Yes sir. No sir. Three bags full sir.

   The fervour of scepticism. The righteousness of some, and there will always be someone who feels strongly about any subject, to voice their opinions. It all flows out as a stream of "the continuous subjective" aired each day. The rights and the wrongs, the good and the bad all have their advocates.

Today it's Army recruitment and the age a young person should be before being asked to bare arms for Queen and Country.
The Army are currently recruiting 16 year olds. Part of the deal is that the recruit is trained and educated for a period of at least 2 years and can not be sent into a combat zone until they reach 18. There are also two streams, the infantry trained to fight and the technical logistical back up.
The opponent to entry at 16 was from a woman who's organisation states that at 16 they are not mature enough to enter a strict disciplinary organisation and that emotional  harm is done to them.
The recruiting soldier says that it's the making of these largely young men and that the benefits of the training and camaraderie far outweigh the disadvantages.
He also highlighted the scandalous fact that often when a recruit is brought in at 16 it is found that the educational attainment of the new recruit is of an eleven year old.
After twelve months of living in an environment where discipline is made an important constituent of the recruits life, they are able to sit the GCSE exams of a 16 year old.
It's a remarkably damming comment on the normal traditional method of educating our kids at a normal school that  within one year, young people can be turned around to fit an educational profile.
Perhaps it's an argument for compulsory service to be reintroduced, taking the kids out of the hands of the educational libertarians to give them all a quick dose of "yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir".