Why does Europe return the call to the army

58
For at least the last three decades, the decisive trend in the recruitment of armed forces in most European countries has been their translation into a voluntary (contractual) principle of recruitment. Mandatory conscription was considered at the suggestion of left-liberal forces as something archaic, violating human rights and freedoms. Domestic opponents of compulsory military conscription were guided by the example of Western Europe.

Now everything is changing rapidly. For example, in Germany, the ruling party Christian Democratic Union (CDU) began to discuss the possibility of the return of the mandatory conscription to military service. Recall that the call to the Bundeswehr ceased seven years ago, in the year 2011. Then the abolition of the call, as it seemed, kept pace with the times, but then the attitude of the German authorities to this issue changed. In the CDU, they talk not only about the return of the compulsory draft, but also about the possibility of introducing a so-called “Universal compulsory national service” for all German men and women who have reached the age of 18. Of course, it’s still premature to talk about the introduction of such a service, but the members of the CDU are determined and, given that this is still the ruling party, they may well achieve their goal.



Initially, the country in which there was no military call was Great Britain. Even in the USA right up to the 1960. the army was recruited by conscription. This circumstance contributed to the emergence of the mass youth anti-war movement during the Vietnam War. Voyuy in Vietnam, some contractors, the American youth would pay much less attention to the hostilities in the distant Indochina. Ultimately, in 1973, the US Army moved completely to a contract basis. Today it is the largest army in the world, which is recruited exclusively by hiring volunteers. The Chinese and Russian armies are recruited by compulsory conscription for military service, although in the PRC the military department has, due to the enormous mobilization resources of the country, the ability to select only the best draftees from among men of military age.



In 2000 - 2010 - s. Europe has experienced a real epidemic of converting the armed forces to a contract basis. Thus, in 2006, compulsory military service was canceled in Macedonia and Montenegro. However, these small states have very few armed forces, so the prestige of military service against the background of high unemployment and a small number of vacancies for private and non-commissioned officers will always be guaranteed high.

In the same year 2006, military service was abolished by Romania, which is a large country by Eastern European standards. For almost the entire stories The twentieth century, the Romanian armed forces were manned by conscription, but now they decided to abandon this principle, since the mobilization resources of the country are decent and the size of the army is low. From 2006 to 2008 Bulgaria also canceled the military draft service, and here the cancellation of the draft took place in stages - first on navy, then in the air force and ground forces. In 2010, military service in the Polish Army, one of the largest armies in Eastern Europe, was stopped. For twenty-five years, the size of the Polish army decreased by five times, so the need for a large number of draftees also decreased.

Among the most prosperous states of Europe one of the last military conscription was canceled in Sweden. This country decided to abandon the draft army in 2010, although until recently the Swedes diligently adhered to the concept of “armed people” when they were neutral - all Swedish men served in the army, and military training was considered a must. During the Cold War, service in the Swedish army passed to 85% of men in the country. However, then the number of armed forces began to be reduced, citing this, including the fact that since the beginning of the 19th century, Sweden had not participated in any war. Obviously, the transition to a contract army in 2010 was associated with minimizing foreign policy risks.

Why does Europe return the call to the army


But very soon the Swedish government understood the meaning of its mistake. In a country with a high standard of living of the population, there were not many who wanted to take up military service under a contract. Why should a young Swede go to the army, exhausting themselves with workouts and difficult (even in Sweden) conditions of service, if you can be much freer and you can earn more. There was a question about the preparation of a mobilization reserve in case of possible hostilities. Indeed, in 2016, the desire to join the military as volunteers in Sweden expressed the entire 2 thousands of people.

In 2014, when relations between the West and Russia began to deteriorate, in Sweden they again returned to the tested anti-Russian rhetoric. Although the last two centuries, the Swedes have not fought with anyone, they continue to consider Russia to be a terrible opponent, threatening the national security of the Swedish state. In 2015, Swedish Defense Minister Peter Hultqvist called for an increase in defense spending by 11%. At the same time, he openly stated that this increase is a necessary measure against the growing Russian threat. The role played by the Swedish media, which for the most part are sharply anti-Russian. Since in the information society, it is the media that determine the mood of society, the results of a sociological survey regarding the possibility of returning a military conscription turned out to be very predictable - more than 70% of Swedes spoke out to return the call to the army.

Eventually, the military conscription to the Swedish army was returned. Although the base of the combat units is still constituted by contract soldiers, in 2018, about 4 thousand young men and women were called up for military service. The call-up of women for military service today is carried out not only in Sweden. At one time, the only country in the “western” bloc where girls were called up for military service was Israel. Women conscripts were a kind of IDF business card. In addition to Israel, women served in the armies of the DPRK, Libya, Benin, and several other African states, but no one expected them from them. In modern Europe, if we are constantly talking about gender equality, women have also been called up for military service. In addition to Sweden, conscripts appeared in neighboring Norway.



Unlike Sweden, Norway is a member of NATO. This country has also long been very negatively disposed towards Russia, being the key outpost of the North Atlantic Alliance in the northeast, in close proximity to the Russian border and the strategically important facilities of the Murmansk region.

The law on the recruitment of women for military service was adopted in October 2014. According to the law, women aged from 19 to 44 years are eligible for conscription. It should be remembered that for the Scandinavian countries, the army is not only a purely military, but also a very important social institution. It is through conscription service in the army in the Scandinavian countries that, firstly, social convergence of representatives of various segments of the population — from the upper class to the lower classes — is ensured, secondly, the equality of men and women is affirmed, and thirdly, they are integrated into Swedish, Norwegian or Finnish societies are young people from already very large migrant families who receive local citizenship.



Finally, in the Scandinavian armies there are good opportunities and in order to earn some good money - conscripts receive quite high wages, and in order to master some kind of new specialty that is in demand “in the civilian world” - various kinds of activities operate in the armies of Sweden, Norway, Finland. professional courses to help master the knowledge and skills in demand. Yesterday’s high school graduates return a year later from military service with good pay-up money, or even with a certificate or certificate of a new profession.

In 2008, the call for military service in Lithuania was canceled. The Lithuanian Armed Forces, also referred to as the Lithuanian Army (by analogy with the Polish Army), have a very small number — just over 10 thousand troops. However, in Lithuania for eighteen post-Soviet years, military conscription continued. In 2009, the last military personnel serving in the conscription service were demobilized; however, only six years later, in 2015, the military conscription in the Lithuanian army was restored. The government of the country has directly explained such changes by the need to increase the country's defense against the “Russian threat”.

The shortage of recruits was also encountered in far larger countries than Lithuania or Sweden, the countries of Europe. In Germany, for example, almost 83 million people live, but this country, after the abolition of military conscription, began to experience big problems with the shortage of contract service soldiers. It is prestigious to get a contract in the army in Guatemala or Kenya, Nepal or Angola. In rich European countries, young people are completely unattractive to military service, even if the state is willing to pay for it generously and promises all sorts of benefits. The only ones who readily go to serve in the army are immigrants from migrants from Asian, Latin American and African countries whose families have a low standard of living, and the prestigious white-collar work in the civilian segment of the economy does not shine for them.



The scale of the problem is best indicated by the scant figures of statistics. After 2011 ceased to call recruits in the Bundeswehr, the number of young German men and women who want to devote themselves to military service, decreased with each passing year. So, in the first half of 2017, only 10 of thousands of men and women decided to enter military service and enter into a contract. This is 15% less than in the 2016 year. At the same time, the conclusion of a contract does not mean that the young man or girl will remain in the army. More than a quarter of young soldiers break contracts after a probationary period, when it turns out that the army is still a little different from what they imagined.

Now many German politicians are actively working on the introduction of the so-called. "Universal national service". Approximately the same is said in France. The essence of this concept is, firstly, to return to the call of young people of both sexes for 12 months, and secondly, to provide an opportunity to choose between serving in the army, in supporting army structures, where it is not necessary to wear a uniform and weaponas well as in civilian institutions. It turns out that any young person, regardless of gender, nationality or social origin, must give his civic duty to the state. You don't have the strength and health to serve in the army, you don't want to wear a uniform by conviction or for some other reasons - please, but welcome to a social institution, to the hospital, to the fire brigade, only to benefit society.

Such a service will provide European countries with young workers, and will also slightly reduce the growing unemployment rate. After all, one of the young people will be able to easily adapt to military service, look at the promised salaries, benefits, and decide to remain in the armed forces in the future.



French politicians, speaking about the need for the state of military service on conscription, are guided by another important consideration. Now the population of European countries is becoming increasingly variegated in ethnic and confessional relations. If before the French or Germans already had a French or German identity, now in France and in Germany there are a huge number of visitors from the countries of the Near and Middle East, Africa, and South Asia. There are a lot of young people among the migrants, but because of the peculiarities of their social status, they, as it were, drop out of society.

Traditional institutions of socialization, like the secondary school, do not cope with the task of transmitting to the masses of migrant youth German or French identity. But compulsory military conscription service can perfectly cope with this task, during which a German and Algerian, French and Eritrean, Swede and Pakistani can be in one unit. In the army, the assimilation of civilian identity will occur more efficiently and quickly than “civilian”. European politicians are sure of this, and the future will show how it really will be.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

58 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    16 September 2018 05: 48
    Whatever life seems raspberry. And then a European paradise, a European paradise! The contract army can win in a local conflict, in a big war, never. This has been said more than once. Everything new, it’s well forgotten old.
  2. +2
    16 September 2018 06: 08
    More money for NATO pours out in an increase in the number of conscripts. How firms take a person for a probationary period with a lower salary, and after him they dismiss and take new ones. Saving
    1. 0
      18 September 2018 09: 54
      Quote: Ales
      How firms take a person for a probationary period with a lower salary, and after him they dismiss and take new ones. Saving


      in such firms there are no experienced workers.
      would you like to have such an army?
  3. 0
    16 September 2018 06: 15
    compulsory military service on conscription can perfectly cope with such a task, during which a German and Algerian, a Frenchman and an Eritrean, a Swede and a Pakistani can be in one unit.

    In a real combat situation and against a serious enemy, such an "army" will not be worth a dime.
    1. +2
      16 September 2018 20: 34
      What can you say, it cannot be ?!
      In the army of the Red Army, as it were, there were more nationalities, and nothing, they kicked Euro-Reich's ass in the 45th.
      1. +1
        16 September 2018 20: 41
        Quote: trahterist
        In the army of the Red Army, as it were, more nationalities were

        Nationalities in the Red Army are noticeable less was than the enemy. As you know (or do not know), we fought not only with the Germans, but also with their allies, who sent their contingents to the Eastern Front.
        And we are not talking about parts of waffen SS where anyone was, from the Dutch and French to Ukrainians and Belarusians.
        1. +1
          17 September 2018 05: 03
          on the Eastern Front, on the side of the USSR, in addition to many dozens of titular nationalities of the country's inhabitants (from Udmurts to Yakuts, from Buryats to Evens, from Belarusians to Tajiks, etc.), representatives and a lot of other peoples fought, from Poles and Czechs to French and Spanish .
          1. +3
            17 September 2018 22: 06
            All of them were united by ideology, and on both sides. Russia still has its remnants - the example of the "Immortal Regiment". What does the EU have? 6-color rainbow ideology?
  4. +8
    16 September 2018 07: 03
    If tomorrow is war. If the hike is tomorrow. Be ready for the trip today soldier
    Attracting youth to military affairs and having a trained reserve is normal for any country.
  5. +5
    16 September 2018 07: 33
    All in one pile.

    About Germany. This is probably about it.
    https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article180555822/CDU-Politiker-wollen-Wehrpflicht-wieder-einfuehren.html
    What is important to understand
    1. Absolutely everything that the deputies of the legislative assemblies say, performs exactly one function: the population will like it. The ranks of the CDU decided to throw the topic of dida war, suddenly a ride. Hardly a ride, but why not.
    2. The withdrawal from the draft was not made at all by leftists, but by the most militarists. Accordingly, the return of the call is a 100% pacifist, socialist measure, because
    a) it is possible to plant youth for a year allowance by removing it from the labor market
    b) you can get rid of the Americans with their 2% of GDP for defense by issuing unemployment benefits for military expenses
    c) those 1,3% of German GDP that is spent on defense now, again go to unemployment benefits, because the sense from them is still zero (except, oddly enough, German intelligence).
    d) the draft army will make its use, already dubious, politically unacceptable. The voter will not allow sending our boys, and especially girls, to cannon fodder to some savages, be it Syria, Donbass, whatever. But soldiers, with several months of service, are nothing but meat.

    The draft army makes sense for those, and only for those states for which national mobilization is possible in front of a numerically superior enemy. In the countries of the wider West - these are Israel, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Switzerland (the latter - by tradition). It is customary to serve in such countries for at least two years and regularly undergo training. It is very important that both conscripts and society are well aware of why they and their country need this. If your home is dear to you, that’s all.
    The remaining countries have exclusively expeditionary forces. An expeditionary soldier should be a mercenary, and even better, a private mercenary. Firstly, it’s more convenient for the voter, and secondly, the complexity and cost of modern databases impose requirements on any infantryman, which did not always be presented to pilots for pilots. Without at least a 4-year contract, it’s not worth taking
    1. +3
      16 September 2018 09: 55
      In general, I agree with your theses, but I will not bother with trifles and argue. But I think that the emerging return to the call is also due to the feeling of approaching some kind of cruel kneading. And because of this, many countries (no, not that way — rather a collective West) are trying to create a supply of mobresource prepared at least at the basic level.
      1. 0
        16 September 2018 11: 46
        Quote: KVU-NSVD
        the feeling of approaching some kind of cruel kneading

        If you read not my theses, but the article in Welt, then make sure that there is no feeling there and close, one cheap left populism. There would have been at least some concern - the German Defense Ministry, W. von der Läyen, would have come to the house tomorrow, and, say, the Rosneft Schroeder presdovier, by the end of the week.
    2. +1
      16 September 2018 20: 35
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      Absolutely everything that the deputies of the legislative assemblies say, performs exactly one function: the population will like it. The ranks of the CDU decided to throw the topic of dida war, suddenly a ride.

      You do not find a fierce contradiction in this statement? For the sake of rating, does a political party suggest ... returning to universal military duty? How is this possible? Is there a line in the Bundeswehr in Germany? Does everyone want to serve without exception? Of course, I understand very little about the German mentality, but ...
      1. +1
        16 September 2018 21: 29
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        You do not find a fierce contradiction in this statement?




        There is no contradiction. You just need to know the details of the political struggle. Lately, the wind of populism and sovranism has been blowing over Europe lately. And this is a half-hearted idle talk, aimed at the far right sector of the electorate ... just idle talk by the way)
      2. -1
        16 September 2018 21: 56
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        You do not find a fierce contradiction in this statement?

        No, not really. CDU speaks with his constituent. Women rule the world in their forties. And not a fig is Maya Plesetskaya, but, unfortunately, Larisa Guzeeva. CDU youth is not too interested - and mutually.
        1. 0
          16 September 2018 22: 18
          The defense ministries of all countries where the right-wingers raised this topic (Germany, Italy, France), all spoke unequivocally. Definitely No.
        2. 0
          16 September 2018 22: 33
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          not Maya Plesetskaya

          I apologize. Maya Mikhailovna Plisetskaya.
  6. -2
    16 September 2018 07: 34
    The Swedes remember 1809, when the Russian army, crossing the ice of the Gulf of Bothnia, was almost at the walls of Stockholm!
    1. +2
      16 September 2018 18: 16
      Yeah, and before that, in the previous war in 1790, they were able to wash us well with blood in the Second Battle of Rochensalm. So let’s do it without hatred - it is too expensive.
  7. +1
    16 September 2018 07: 38
    Haha, in order to appeal to Europites, an argument is needed, but what kind? Tolerance is possible for EuroPites, even women can be raped by refugees, and there will be nothing for them.
  8. +2
    16 September 2018 08: 13
    But it will be possible to push a lot of young emigrant guys into the army. They will not be sorry if they die in conflicts
  9. 0
    16 September 2018 08: 56
    In the light of the development of modern military equipment, conscripts simply will not be able to become a full-fledged combat unit due to the inability to control this equipment. I mean not only the most modern models of tanks, artillery systems, air defense systems, electronic warfare systems, etc. But even new items in motorized rifle units require a long time for acquaintance and development. These are drones, and modern means of communication and orientation on the ground, to say nothing, even mastering a computer for communication requires a certain amount of time.
    1. +2
      16 September 2018 12: 26
      So, you need to return military training to school. So that all this dregs like walking in a system, painting curbs and cleaning the toilets with a toothbrush, the conscript has already learned. And to call for 3 years and all this time is only enhanced combat training, constant work with equipment. An alternative civil service must be done for 5 years and without bonuses, so that more people go to the army.
      Quote: Ros 56
      even mastering a computer for communication takes some time

      Not for those who have been sitting in gadgets since childhood.
      1. 0
        17 September 2018 11: 34
        Quote: Narak-zempo
        And to call for 3 years and all this time is only enhanced combat training, constant work with equipment. An alternative civil service must be done for 5 years and without bonuses, so that more people go to the army.

        And will Narak-zempo feed and dress these loafers at his own expense? Then I agree. Universal appeal is primarily a strong blow to the economy. Especially in developed countries, where families with three children have long been no longer the norm, but something unattainable.
        1. +1
          10 October 2018 14: 50
          Quote: brn521
          And will Narak-zempo feed and dress these loafers at his own expense?

          We feed all top managers at our own expense, we also unfasten the money, as it were, for our pensions, to which the majority will not live and all that. With a fairer distribution, enough for a million "idlers".
    2. +1
      16 September 2018 18: 28
      Quote: Ros 56
      in light of the development of modern military equipment, conscripts simply cannot become a full-fledged military unit due to the inability to control this equipment.

      In principle, you are right, but there are several nuances:
      1. A professional army in a collision with an equal or stronger opponent quickly loses combat effectiveness.
      2. Even poorly armed, but well-motivated irregular illegal armed groups, the militia or the militia in the city are able to maintain their positions (Syria, Donbass, militia units in repelling an attack by militants in Dagestan).
      3. We must not forget the fact that the army needs ordinary and numerous infantry. The Air Force, artillery, and armored combat vehicles are capable of breaking almost any resistance, but they are not able to occupy and clean up the city or hold the territory without infantry support.
      4. We must not forget the social significance of military service: a conscript is a full-fledged citizen, not a parasite. Now a lot of conscripts remain to serve as contract soldiers or enter the sovereign service (the benefit is now a ban on filling civil service positions in law enforcement bodies by persons who have not served in the army). Unfortunately, in Russia, a conscript does not receive a civilian profession based on the results of military service (except perhaps a driver), and here, as in the case of equalizing representatives of different classes and raising a patriotic attitude to the motherland, one needs to work and work.
      1. 0
        17 September 2018 13: 28
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        A professional army, when confronted with an equal or stronger opponent, quickly loses combat effectiveness.

        So that's the point. There is no one stronger than NATO. Why do they need conscripts? Feel that NATO will end soon?
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        Even a poorly armed, but well-motivated irregular illegal armed group, militia or militia in the conditions of the city is able to maintain their positions (Syria, Donbass, militia units in repelling an attack by militants in Dagestan).

        This is in the event of a conflict of rogue with the same rogue. Will the developed countries ever descend to the level of Syria and Donbass? And we will multiply this business by the level of modern technology and knowledge. The same bacteriological weapons are now potentially much more effective than nuclear weapons. The parameters of the strains back in the 80s were adjusted almost by the movement of the sliders on the monitor. And this business will cost in comparison with the general appeal literally in a penny.
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        We must not forget the fact that the army needs ordinary and numerous infantry.

        Only on condition that this infantry is coordinated and provided with everything. This is possible in modern conditions only during a sluggish war. Those. again, when some rogue butts among themselves. In the event of a serious conflict, coordination and procurement will be ensured in the first place. Those. we will invest in our reserve, say, we will have trained shooters who have lived and trained for at least a year on government support, burned cartridges and machine guns instead of learning or working. But in the case of large n they will not receive any weapons, or ammunition, or a clear command. And they will need drill training only when they are being held in some Chinese concentration camp, where they drown vigorously and with songs, because there they promise to finally feed them.
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        We must not forget the social significance of military service: a conscript is a full-fledged citizen, not a parasite.

        A very unreliable topic. In the USSR, there were millions of these same citizens who had undergone military service. What's the point? They brought up a huge number of pragmatists who have their own skin closer to the body. And do not care, who have a hut with the edge, away from the authorities. And there’s no escape from this, this is the specifics of the army.
        1. 0
          17 September 2018 18: 45
          Quote: brn521
          There is no one stronger than NATO.

          China is looking at you with a smile. :)

          Quote: brn521
          conflict rogue with the same rogue. Will the developed countries ever descend to the level of Syria and Donbass

          The controversial statement - the conflicts between Pakistan and India, the Arab-Israeli wars and almost all the conflicts of the second half of the twentieth century indicate the opposite.
    3. 0
      9 December 2018 15: 46
      Tell us, how often do generations of equipment change in the troops? And so, so that it’s completely fundamentally different from the previous one? Well, I served on the R-330B. Well then there were fees. Now BM with computers instead of blocks. So what? Is something fundamentally changing? For those who have mastered the previous generation with a bang - two weeks is enough to master a new one. Not to automatism, but you can work. And work well. And a year of urgency for teaching principles is enough. And where everything is more complicated, there were no conscripts and there will not be any spawners.
  10. -2
    16 September 2018 09: 44
    Take an example from the Strongest Army in Europe.
    But once upon a time:
    President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych signed a decree on the latest draft and the transition to the formation of the Armed Forces on a contract basis.

    He stated this during a meeting with women - Heroes of Ukraine, the press service of the President of Ukraine said.
    "I signed a decree this morning. There will be no more conscription. Everything is written there, how the conscripts will be released into the reserve, and the last will go this year, and we will not call any more," Yanukovych said, noting that the recruitment for urgent service will remain only in the internal troops.
  11. BAI
    +1
    16 September 2018 10: 55
    Why does Europe return the call to the army

    And how else to shove migrants into the army?
    1. -1
      16 September 2018 11: 42
      Quote: BAI
      how else to shove migrants into the army?

      We read "gurkhi" and "foreign legion".
    2. -1
      16 September 2018 12: 42
      Quote: BAI
      And how else to shove migrants into the army?

      Well yes. If you put the black-throated into the European armies, it will be something like the one in the photo here:
      https://www.stav.kp.ru/daily/26061/2970713/
      1. -4
        16 September 2018 12: 54
        The foreign legion is perhaps the most useful part of the French army. Including because they are not afraid to use it.
        1. +1
          16 September 2018 18: 29
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Foreign Legion

          But, fortunately, only France has it :)
          1. 0
            16 September 2018 19: 12
            France and Britain. Americans distribute similar functions between PMCs, the CIA and local. RF - between PMCs and some kind of muddy people on vacation. Germany also had parts from non-citizens at one time, but there was a stylistic problem that made it difficult to restore such a practice.

            Since only Aryans could serve in the Wehrmacht, the non-Aryan units were organizationally part of the office under the name Schutzstaffel. Better known as SS.
            1. 0
              16 September 2018 19: 25
              And who is Britain now?
              The Wehrmacht has sunk into oblivion.

              By the way, I read relatively recently that the French were the first to come up with "vacationers" in the 17th century.
              1. -1
                16 September 2018 20: 32
                Quote: Blackgrifon
                And who is Britain now?

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurkha
                Quote: Blackgrifon
                By the way, I read relatively recently that the French were the first to come up with "vacationers" in the 17th century.

                Who just doesn’t.
                1. 0
                  16 September 2018 21: 12
                  Aren't Gurks equal to the all-citizens of Britain? I mean, the losses among them go to the local Ministry of Defense, and not as the losses of hired personnel.
            2. 0
              10 October 2018 14: 57
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              non-Aryan units were part of an office under the name Schutzstaffel. Better known as SS.

              SS - the most purebred Aryans, "new nobles", for non-Aryans there were so-called. Waffen SS
  12. 0
    16 September 2018 12: 45
    Everyone is preoccupied with the call, i.e. how to get more cannon fodder (this is in our demographic situation). Instead of preoccupying with how to prepare competent reservists. With the help of a universal national service at least.
  13. +3
    16 September 2018 18: 32
    No matter how much you say "halva, halva", but your mouth will not become sweeter. In Russia, you cannot stand on some contract soldiers, they are not eternal. A big "batch" will go there, most of them will quickly grow. And the call for at least 2 years is a chance to train military affairs. But only practically do more. Yes, and the technique needs to be adapted for training at the call of the guys. Yes, and at school they must teach the basics, as it was in the USSR. Otherwise, we will partisan in the rear of Nata. Nato has long announced Russia.
    1. -4
      16 September 2018 19: 20
      Quote: serzh sibiryak
      as it used to be in the USSR

      1. The USSR did not help.
      2. This army showed what it was worth in the 94th in Chechnya.
      Quote: serzh sibiryak
      Nato has long announced its trip to Russia.

      In the coffin, NATO saw a campaign against Russia.
      Themselves.
      All by yourself.
      1. +4
        16 September 2018 19: 31
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        This army showed what it was worth in the 94th in Chechnya.

        Yet you are wrong. That army proved to be in Afghanistan.

        It was difficult to call what was brought into Chechnya the army, if only the army could be called a morally crushed, looted and shattered reform-reform-division-militarized structure. Moreover, even with the star that the army was in 95, the individual formations and units were more than combat-ready - the same marines and paratroopers. Yes, and the massive stamina and courage that yesterday’s boys showed in a fire bag on the forecourt of Grozny should not be forgotten.
        1. 0
          16 September 2018 20: 50
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          That army proved to be in Afghanistan.

          Do you think that the war in Afghanistan was successful?

          For starters, try to explain to yourself how it happened that in Vietnam the Americans had one killed for 6 wounded, in Afghanistan 2001-2014 they had 8,5 for the wounded, and in Afghanistan, OKSVA had one dead for 3,6 wounded , in the first Chechnya - by 2,8, in the second Chechnya - 3,4, in the Berlin offensive operation - 3,5.

          Quote: Blackgrifon
          it was hard to call an army

          The army is people. Every single officer of that war is Soviet. And on both sides.
          It was these people who were supposed to beat the very 7th American Corps and the 1st British TD, who had traveled to Iraq four years earlier.
          1. 0
            16 September 2018 21: 10
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            and 8,5 wounded, in Afghanistan, OKSVA had one dead per 3,6 wounded, in the first Chechnya - 2,8, in the second Chechnya - 3,4, in the Berlin offensive operation - 3,5

            Does the organization of the sanitary service and the lack of emphasis on medical training explain this?
            In addition, you tactfully forgot that during the period of the Afghan war the Mujahideen received support with weapons and military experts from almost all the countries allied in the US region, from the USA and China themselves. At the same time, the flow of weapons to Afghanistan after leaving OXWA almost immediately stopped.

            The fact of the matter is that the officers were of the same school, but something in Afghanistan there was not a single case and was close to how the BTG of the 81st mts regiment and the Maykop brigade were first brought without cards into the city, forbidden to occupy and clean up the houses, and then could not save.

            If everything were as simple as you say, then the big question is, why then before the collapse of the USSR did both parties (both Yankees and Russians) recognize each other for an equal and dangerous opponent in any potential conflict without the use of nuclear weapons?
            1. -1
              16 September 2018 21: 50
              Quote: Blackgrifon
              Does the organization of the sanitary service and the lack of emphasis on medical training explain this?

              AND? So how did the Soviet army prove itself?
              Quote: Blackgrifon
              You tactfully forgot that during the war the Mujahideen received support with weapons and military experts from almost all the countries allied in the US region, from the USA and China

              I did not forget, therefore, I did not give general losses. On the other hand, if every third wounded died among the Americans, the losses of OKSVA and the Coalition would be approximately equal.
              Quote: Blackgrifon
              at first they brought into the city without cards, banned occupying and cleaning residential buildings, and then they could not save.

              Colonel Savin, General Shevtsov, General Rokhlin - not Soviet officers?
              Quote: Blackgrifon
              recognized each other for an equal and dangerous opponent in any potential conflict without the use of nuclear weapons?

              What is your thesis? Jews also recognized the Syrians as an equal and dangerous enemy all the way, and so what?
              1. +1
                16 September 2018 22: 57
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                So how did the Soviet army prove itself?

                Compared to PCV? An order of magnitude better. Moreover, as the level of training in terms of providing medical care to the wounded on the battlefield has proved to be difficult to judge in the absence of sources.

                Quote: Cherry Nine
                On the other hand, if every third wounded died among the Americans, the losses of OKSVA and the Coalition would be approximately equal.

                AND? In the Vietnam campaign and in Afghanistan, where the opponents supplied their customers equally well, both powers suffered serious losses: 58 dead Americans and 220 dead Soviet soldiers. Does this mean that the American army was an order of magnitude worse than the Soviet?
                In the 2001-2014 campaign, the Americans faced not with a client of equal power, but with a semi-irregular formation, which has virtually no external supply of weapons and supplies. Which at least affects the loss of the Americans and their allies.

                Quote: Cherry Nine
                Colonel Savin, General Shevtsov, General Rokhlin - not Soviet officers

                AND? I already wrote to you that at the time of the beginning of the WWII the state of the army (psychological, logistic and organizational) was such that it was amazing how she was able to enter into this conflict, not to mention the fact that she managed to carry out combat missions.
                The same is with the officers - if you take a specialist from the familiar environment (including ideological), subject him to humiliation, make him a beggar and blameless, and then put before him a responsible task, tying him "by hand", he has nothing will not work.
                With the same success, we can discuss with you William F. Harrison, blaming him for the failure in Mogadishu, but it will be as subjective (and unfair) as the charges against the regiment. Savin and the generals Shevtsov and Rokhlin.

                Quote: Cherry Nine
                What is your thesis? Jews also recognized the Syrians as an equal and dangerous enemy all the way, and so what?

                The fact that you use statistics in isolation from the general situation. You can’t just take the numbers, compare them and draw the correct conclusion. Therefore, I can not agree with your conclusion.
                1. -2
                  16 September 2018 23: 41
                  Quote: Blackgrifon
                  Compared to PCV? An order of magnitude better.

                  Nevertheless, all four times (Vietnam, Afghanistan 1979-1989, ППВ, Afghanistan 2001-2014) ended the same way - they threw manat and dumped, saying that they had won.
                  When you say "performed better / worse" - you mean what criteria?
                  Quote: Blackgrifon
                  Does this mean that the American army was an order of magnitude worse than the Soviet?

                  This suggests that the government of Brezhnev-Kosygin turned out to be smarter than the government of Lyndon Johnson. Unfortunately, it has degraded.
                  Again. When you say "The army performed well / badly" - what do you mean?
                  Quote: Blackgrifon
                  humiliate him, make him a beggar and all censured, and then give him a responsible task, tying him "by hand"

                  Excuse me, who are you talking about? Boris Yeltsin shot generals who suffered little loss, like D.G. Pavlova?
                  Quote: Blackgrifon
                  With the same success, we can discuss with you William F. Harrison, blaming him for failing in Mogadishu

                  Mogadishu was a glorious page in the history of SOKOM and Rangers. Against a 30-fold superior enemy, at his home, without heavy weapons, they laid 50-100 snouts on each of their slain and completed the tasks of the operation.

                  There are many questions to this operation, but there is no doubt that they were very powerful.

                  By the way, returning to the topic of the article. At that time, one shot down pilot (also, by the way, a professional) was dragged around the city, after which Clinton changed his mind about carrying the burden of the whites. During the "war on terror" the losses from the side of the Coalition since 2001 have long exceeded 10 thousand, but everybody doesn't care.

                  If you want to fight, cancel the call and come up with a good, positive story.

                  Quote: Blackgrifon
                  as well as allegations against the regiment. Savin and the generals Shevtsov and Rokhlin.

                  I understood you correctly that in the story you mentioned
                  Quote: Blackgrifon
                  The BTGs of the 81st mts regiment and the Maykop brigade were first brought into the city without cards, they were forbidden to occupy and clean up houses, and then they could not save.

                  historical circumstances alone?

                  Quote: Blackgrifon
                  You can’t just take the numbers, compare them and draw the correct conclusion. Therefore, I can not agree with your conclusion.

                  So articulate yours. Only as clearly as possible.
                  1. +1
                    17 September 2018 00: 07
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    Nevertheless, all four times (Vietnam, Afghanistan 1979-1989, ППВ, Afghanistan 2001-2014) ended the same way - they threw manat and dumped, saying that they had won.
                    When you say "performed better / worse" - you mean what criteria?

                    OK. The topic is complex, and we have gone far from the main topic, but let's choose the criteria:
                    1. Losses in manpower;
                    2. Losses in technology;
                    3. Monitoring the situation (territory) at the end of the conflict;
                    4. The impact of the conflict on the army as a whole.

                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    it has degraded

                    Undoubtedly.

                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    When you say "The army performed well / badly" - what do you mean?

                    Could the army, taking into account the opportunities available, win (create the conditions for victory or go through the conflict) with acceptable losses.

                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    Mogadishu was a glorious page in the history of SOKOM and Rangers. Against a 30-fold superior enemy, at his home, without heavy weapons, they laid 50-100 snouts on each of their slain and completed the tasks of the operation.

                    Exactly done? Captured the entire leadership of the IAF? Especially when you consider that, based on its results, a decision was made to withdraw American troops from Somalia
                    And you mix personal heroism and courage of ordinary participants with problems in planning and conducting an operation. With the same success, we can safely say that the Storm of Grozny in 1995 was a victory: a smaller group, in worse strategic conditions, managed to inflict heavy losses on the IAF.
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    If you want to fight, cancel the call and come up with a good, positive story.

                    What does this have to do with it and how is this connected with our conversation? A conscript army or an army in which at least 30-40% p / d conscripts has better stability in a conflict involving high losses than a fully professional one.

                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    historical circumstances alone?

                    My opinion is yes. For there is no other explanation for the fact that less than ten years of the so-called. the same officers achieved victories with a minimum of losses. In addition, I was lucky to talk with some participants in those events, so I think that the main reason for the high losses was the general situation in the army, caused by the domestic political situation in the country.
                    1. -2
                      17 September 2018 06: 46
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      Could the army, given the opportunities available, defeat

                      You are making a common mistake. The army cannot win in principle. Just lose or not lose.
                      Politicians always win. Victory is a sustainable political decision following a military conflict. If such a decision could not be worked out - see Vietnam, Afghanistan, a lot of places.
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      but let's choose the criteria:
                      1. Losses in manpower;
                      2. Losses in technology;
                      3. Monitoring the situation (territory) at the end of the conflict;
                      4. The impact of the conflict on the army as a whole.

                      1st criterion - the Americans defeated in Magadishu. Won and evacuated.
                      2. Whoever has more equipment - he loses more. It is easy to see that in Iraq in the 91st, the Coalition lost more aircraft than Saddam.
                      3. If, at the end of the conflict, the army is forced to control the territory, the conflict is not over.
                      4. In general, I did not understand what was meant.
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      Captured the entire leadership of the IAF?

                      There was no talk about the entire leadership. About two specific clowns.
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      The assault on Grozny in 1995 was a victory: a smaller group, in worse strategic conditions, managed to inflict heavy losses on the IAF.

                      No. The balance of power and loss was radically different.
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      A conscript army or an army in which at least 30-40% p / d conscripts has better stability in a conflict involving high losses than a fully professional one.

                      Again. It is believed that Western countries are sensitive to losses l / s. Losses during the War on Terror are higher than in the PCV. In one separate Afghanistan and in one separate Iraq - higher. The political result is rather negative. But all do not care. There would be conscription armies - this would hardly be possible.
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      For there is no other explanation for the fact that less than ten years of the so-called. the same officers achieved victories with a minimum of losses.

                      You just don’t like it, this is an explanation.
                      Firstly, there have never been victories with a minimum of losses.
                      Secondly, the Soviet army showed a categorical inability and unwillingness to learn. After 10 years of a local war in the mountains and an unfriendly peacekeeper, she could not wage a local war in the mountains and an unfriendly peacekeeper.
                      Take an interest in war 080808 from this point of view. A lot of fun.
                      1. 0
                        17 September 2018 15: 51
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        There was no talk about the entire leadership. About two specific clowns.

                        As far as I remember, these "clowns" were bound hand and foot by the same notorious politics. A purely police action, only some bandit group muddies the waters, the population as a whole is peaceful, they should not offend, they should not occupy their homes, the situation should not be escalated, etc.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        The army cannot win in principle.

                        But still, the effectiveness of its work should be somehow evaluated. Politics only sums it up.
                      2. +1
                        17 September 2018 18: 38
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Just lose or not lose.

                        Controversial statement. The army will either win or lose. Victory in a war is a political achievement, and creating the conditions for this achievement is completely different.

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        1st criterion

                        It was meant that all 4 criteria should be taken in correlation.
                        Regarding the 4th criterion, this is the ability of the army to adapt to conditions under the influence of the enemy.
                        And you are wrong - the appearance of modifications of the BMP with the letter "D" and much more (from body armor and ending with the emergence of the BMPT project) is precisely the technical result of the participation of the SA in the hostilities in Afghanistan.

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        the Soviet army showed a categorical inability and unwillingness to learn. After 10 years of a local war in the mountains and an unfriendly peacekeeper, she could not wage a local war in the mountains and an unfriendly peacekeeper.
                        Take an interest in war 080808 from this point of view. A lot of fun.

                        The fact of the matter is that initially the attitude of the population towards the SA was neutral, but as the reforms were carried out (carried out by local leaders at the suggestion of party officials without regard to reality) and the development of the b / d, the attitude began to change dramatically. As for the "unwillingness to learn" - for some reason, the opinion of those who were there, as well as a lot of literature says exactly the opposite. It's okay that most of the tactical and strategic developments of the USSR used in Afghanistan were actively and successfully used by the coalition troops. Read about this.
                        I did not understand what exactly do you mean in the part of the Five-Day?

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        It is believed that Western countries are sensitive to losses l / s.

                        I'm not talking about the hypothetical "sensitivity to losses in l / s", but about the losses among specialists. The latter are far from interchangeable and their losses are very sensitive. And local wars are not an indicator here at all - if you lose 1-2 contract soldiers per month / quarter in a company, then their losses are easily compensated (hiring and training new fighters), but if you lose 1-2 people. every day ... There is a vivid example in the years of WWII, Japanese carrier-based aviation was staffed with professionals of the highest class, but the replacement of losses was at the pre-war level. As a result, as the veterans dropped out (and the latter happened as the scale of the war at sea grew), the Japanese carrier-based aircraft degraded more and more.

                        I understand that we will not come to a consensus, thanks for the interesting conversation, but I propose to complete it.
        2. -1
          17 September 2018 14: 14
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          That army proved to be in Afghanistan.

          Well, yes, I remember, I was very petty then. Conscripts discussing how to safely break their arm or leg so as not to volunteer in Afghanistan. The psychos who returned from there, who needed nothing to fill the face of a random passerby. Drug addicts. Drunken disabled people. And most importantly, future recruits have a clear understanding that the soldier is meat, and not part of something great and fair. And if he does not take care of himself, no one will take care of him. These are at first yard rumors and specific examples. The media began to inflate this matter only later. I note that the authorities seemed to be quite loyal to the Afghans, arranged for or redeployed to work of their choice, sent to universities out of competition, dismissed from civil and criminal cases. But it's more like a dead poultice. When I entered the university, there was still a fresh legend about a couple of Afghans who behaved like very greyhound gopniks, and who had to be kicked in the toilet by the whole faculty, after which they were expelled. But this applies precisely to the draftees - the rank and file and non-mercenaries, i.e. officers.
          However, the USA in Vietnam faced similar problems, but they subsequently fixed this matter and did not dance on this rake anymore.
          1. +1
            17 September 2018 19: 50
            Quote: brn521
            not mercenaries, i.e. officers

            Have officers become mercenaries?
  14. 0
    17 September 2018 16: 16
    In the army, assimilation of a common civic identity will occur more efficiently and quickly

    In principle, it is.
    Only the term "Russian threat" worries
  15. 0
    17 September 2018 21: 56
    "Mutter, don't scold me, I'm drunk,
    Today I drank and will drink.
    Because tomorrow morning early
    I'm leaving to serve in the army ... " drinks Contract, contract. They are fed well in civilian life. laughing
  16. +1
    6 November 2018 22: 30
    War is a continuation of politics .... politics has reached an impasse, a way out of an impasse is war, war will write everything off ...
    Too many people, too many problems ..., by democratic methods, the situation is insoluble ..., batons and teardrops-- lost effectiveness, trenches, guns .... these are the new weapons of democracy.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"