I have pondered on the idea of what to do with homeless people; they benefit neither me nor you, so why should we put up with them? Due to recent events, one idea has come to the fore: With Saddam Hussein’s army pushing our troops back further to Kuwait, it is clear we need a stronger force. It is true that we can utilize one of the many powerful weapons in our arsenal, such as the nuclear bomb, yet the civilian and biological affects of this are not worth it. It is clear; we should increase the size of our infantry. And it is fortunate we have this surplus of people lying around, literally.
Experts tell us that tourists who see these homeless people lying around our capital our demoralized and therefore reduce the amount they spend. Is it therefore fair to say the homeless are lowering the amount of taxpayer’s profits? And why should the taxpayer feel sorry for these people? Does it actually look like they are doing anything to change the situation they have often put themselves in? In a recent survey around Glasgow, it appeared 70% of homeless people studied had run away from home due to family troubles. My friends, this is more than 2/3 of the sample! I therefore state my solution, which has advantage both ways. It is clear; we should increase the size of our infantry. Our advisors in the Golf tell me that an increase of approximately 50,000 troops would adequately push the Iraqi forces back to Baghdad.
The scheme to add the homeless people to the army has many advantages. If the current state of homeless people is around 125,000 in the whole of Great Britain, I have estimated it will cost approximately £205.00 each to add these people to the army. This includes a dose of drugs in a sandwich given to the homeless, in order for them to pass out, which will make it easier to transport them back to an infantry camp for very basic training, mainly distinguishing the enemy. The State will then train these soldiers, and if any are impossible to train (for reasons including old age, etc) then they may be used as target practice. The remaining budget will be left for purchase of an SA80 assault rifle. This totals £25,625,000 which I am sure you will agree is an amazing price to pay to double our army. You may wonder at the idea of a salary for these men or women. But I ask you, is it right for them to have not paid for the services they received in their home country, and then ask for us to pay this amount out? Of course it is not fair. Therefore, I propose that it is not in our intention to provide these new soldiers with a wage, but rather make them fight for the huge backlog of taxes they have not paid. I grant that the homeless probably will not conform to the high standards that the world expects of our armed forces, and therefore we intend not to spend any more money than we have too. We will therefore create a new division for these men, known as the “Angry Mob”. The sole intension of this group is to be deployed into the country, transported to an area of enemy activity, and then be released. We will train them to run around, shooting enemy positions etc. Enemy positions, how to locate them and how to identify the enemy will be included in the training. I believe it is unimportant to train them in tactical moves and why should we spend anymore money?
So, why should my proposal be taken into action? Firstly, it will greatly reduce the number of homeless people found in our streets. It will mean that we can give better services back to the taxpayer, and they will therefore agree with my plan.
Secondly, when we win the war, we can create a law to make it illegal to be homeless because we will have demonstrated the plan works. Anyone who is homeless will be taken to the nearest military barracks.
Thirdly, this increase would be a great advantage to the officers in our barracks who must train these men. Because it is not worth including the old in our army, we can use them as target practice, and there is nothing better than practising on a live target.
Fourthly, it will make further operations in our army quicker and therefore less costly. We can use members of the Angry Mob division to be bait. For example, we send them into a fierce city battle, to be shot at by the snipers. Our “proper army” will then compromise enemy cover, giving us a huge advantage over any enemy stealth movements. And what if our mine detectors run out of batteries in the desert? Why, it’s simple enough just to tell the Angry Mob division to walk about 100 yards in front of the main army!
We have seen that more means better, from the Chinese army. They are over one million men strong, and do any western countries dare attack them? I think not. Russia, another example of a strong army. Did we dare strike them first during the Cold War? No. And even the Russian’s had weak divisions, sometimes two people to one rifle. What other methods do they use to scare us?
And more, what other methods could be used to solve the homeless situation? To simply pay the homeless is not good enough, as already discussed. Do we really want to overcrowd our already bursting prison – do they even deserve the roof it would put over their heads? Waste our time executing them? Too much paperwork and what to do with the dead bodies? Cremation possibly, but Britain doesn’t need the smell of the rotting (Although I’m sure we can find space in Wales).
You can see ladies and gentlemen, my method has many advantages over any current or other proposed methods. I would like to thank you for listening to my speech; I hope that we can swiftly resolve the problem of the homeless.
