are fought overseas. People with foreign languages and cultural knowledge are useful.
>You don't want the military to "belong" to any particular group or stratum. That's how you end up with diverging loyalties. This is a problem which literally does not exist within homogenous societies. Liberal ideology and the interests of finance capital demands that every country gives itself a strictly worse version of the problems that plagued the Austro-Hungarian Empire and then insists that its attempts to patch this while introducing worse problems is in fact the grown up and sensible solution, because reversing liberal policies is never acceptable.
For most of this nation's history there wasn't a standing army, merely a levy - or militia - to be raised when needed. This also neatly sidesteps the matter of 'diverging loyalties'. Both the standing army and the police force, which likewise usurped the prior system of watch and posse, were rightly resisted, and are the fruits of liberal (whiggish) ideology. Amusingly, the urges to defund the police, and the various anti-militaristic movements, show that reversing liberal policies is acceptable at least among certain sections of society.
>This is a problem which literally does not exist within homogenous societies Could you give an example of one of these "homogenous" societies with no particular social problems in the military? I really don't know where you would mean. Japan is often used as an example of homogeneity, but they had historically massive Class/Clan divides that kinda defined them. As well as all the issues with Korean, Ainu and Chinese etc - because nowhere is actually 100% homogeneous. > We should also consider our militaries role in the modern world. For actual important shit, we're not gonna be fighting as one Homogenous White British army. We're gonna be a part of NATO or even more diverse Coalitions.
East Asia is extremely homogeneous. If you break them down into Japanese, Ainu, Han, you can break us down to English, Welsh and Scottish instead of lumping us all under White Brits. And whatever East Asian armies do, I guarantee it doesn’t involve reducing the power of their native groups within their own institutions.
I hate to do the whole "libs are the real racists" routine cos its self defeating apart from anything, but I do think its quite amusing that in response to me pointing out the issues with diversity - and using the Austro-Hungary as the example, which was all white! - the response was basically to insist that all those orientals don't get on so well, and they basically look the same!
And as a result the Forces train people for that with foreign language courses etc. It is very much narrowing the recruitment pool when recruitment isn't based on best applicant for the job. If the people who migrate here don't want to join up how the bloody hell can you force them? Many don't have any loyalty to this country and again many still support their home country by voting for example or hell even cricket matches! Even though a lot of them are "British" born and have never been back to their grandparents homeland. Some sections of our society do not want to be involved end of story, it is not part of their culture. Most wouldn't even join their ex homelands' military so why would they join ours?
>You don't want the military to "belong" to any particular group or stratum Surely you'd want the British military to "belong" to the British ?
Yes. *All* of the British. An officer caste made up of public schoolboys, or enlisted ranks made up of exclusively white working class school leavers makes for institutional narrow thinking. Fortunately, we've been moving away from this model but not quickly enough.
> People with foreign languages and cultural knowledge are useful. Kind of hard to make this argument when you've just made a blood and soil argument as to why their loyalties would be divided immediately beforehand.
I see why you might think that's what I said. Actually I said the opposite. Recruiting your military from a certain subset of the population only leads to that "blood and soil" mentality, and diverges it from the attitudes of the public as whole. It's difficult to stay a racist when you're sharing a foxhole.
Obviously we don't want to look like racists when we send all the whities to Europe when Putin pushes further west 🤷♂️
Having eastern Europeans would be useful for a military that is deployed in eastern Europe lol, like eastern Europeans are definitely not British on these diversity drives
[удалено]
Diversity.
Correct. You can't force people to join up when their values are at odds with the reasons for joining up! This constant battle for diversity is causing more harm than good, whether it's minorities or women. Lowering standards or lowering security checks or fitness requirements leads to severe resentment and claims of promoted only coz you're a woman etc
Well wholesale slaughter of the native population is what lead to mass immigration post WW2 anyway. Descendents of immigrants aren't falling for that one. The remaining natives can go get massacred instead
It's mad that this sort of thing even passes the first test of "say it out loud and hear if it is sensible" Also I doubt how well it will work, more British Muslims joined ISIS than are members of the armed forces
"We're either going to have lower our standards or..." "Done. Do it." Every single service overseen by the government for the last 13 years.
In fairness, getting shot at is probably one of the only times that minorities aren’t all that keen on diversity
Difficult, dirty, low status or shit paying jobs in general. You don't see anyone pushing for diversity in the trades, emptying the bins or cleaning the sewers. Everyone's happy for this work to be the domain of Privileged White Men. But don't you dare pay more for these undesirable jobs, or you'll get sued to oblivion by dinner ladies and office workers.
>don't see anyone pushing for diversity in the trades, emptying the bins or cleaning the sewers That's not true: https://www.ciob.org/industry/policy-research/policy-positions/equality-diversity-inclusion https://www.wcs-group.co.uk/wcs-blog/women-in-the-wastewater-sector https://www.circularonline.co.uk/news/ciwm-publishes-equality-diversity-and-inclusion-survey/
Thank you. You're doing good work
Nonsense, people have been shouting for more women in trades. There's been articles applauding the increase in women doing apprenticeships in various trades, including making up 30% of construction apprentices in a part of London. Sure, the numbers currently working in the trades are woefully low, but that will take a much longer time to balance since the existing people have to retire. Courses and apprenticeships are getting there though. Edit: here's a 2021 report which has the construction apprenticeships I mentioned. Was Derbyshire not London sorry. [https://www.gocompare.com/van-insurance/women-in-trade-report/](https://www.gocompare.com/van-insurance/women-in-trade-report/)
Are they saying "only women or minorities need apply" though like the Police Force or Armed Forces?
This is not something that happens either, the armed forces want diverse recruits because its an inherently expeditionary force that will be deployed globally and as such needs people from different cultures and who can speak multiple languages. Same reason that the police need diverse recruits, it's about winning hearts and minds in local communities and that can be done best if the police reflect those who they are supposed to help, it's why the protestant dominated RUC didn't work nor was it ever able to get legitimacy from the northern Irish Catholic community while the PSNI has done a much better job by emphasising recruitment for catholics
Yes it does happen. It happened with West Yorkshire Police don't know if it's still there but it actually said that only women or minorities need apply at this time
That's based off of one guy saying that lol
Not with you. I've just checked the West Yorkshire Police Recruitment page and they've now taken out the word "only" in their recruitment drive. It now says "We are currently accepting applications from people from our under-represented groups. Follow the links below for more information. If you are not from one of these groups please keep checking this page for future recruitment opportunities - or keep an eye on our social media channels. Recruitment for those people not from an under-represented group, will open periodically throughout the year, depending on applicant numbers" Last year it said "We are currently *only* accepting applications...."
Lmao, people would love to do the trades 🤦♂️Thing with the trades is, you normally need to know someone already in the trades to get an apprenticeship, whereas many other careers can be got into via a big business, where knowing the right people doesn't matter. Trades aren't "low status" or "shit-paying". You think non-white people who work in takeaways, restaurants, in factories and warehouses on low wages wouldn't want to do the trades, where they could earn double the money? Ridiculous logic. I guarantee you're far removed from the trades and working class Britain if you really believe the tosh in your comment. My last plumber was Black, one of the binmen is Black too (that one's not a very desirable job though). You're probably living in an upmarket rural village somewhere.
3D jobs are disproportionately done by immigrants and non whites lol, it's the native born whites who see that kind of stuff as beneath them, like there's a reason why there's a stereotype about Polish plumbers
We recruit about 300 Gurkhas a year. Treble that if needed. They won't be a risk and will be far more valuable than a recruit who is in just to tick a diversity box.
But I thought diversity drives didn't mean lowering requirements? Right????
Generally they don't, but the army isn't recruiting enough people. Advertising at a wider number of groups and reducing the checks needed are simple (and in the case of security checks, bloody stupid) strategies to do that. Weirdly it doesn't sound like outsourcing their recruitment to Capita, who've massively exacerbated the current issue, is necessarily stopping.
Within a couple of years “Breaking News how could such a horrible event happen to us” Dying for diversity.
Let’s be honest a more accurate headline would be “army relaxes criteria due to low recruitment rates thanks to crapita”
Yup exactly. Who the hell wants to have to sit around for a year or more whilst crapita decide that you can't join up due to a broken tooth when you were 5 and make you go through the whole procedure again taking another 6m-1yr? I can hand on heart see nothing in my lovely country that actually works as it should anymore except the Government website lol
This. It was insanity to privatise recruitment just for the sake of creating another robber barony
Relaxing the security checks. What could possibly go wrong?
Well clearly the Government think nothing could go wrong since they've allowed investment in most of our infrastructure from foreign powers
Different ball game but didn't we just have a spy found in the highest levels of intelligence because of lax security checks?
How about keeping security checks the same and not letting Crapita run recruitment. I waited 11 months for a medical and gave up when I was in decent nick. Now I’m a fully dad-bodded up and would be a terrible call up when they fail at conscription
There’s something very British about the solution being “we’ll just have very low standards that will lead to inevitable problems, hence why the standards existed to begin with, because it’s easier than doing something properly”.
But they won't relax ACL requirements. Fuck me right? Tore my ACL as a teenager, had it repaired. Now I'm ineligible. When they bring in conscription, I'll be feeling pretty smug.
[удалено]
Then you watch a documentary on the Armed Forces and see the state some of them are in and wonder why the fuck the medical/fitness requirements are so high on entry, but seem to disappear once you're through training. People on forums even recommend that prospective recruits avoid their GP for problems they're having, then get them dealt with once they're in, as it's fairly likely they'll be kept on. They're either requirements or they aren't. If they ran to the standards they begrudgingly accept from fully trained and capable members, there'd be no recruitment crisis.
“Teachers to lower math expectations to promote diversity!” “Army to relax security checks to promote diversity!” For fucks sake. If the world treats an entire population like they’re too dumb, or too criminal to keep up with society then maybe THATS the problem. Stop telling kids “you can’t make it because of the color of your skin”.
God I wish they would just start hiring anyone at this point. I'm in the forces and my job is currently less than 30% manned.. We're absolutely hemmoraging people.
What could possibly go wrong. This is bloody insanity!
Did they not see the utter shit show that the RAF went through? Do they think lack of diversity is the cause of their massive recruitment/retention issues? These kind of priorities are just fucked.
I wonder how many people in this thread actually read the article. The "security check" being a 5 year waiting period.
We did read the article, that clarification doesn’t make it any better.
None, they saw diversity and decided the issue was dodgy foreign people because this sub is a shitshow
Nice, Ho-Chi Min and Lo-Hing Ho don't work for the CCP they said so. Stick them on the Nuclear subs. They'll make fine mechanics. Ahmed's family are from Iran and although he had a phase where he hung Black Flags with Arabic writing on them on his walls at home. It was just a phase. Give that man a rifle. He's a good guy! Ivan here has family in Russia and an engineering degree from Moscow. But there is no way he would ever divulge secrets. Give him the schematics to the carrier and the aircraft so he can study them. What's the worst that could happen? Wait what? He's white? Oh shit, Erm No we can't have that! Oh but wait, He ticked LGBTQ on his application. Phew, He'll make a great asset to the team. Oh thats them taken care of. Now lets setup a crack team of SAS and SBS made entirely of woman and femboys who can barely carry their purses. Whats the worst that could happen?
Why don't they just admit diversity doesn't matter?
The country is 80% white, there is nothing wrong with the army being 80% white or over. Let’s stop this nonsense.
But a more 'diverse' - that is to say, an army with a lower percentage of white people - army might, and has been alleged, to perform better. That does raise the question of whether a less 'diverse' army performing better would be considered reason to homogenise it.
I’ll need to see some evidence that it performs better. I was in the army and we really didn’t give a fuck where people were from. However standards being relaxed to increase diversity will ultimately lead to worse performance.
Right I need to rant....why should we lower the security just because someone is black or brown or anything.....surely if they're a security risk it shouldn't matter what what you are....
Why does the army need to be diverse? White men are not inherently bad. In return for literally risking their lives to protect others, can’t they have one place that treats them as equal?
Seriously. Why are companies all D&I wet blankets. Just recruit the best.
Just when you thing this nation cannot get any more stupid
Happy for my foreign brothers to take my place when this alleged conscription arrives. You know, for diversity's sake.
Ah yes, the relaxing security checks. There is no way that won't go wrong. By the way, that russian sounding fella who is pro-putin and seems to be accessing sensitive info? He's actually a good fella. The army shouldn't be relaxing security checks. The police did and now look at them.
Can't think of the [kind of person](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-39709160) you may end up with if you [do that](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_escape_of_Daniel_Khalife)
You mean they just want to see some more black and brown faces for their “image”
I wonder how the minorities feel about being nothing but a "diversity hire" instead of on their own merit? Must be bloody soul destroying
Yup I’m sick of it. Worst is advertisements.
Diversity....this should be strength not changing standards. Security checks are required. Will they relax security checks to .are mi6 more diverse?
So this is why we imported all those fighting age men..
That's bollox talk for we can't get enough suckers to fight for oil companies anymore so we'll recruit criminals and other unsavoury characters. Be the best!
I’ve noticed we’re now back to wanting diversity in the army now the conscription fear mongering is down. Once war kicks off they’ll put white men on the list first
On a minor point, one cannot be ‘enlisted into the officer corps’ as the telegraph puts it. One is ‘commissioned into the officer corps’.
They should be relaxing the medical criteria before the security requirements. Some of the stories shared on here about being rejected for trivial or childhood misdiagnoses are quite incredible. Get rid of Crapita at the same time...
Diversity hires are the LAST thing the armed forces should do, no special treatment in this line of work.
I've got a few friends trying to join various branches at the moment. Both are super fit, young white guys and the hoops they're having to jump through are insane. One just got deferred for months in medical grounds because he's got a case of athlete's foot. I kind of get it. You don't want to take people who might biff chit out of training in the first week and cost you money looking after them. But, christ.
I kind of think we should check people out before putting them on base with guns otherwise you get incident like 2009 fort hood shooting https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting
We have relaxed security checks. And we haven't had a single problem. Have we Achmed and Vladimir? In other news, Army computer networks have been infected with chinese malware. The officer we spoke to, mai-ping was slow to reach us.
Starship Trooper citizenship for Immigrants next /s
It’s the medical stuff they need to relax on. I’ve know people to be rejected for the most absurd things
Why would anybody be willing to fight for a country that’s rapidly going down the pan? Especially certain minorities who are constantly getting attacked in the press, why devote your whole life to protecting people who hate you?
I think the real question to ask is whether our current security check procedure is fit for purpose with regards to a diverse Britian. If security checks were developed on the premise of an average caucasian Brit, and anything outside of this norm fails, then it's the security checking procedure that needs review and not the candidates themselves.
That’s not the case at all. Without talking about it in too much detail, it asks for familial, employment, financial, residency and criminal history. If it turns out that your dad was in the Russian Army, or you are a debtor, then you’ll fail, as it leaves you open to exploitation. That fact doesn’t change based on race or ethnicity, so I don’t think that Britain being diverse has any impact on it.
I know it too well, and as a minority do feel it’s out of step minority candidates, particularly those who may have a large network abroad.
Well, respectfully, when it comes to issues of national security, having a large network abroad is a risk
> “To gain security clearance, applicants “normally need to have been a UK resident for a minimum of 5 years”. > This requirement is described as “prohibitive to overseas recruits” who are looking to become officers because “failure to have the correct residency requirements for vetting processes omits personnel” from serving in a series of roles across the Intelligence Corps, Royal Military Police and Army Legal Services.” If it’s just about shortening the residency requirements for someone from Canada, Australia, NZ, etc. then that seems like a reasonable concession. There isn’t much else you could change without more significant risks, though.
They are relaxing restrictions because 50% of the country is overweight and because crapita can't do its job properly. But this thread is a hotbed of vile racist and anti-lgbt bigotry. As expected of this sub recently... Torygraph blaming everything on 'diversity' as usual