Military Review

"Contract" does not threaten us?

78
How many copies were broken due to the increase in spending on the domestic defense industry! At one time, all those who disagreed with the concept of the need for the speediest modernization of the Russian army and the defense industry sector were publicly obstructed. Even the seemingly unsinkable Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, who was replaced by Anton Siluanov in a fire order, suffered. I remember that Kudrin tried to criticize the plans of the country's top leadership regarding the allocation of enormous money for the modernization of the Armed Forces and the defense industry, arguing that the global financial crisis could still declare itself at the most inopportune moment. As a result, such comments seemed to the authorities, let's say, not quite correct, and therefore Alexei Kudrin found himself behind the government’s board not only of Vladimir Putin’s Cabinet of Ministers, but later in Dmitry Medvedev’s Cabinet of Ministers, who reacted so ardently to criticism from the then Minister of Finance.

As a result, the quite mature reform went, but it didn’t go quite like clockwork. A certain squeak in the implementation of ambitious plans manifests itself today, and, in the opinion of many economists, will manifest itself tomorrow. At the same time, a sufficiently large number of those very experts in the field of economics tend to think that Kudrin’s words had a certain logical base under them that needed attention ...

One of the manifestations of the creaking mechanism of army modernization and reform can be called a state with the level of funding for such an item as an increase in the number of contract soldiers in the Russian army. The fact is that according to the presidential Decree of 7 this May (the date of Vladimir Putin’s inauguration), to 2015, the number of servicemen serving under contract in the RA should be significantly increased. The phrase “substantially” means completely unambiguous numbers - for 50 thousands of “man-bayonets” for the year starting from 2013. An increase in the number of contract servicemen would solve the perennial problem associated with the balance of contract-draft form of service in the Russian army, and would also give the army at least the exterior color of a professionally trained combat force.

But the aspirations of the authorities, unfortunately, can not always dock with the existing realities. The fact is that 150 of thousands of contract servicemen for 3 of the year is a venture that could well have been realized if not for one “but”. It consists of the “but” in the notorious financing. The budget for the needs associated with an increase in the total number of contract servicemen for 50 thousand people in the coming year, laid down a total of about 16,4 billion rubles - with the average calculation: for 328 thousand rubles per person (per year). If you recalculate for months, it turns out about 27333 rubles per contract soldier. This amount should include immediate allowance, monetized rent payments, if the contractor is not going to live in the barracks and other payments. Moreover, from this amount it is necessary to make deductions related to taxes, financing of social obligations, and so on, so forth. As it is not difficult to notice, the real cash income of the contractor, for whom the state intends to allocate 27333 rubles per month, will at best be equal to 50-60% of this amount. For obvious reasons, not everyone will be eager to sign a contract and become a soldier on such financial terms.

In this regard, it turns out that the Ministry of Defense will have to either lower the bar for recruiting contract servicemen to at least 30-35 thousand people, or increase funding for the project. But since the budget for next year in terms of modernizing the army and its phased transition to a balanced contract-based basis, has already been formed, and the President’s decree is there, any reduction in the planned number of contract servicemen from the country's main military department will look like a wave of obvious sabotage. And today, no one likes again to get nuts from Vladimir Putin for non-execution of his personal instructions. And the hapless Anatoly Serdyukov clearly does not want to become the fourth minister, received an administrative penalty.

In such a situation, the Ministry of Defense is left with two options: either somehow convincing potential contract servicemen to serve one or two years on modest funding, and then, they say, it will be better; or fill the contract gap with the help of conscripts.

Naturally, one can not especially guess what step will be taken by Anatoly Serdyukov, who was assigned a very modest amount to attract contract soldiers. Anatoly Eduardovich, whether he wants to or not, will simply be forced to take the second path, which has been tested over the years. In this case, we can also talk about the sabotage of the presidential Decree, but everyone understands perfectly well that there would be no sabotage if the financing was not laid out in the amount of 16,4 billion rubles, but in somewhat large amounts.

One more strange fact cannot be overlooked: there are no additional costs associated with financing new contract military personnel in 2014 and 2015. One can only guess what the bottom of the barrel is going to scrape Anatoly Serdyukov and all of the Ministry of Defense in order to be staffed for 150 thousands with a large number of new contract servicemen for 3 of the year. Perhaps there is a certain parallel item of expenditure in the military budget, which has not yet been announced, and in which, nevertheless, the financial points are outlined on how Russia can ensure the transition to contract-appeal in the right proportion. But nothing is known about such an expenditure item, and therefore the fate of potential 150 thousands of contract servicemen is in limbo.

Do we become witnesses of the first stage of the reform slip? After all, it is difficult to explain why of the almost 7,5 trillions of rubles allocated for the modernization of the army and military-industrial complex in 2013-2015, there was not enough money to implement a program to increase the number of contract servicemen. I would like to hope that the necessary funds will still be found so that the modernization plans in the future do not remain at the level of slogans.
Author:
78 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. grizzlir
    grizzlir 13 October 2012 08: 45
    +21
    Without an increase in contract servicemen, there can be no talk of any reforms in the army. For one year, you can prepare a good motorized rifle, paratrooper, mediocre reconnaissance rally gunner. But you cannot train a good tanker or Navy specialist. Ideally, only contract servicemen should work with military equipment. they will improve and hone their skills from year to year. I know that many will not like my words, the opinion of many from this site is that we throw all our hats on URA. We threw, and more than once, only human losses were odd long.
    1. ilf
      ilf 13 October 2012 09: 07
      +20
      I agree with you, we need a professional contract army, but do not cancel military service
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 13 October 2012 11: 51
        +16
        Quote: ilf
        I agree with you, we need a professional contract army, but do not cancel military service


        And why, in fact, are we so afraid of conscript service? It would be useful for the NEKST generation to ventilate their brains in the field and on the parade ground, even if there "snickers" nothing will disappear and there will be normal people. Maybe they will remain in the professional army. Stop following the "Soldiers' Mothers" and other State Department grant-eaters and egg-headed reformers and effective managers who, apart from "Let's do it like in the West and everything will be fine," have nothing.
        Repeated and repeat - we need a trained numerous mob. reserve. Remember the war, mainly due to the mob. human and material resources, we defeated the army of united Europe in essence.
        Firstly, who is considered a professional? Now this is any man who has served military service with the necessary military specialty, acquired again in the same military service. How is a profession acquired in the army, everyone knows - you don’t want to force, you do not know how to teach. Now, if the urgent service disappears, then where will the professionals be trained? You can, of course, create training centers where to train contractors and put them into positions already after preparation. But there is a very vulnerable place, which for some reason is forgotten by all the creators of the military reform. And where will you find the necessary number of specialists who want to serve in this particular part and in this particular position? Yes, even intensively master it in a training center with all the charms of army life?
        So it turns out that it is not possible to create a professional army, but the conscription service and, accordingly, the preparation of the mobile reserve, were completely ruined by liberalization to please the so-called human rights defenders from US intelligence agencies.
        1. grizzlir
          grizzlir 13 October 2012 12: 30
          +6
          Quote: Ascetic
          And why, in fact, are we so afraid of military service?

          Yes, no one is going to cancel the term. Here, let's compare the army with health care. How would you feel that after the institute the doctor worked for a year or two and went to another job. Or do you still want to be treated by a doctor who worked for more than one year, and trained possesses certain professional experience. Why in civilian specialties we trust professionals, drivers, doctors, pilots more, and in the army many believe that a person will learn to masterfully master complex equipment in a year. It seems to me that doctors, drivers and pilots are much closer to us, because many use their services and our health and life depend on them. And we remember about the soldier only later, because not only our life, but the life of him and his comrades depends on his skill. I don’t think this is the right concept, in the end, the future of the country and our lives depend on the training of a soldier, but many people forget about this, although they like to shout patriotic slogans.
          1. Ascetic
            Ascetic 13 October 2012 15: 41
            +1
            Quote: grizzlir
            Or, all the same, you want to be treated by a doctor who has worked for more than one year, trained and has certain professional experience.


            The doctor can do operations until retirement until his hands shake and his vision is in order. And an ordinary contractor will not be able to run along an obstacle course all his life, up to a maximum of 40 and then?
            1. Region71
              Region71 13 October 2012 17: 00
              0
              Quote: Ascetic
              The doctor can do operations until retirement until his hands shake and his vision is in order. And an ordinary contractor will not be able to run along an obstacle course all his life, up to a maximum of 40 and then?

              Sorry to get into your conversation. It seemed to me that there was a preferential pension for the military, and by 40 the contractor might no longer be ordinary. And you offer the military to serve up to 70 belay
              1. olegyurjewitch
                olegyurjewitch 14 October 2012 15: 01
                0
                Quote: Region71
                . It seemed to me that there was a preferential pension for the military, and by 40 the contractor might not be ordinary anymore. And you offer the military up to 70

                I think this is not about age qualifications, but about continuity of replaceability by length of service.
            2. Hon
              Hon 13 October 2012 17: 13
              +1
              Quote: Ascetic
              And an ordinary contractor will not be able to run an obstacle course all his life, up to a maximum of 40 and then?

              And then retirement, and in his place a younger contractor.
          2. bddrus
            bddrus 13 October 2012 18: 17
            +1
            I think the answer to your question is simple: in a "difficult time" everyone will not have to become a doctor, teacher, salesman and other civilian profession, but in a war everyone should be able to defend their homeland, no matter how pathetic it may sound. There are military specialties, where contract soldiers still serve, as well as commanders, but for privates there will be enough time
            1. Hon
              Hon 13 October 2012 18: 36
              +2
              And who are you going to fight with? With the current development of armaments, reservists will not get it. We will not shove our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq as the United States does. Then why do we need a large number of reservists?
            2. olegyurjewitch
              olegyurjewitch 14 October 2012 15: 08
              0
              Quote: bddrus
              but in the war everyone should be able to defend their homeland, however pathetic it may sound

              Yes, everyone should be able to, but you also need to have and support a mobilization fund, and this includes mob gatherings, an alert system, retraining, and much more, which unfortunately has been lost, or exists only on paper.
              1. bddrus
                bddrus 16 October 2012 09: 01
                0
                Well, who says what is not necessary?))
        2. Hon
          Hon 13 October 2012 17: 08
          +1
          An interesting fact, all my friends who served with one voice say they do nefig in the army !!! That is, not all become patriots in the army.
          Quote: Ascetic
          And where will you find the necessary number of specialists who want to serve in this particular part and in this particular position?

          If you put a normal salary for a specialist, then there will be plenty of people willing.
      2. pinachet
        pinachet 13 October 2012 15: 49
        +1
        I agree you need a mixed principle of manning.
    2. nycsson
      nycsson 13 October 2012 10: 00
      +5
      Quote: grizzlir
      But you cannot train a good tanker or Navy specialist.

      I am in favor of increasing the period of conscription from 1 to 2 years!
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 13 October 2012 11: 48
        +2
        not, 2 many, but a year to train is enough, and then retraining for 10 years (a month in a year). It would be cool, so that knowledge would not fly into the pipe.
        1. baltika-18
          baltika-18 13 October 2012 12: 11
          +4
          Quote: cth; fyn
          not, 2 many, but a year to train is enough

          You won’t make a full-fledged soldier in a year. The saying was earlier, who in the first year, he goes to the toilet with his mother’s pies, they become a soldier in the second.
          1. Blat
            Blat 13 October 2012 20: 46
            +2
            in the second year they become old-timers. who are deeply in the service ..... uh))))))))))))))))))))) fairy tales about how to become a man)))))))) ))))) and if it’s deep, there’s no talk of any discipline, and naturally the process of degradation of the army is taking place. A person should know why and what he is doing in the army. But to put it mildly, to put it mildly ........
            1. thatupac
              thatupac 13 October 2012 21: 07
              0
              At the service of people poh .. becomes from the first day. So 1 or 2 years - a little difference.
              1. Blat
                Blat 13 October 2012 21: 21
                +1
                Well, from the first day the possibilities are not the same as in the second year))))))))))))
    3. Suvorov000
      Suvorov000 15 October 2012 11: 12
      +1
      You laugh in a year to prepare a good paratrooper is not realistic, it will only physically fit the desired form in a year, and if most people think that the paratrooper is just two meters of blunt force, then this is a common misconception, what paratroopers are now doing is not their functional duties , motorized shooters should do this
      1. Evgan
        Evgan 15 October 2012 19: 42
        0
        And, like, Mabute is a good physical. preparation for anything? Or is it easier to learn BMP than BMD? Where does this misconception come from, that the winged infantry should be a bunch of people who can shoot from AK and dig trenches?
  2. Reddragon
    Reddragon 13 October 2012 09: 07
    +5
    Are we becoming witnesses to the first stage of the reform slip?

    First? Good morning wink Slipping began with the fact that the Defense Ministry and the defense industry could not agree on prices, or rather, from the very beginning
  3. Alekseev
    Alekseev 13 October 2012 09: 09
    +11
    But he (Serdyukov) is a brilliant bookkeeper, as he considered, together with his accountants, the costs of transferring the army to a contract?
    But, actually, the issue of maintaining large armed forces in peacetime is a headache for any government.
    Where the heads are bright, capable general staff, this problem is solved. But not with us.
    It should be clear to the horse, and not only to the feldmebel along with the "secret hero" that an army capable of defending such a country as Russia cannot be recruited under a contract, including for financial reasons.
    The division into Rapid Response Forces, contracted, training centers for draftees and a base for the mob. deployment.
    As a result of intensified reform activity, the first and second are not created in full, and the third is generally poher.
    Hope for a nuclear shield, i.e. to balancing on the verge of suicide.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 13 October 2012 11: 49
      +1
      Sensible thought! wink
    2. Hon
      Hon 13 October 2012 17: 18
      +2
      In Sochi, the 2018 World Cup and other Sabantu, such babosy leave that not one contract army is enough.
  4. Maestro
    Maestro 13 October 2012 09: 16
    +18
    I have the "good fortune" to serve in a unit that has been participating in all contract experiments since 2005. And he made one conclusion for himself: the lion's share of the commanders are not going to change their approach to the soldier. If the platoon-company commander, directly working with contractors, is forced to somehow change his form of work, then for commanders from the battalion commander and above (for the most part) the contractor is not quite a full-fledged person. His family questions are rarely interesting to anyone. After all, for the conscript prosecutors, oh, how can they pull, but for the double bass who will intercede ?! Especially when a round of reform began, involving a massive reduction in personnel. There was just a bestial attitude towards people. Literally!!!
    I believe that the decisions of the Supreme are not sabotaged in the Cabinet, and not directly on the ground. Moreover, sabotaged by elementary stupidity. IT IS NECESSARY TO CHANGE YOUR ATTITUDE AND RE-BUILD YOUR WORK! Otherwise, no money will help. And even more so when they are not enough.

    PS To avoid bias, I inform you - I'm not a contractor.)
    1. grizzlir
      grizzlir 13 October 2012 09: 31
      +6
      I don’t agree with you on everything. I liked working with contractors more than with conscripts. I’m talking about tank troops. Most of the contractors were very good at their skills, mechanics could fix most minor malfunctions on their own, conscripts were lost even with minor breakdowns and often they’ve ruined the equipment. Yes, and in the battle with the contract soldiers it’s calmer. As for social issues, the officers are in distress in our army, and you are talking about the contract soldiers. And this is not the battalion commander’s guilt and higher, but the ministries of defense. They conclude a contract with people, promise mountains of gold , and in the end, the person remains deceived. That's why normal contract soldiers in the army do not hold, and sometimes they serve even after the sleeves.
      1. Maestro
        Maestro 13 October 2012 09: 36
        +6
        Well, if you already decided to recruit them, then you should not separate them on social issues.
        1. grizzlir
          grizzlir 13 October 2012 11: 56
          +3
          Quote: Maestro
          Well, if you already decided to recruit them, then you should not separate them on social issues.

          I agree completely. Well, this question is not for the officers, but more for the government. In general, I like the structure of the French-foreign legion, where the officer pulls all the hardships with the soldier and does not have special social privileges in front of the rank and file. Equal good conditions are created for all military personnel.
          1. Bismark
            Bismark 13 October 2012 14: 38
            +3
            I don’t know how the structure of the French-foreign legion is, but I like the Soviet structure. He began his service in the tank troops on the Amur as a conscript, for 2 years he knew the technique with his 5 fingers, any breakdown on the march could be eliminated. Shooting was quite often, during the exercises for about 5 months they lived in the field (in winter). Today, the conscript after a year of vryatli service will be able to show such dexterity.
            1. gmajor
              gmajor 13 October 2012 15: 19
              0
              I think that you are right, colleague. Before you train a military soldier, you need to learn how to read, write and speak Russian.
          2. thatupac
            thatupac 13 October 2012 21: 09
            -3
            Well, so let's call on the Chinese and Tajiks of all sorts to our analogue of a foreign legion. Generally no problem, I think.
      2. ramzes1776
        ramzes1776 13 October 2012 12: 22
        +1
        Previously, emergency regiments in 100% divisions on a contract basis were a real force. True, the whole division had to work for them in order to bring him out for training))) And now the brigades have become 50% short of conscripts i.e. sky-ready !!! Well, what have we come up with these reforms? By the way, the same technique remained from the division, which went. We don’t get anything new. In short, we wanted the best, but it turned out as always !!!
    2. ramzes1776
      ramzes1776 13 October 2012 12: 06
      +6
      There is no guarantee that having recruited contract servicemen in a year, due to financial difficulties and dibilism, the bosses will again be thrown out into the street "of their own free will" or according to the NUK, as it was in 2009. With such a salary, I think there are few people willing, and that is half of the alkanauts will be.
  5. antiaircrafter
    antiaircrafter 13 October 2012 09: 18
    -4
    Part of the funding problem can be solved by firing those who are supposed to be fired - fenders waiting for housing.
    The thing is different - at the newly opened points of recruitment under the contract, a shaft of applicants was not observed. Somewhere on this issue flaws.
    1. ramzes1776
      ramzes1776 13 October 2012 12: 29
      +6
      Quote: antiaircrafter
      Part of the funding problem can be solved by firing those who are supposed to be fired - fenders waiting for housing.

      That’s not just need to touch zashtatnikov. As they provide, let them be fired. You might think that the state has no money. Billions of loans are written off once or twice. One St. Petersburg "Zenith" is worth something !!!
      1. antiaircrafter
        antiaircrafter 13 October 2012 20: 45
        0
        Quote: ramzes1776
        Just don’t just touch the fenders.

        I do not suggest touching the fenders. I’m waiting for the apartment in this position.
        Moreover, the apartments are unmeasured, there is no normal metering, hence the untimely provision and, as a result, the extra costs for DD.
      2. thatupac
        thatupac 13 October 2012 21: 11
        +2
        11 trillion to expand Moscow is also not weak. And you there about Zenith ...
  6. erased
    erased 13 October 2012 10: 12
    +8
    Money is already being cut. Pretty brazen when you consider how Putin is now looking at the army. Or so sure of impunity?
  7. Egoza
    Egoza 13 October 2012 10: 38
    0
    Once the service in the SA was an HONORARY duty of youth. These times have sunk into history. Personally, I don't like the principle of contract soldiers at all. Painfully they remind of medieval mercenaries. They fight honestly, but without "fanaticism", if they lose, they will immediately offer themselves to the army of the victorious side. I would prefer that military schools were organized (and not reduced), where they would train a professional army with a WORTHY pay. Indeed, the technique becomes more complicated, and it will not be possible to master it thoroughly in one year (in Ukraine there are now 9 months). And you can't send professional military personnel to build a dacha.
    1. Hon
      Hon 13 October 2012 17: 31
      +1
      Quote: Egoza
      I personally do not like the principle of contracting. They painfully resemble medieval mercenaries.

      The contractor as an officer only ranks from private to art. sergeant. Officers hope you do not remind mercenaries?
  8. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 13 October 2012 11: 21
    +5
    In fact, the Internet has long been described by smart people in detail HOW all initiatives will remain on paper - no one really was going to raise the army or the military-industrial complex and is not going to!
  9. in reserve
    in reserve 13 October 2012 12: 47
    +3
    In order to switch to a fully contracted service, our officials need to cut their salaries and Serdyukov in addition, and if he starts to resent dismissing him and appointing in his place what thread the general agrees that they give, I think there will be such.
    1. ramzes1776
      ramzes1776 13 October 2012 18: 33
      +1
      Quote: in stock
      In order to switch to a fully contracted service, our officials need to cut their salaries and Serdyukov in addition, and if he starts to resent dismissing him and appointing in his place what thread the general agrees that they give, I think there will be such.

      For officials like Serdyuk, you don’t have to pay salaries at all. They will live normally without it)))
      1. Blat
        Blat 13 October 2012 20: 52
        0
        income taxes should be paid to the state))))))))))))))
    2. Hon
      Hon 13 October 2012 18: 41
      +1
      The officials have small salaries, if you deprive Serdyukov of the salary, then its maximum for 4 contract workers is enough
  10. UrraletZ1982
    UrraletZ1982 13 October 2012 13: 31
    +6
    Communicated, served, with real "dogs of war" and understood the simple truth that real professionals have neither a homeland nor a flag. A real professional does not want to serve in such an idiotic kindergarten, which was made from the once powerful Soviet Army and from the Soviet militia. Now the commanding staff is utterly divorced from the common soldier (as everywhere the higher officials are from the people). Many acquaintances from the professional military left because of the statutory idiocy imposed by people who have not served a day among ordinary soldiers and do not understand that a soldier can also have a soul. Many military men, aces in their field, have been thrown overboard like a used condom. And that statutory dandruff, which forced them to leave, keeps mending on its laurels. Stalin did the right thing when, in the 30s, he jailed the commanding staff of the Red Army, who simply got drunk and could not adequately respond to the ever-increasing threats from the West and Japan, and put the military at the top, who understood how to serve, and not curry favor. My grandfather served in the 50s and says that he did not have such a bestial attitude from the generals, not to mention from the subordinate commanders. Moreover, then there were front-line soldiers in charge of everything, making up the backbone of the SA. Now from real professionals. especially those who have passed hot spots, they try to get rid of them - they join the ranks of security officials and security guards of commerce, officials and other crooks, or even just get drunk and join the ranks of criminals. Especially "bastards in epaulettes" were welded on "combat" ones, who did not pay the participants of hot spots and who had to waste their nerves and prove something to snatch from the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Internal Affairs in action.
    As long as there is a bestial attitude (and it is not only in the army, but in all areas of activity) of the boss to the subordinate, irresponsibility and stereotyped, then do at least a hundred reforms - nothing will work.
    1. bddrus
      bddrus 13 October 2012 18: 25
      +1
      but how could your grandfather compare in the 50s and serve now?
      1. UrraletZ1982
        UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 08: 45
        0
        I have a lot of soldiers in my family and I myself served ...
    2. Flooding
      Flooding 13 October 2012 18: 52
      0
      Quote: UrraletZ1982
      Stalin did the right thing when in the 30s he transferred the command of the Red Army, which simply got too drunk and could not adequately respond to the increasing threats from the West and Japan, and put the military on top, who understood how to serve, not get out.

      What and how he did, as well as the results of his labors, are known to all.
      And as for the correctness ... It's hard to judge from our bell tower, for me it's a bloodsucker.
      1. UrraletZ1982
        UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 09: 15
        +1
        Unlike today's "authorities" under Stalin, the country was able to rebuild hundreds of new cities and in ten years to create its own industry, which helped us win the war (and not lend-leases, which our liberals praise). My old people all said that when Stalin died, everyone cried and grieved, and this did not apply to the rest of the leaders of the CPSU. Before the war, Stalin managed to destroy the "fifth column" represented by the Trotskyists (from among the military, the intelligentsia), who intended to beat our army in the back (as they beat our military in Afghanistan ("we did not send you there"), especially in Chechnya). He managed to prevent the treacherous attack of the "allies" on the USSR after the Second World War by creating an atomic bomb. Unlike today, there was order under Stalin. Power was power and there was no irresponsibility.
        Communicated with Chechen old people. They, with all their anger, they spoke in one voice. that under Stalin there would be no such mess.
        From the time of Khrushchev, and then of the humpback and Yeltsin, streams of bile began to pour on Stalin. Medvedev, Putin's six, also began to sing in unison with the liberals that "the people won the war, not Stalin" and other rubbish.
        On the Rossiya channel, Stalin was the winner in all polls, but the liberals in the person of Svanidza, Migalkov and Shlyubimov did not allow this, placing Alexander Nevsky and the bourgeois liberalist Stolypin. Repeatedly, with the victories of Lenin and Stalin, the results were nullified, and with others, they were unchanged.
        Today's "power", which for 20 years has turned the country into a raw material appendage of the West, cannot do anything for Russia, throws mud at the USSR, pushing all the failures onto it. Under Stalin, would they have gotten away with the repeated collapses of the national currency, man-made disasters like the disaster at the Sayano-Shushenskaya hydroelectric power station, an abscess of corruption that made crime and power one concept, the unleashing of the Chechen wars, as well as genocide against Russians in the post-Soviet space?
    3. Blat
      Blat 13 October 2012 20: 58
      0
      the charter is a set of rules. And the price to that professional kotorum is not to like the charter, and for this reason quits))))))))))))))) you are a direct supporter of the glamorous army)))))))))) probably also hire staff to wipe the snot and without a charter.
      the charter must be changed and adapted to modern conditions. and most importantly. The greatest demand should be with whom the composition is. But not as usual scapegoats are found. The commander must be a model and then subordinates will go into fire and water.
      1. UrraletZ1982
        UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 09: 25
        0
        The charter was written in blood. He is meant to teach, not mock a soldier. This is a VERY smart book and, if properly interpreted, it provides all spheres of life. But in the hands of a stupid, narrow-minded person, it turns into a destructive weapon that destroyed the army from the inside. In war, it is impossible to follow ALL letters of the Charter, because many points there are superfluous and not viable for war, if at least one of the key links in ensuring the interaction of the army fails. Now the system is so rotten that it spills out not professionals, but careerists and opportunists. This is not the fault of the army, but the ruling elite, about which one can say - "are they stupid, or are they in the share?" Officers who stupidly follow the regulations and see a soulless thing in soldiers are called "jackals", and a normal officer and commander cannot be called THAT.
        I will give an example. The general came unexpectedly to our screen and was furious that our uniform was not stroked, we were not shaved, and we had no white gateways. For all the explanations of where from in the war we should do how to induce a marafet, sew on the collar when there was no time to even even sleep. There was no water - therefore, they could not even shave (not to mention the laundry). According to the Statute, interpreted by the soother, each of us was supposed to have two (!) Liters of water for a day, and there were no streams and streams nearby. According to the Charter, only one who has not fought can live. The army does not serve in war - the army is at war. Who advocates the implementation of the Charter - he did not live according to it, but only complied or a fan ...
        1. Blat
          Blat 14 October 2012 11: 37
          0
          I wrote that it is necessary to change and eradicate all manifestations of idiocy
          1. UrraletZ1982
            UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 13: 46
            0
            CHARTER - notes of a madman (army folklore). And so it is ... Statutory forces constantly impeded and impede the development of the army. This is akin to bureaucrat officials, who also seem to act according to the law, but in fact simply use the resources of the state, imperfection or contradictions of laws in vain. A true professional with such evil spirits is not on the way.
    4. not good
      not good 14 October 2012 01: 41
      +1
      And what do you want when the minister himself tabouretkin obscenely obscene the General, Hero of Russia, than an example to follow. If Serdyukov cattle why should he honest and decent professionals nearby?
      1. thatupac
        thatupac 14 October 2012 09: 49
        -1
        If you use obscene words, then it’s for the cause.
      2. sankey
        sankey 14 October 2012 11: 27
        0
        not all Generals Heroes of Russia-geri
  11. thatupac
    thatupac 13 October 2012 21: 03
    +2
    Contractors are not bags of potatoes that you can buy for money in a store. Contractors are people who voluntarily decide to sign a contract for 3 years. There are few such people now. Therefore, the call remains.
    1. sankey
      sankey 14 October 2012 11: 33
      0
      There are enough people who want to, there are a lot of normal guys from them, but they don’t call, that’s a paradox. There is a redivision of the world, and we don’t have an army. There’s a saying why the Germans reached Moscow in 41, they only gathered our Army for winter.
  12. adolph1
    adolph1 13 October 2012 21: 09
    0
    Yes, their reform should not stall tomorrow! It stalled when it started, namely in 92, and the last third stage, which started at 08, is also rather vague, no one knows that it should end up with only one excuse like: there will be a combat-ready army, a "social lift", everyone in the apartment. REFORM is the delusion of a madman. Comrade Serdyukov, I'm sick of buying a Yudashkin uniform from your new big salary, make it so that I can give this money to my children!
    1. thatupac
      thatupac 13 October 2012 21: 16
      0
      Contractors serve themselves. They have money. The conscripts do not have this. Therefore, the state stands for contentment. And let the contractors work for everything about everything from their salary.
      1. adolph1
        adolph1 13 October 2012 22: 26
        0
        Bro you are mistaken! You read the orders first!
      2. UrraletZ1982
        UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 09: 28
        +1
        Contractors are even more entitled than conscripts. The double bass in the war will not be protected as a conscript, but it, on the contrary, is stuck in the front ranks in battle. The contractor is not required to buy ANYTHING for the war for his money. The army SHOULD provide it, and not vilely rattle and sell what is put in the markets and in military agencies.
        1. thatupac
          thatupac 14 October 2012 09: 43
          0
          The army should provide these conscripts in full, but the contract soldiers have money. This is what they play in the Army.
          1. UrraletZ1982
            UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 10: 15
            0
            There is NO SUCH in any contract. The soldier wears it, uses it in life and fights according to the Charter, but everything that is not said in it is prohibited.
        2. adolph1
          adolph1 14 October 2012 11: 47
          0
          By the way, yes ! It’s empty at the warehouses, but please at the military store!
      3. adolph1
        adolph1 14 October 2012 13: 35
        0
        Well then let yourself, tanks, ships and planes buy, as well as pistols and machine guns, and that they are contract soldiers - they get a lot!
      4. olegyurjewitch
        olegyurjewitch 14 October 2012 15: 32
        0
        Quote: thatupac
        And let the contractors work for everything about everything from their salary.

        Even civil organizations, according to the law on labor, are obliged to provide their workers with special clothing. The army is probably a slightly different structure, and contains its state. Well, if you are far from the army, then why do you need all these troubles.
  13. sankey
    sankey 13 October 2012 21: 13
    +1
    I have been serving for almost twenty years. before, contract soldiers came after an urgent one, it was only necessary to train them, but now if by any miracle I will be called up at all in basics. for a year I haven’t seen anything except a shovel and a broom. and there are none. according to the staff, I have 23 people in the platoon who are alive with me five. command gives relationships and the military enlistment office makes off. I don’t know how to serve in 2-3 months, there is no military service at the airbase at all.
    1. adolph1
      adolph1 13 October 2012 22: 30
      0
      We have the same story of soldiers, and even all the soldiers are demobilized at about the same time, they can’t teach anything about demobilization, and officers and contract soldiers need to spend time on new ones.
      1. Blat
        Blat 13 October 2012 22: 51
        0
        this is the meaning of bullying. the officer does not take up his direct duties. all grandfathers do it for him)))))))))))))) probably it’s okay to get money and do nothing? if not officers? or is an officer pure as a piece of jewelry?
        1. adolph1
          adolph1 14 October 2012 09: 33
          0
          Maybe they even wipe one place after the toilet! I repeat once again "all the fighters are demobilized at about the same time," and in their place naturally come those who do not know, but there are those who do not want to know anything. And believe me, my dear friend, if the chief of the company does not understand what he is doing, then you will live at work in the literal sense, you will be engaged in soldiers during the day, and at night with your official duties. I don’t know how it is with you, but in our unit they don’t pay for processing, motivating the tacit order of the brigade commander. Therefore, only your responsibilities and GO TO IN THE HOUSE
        2. thatupac
          thatupac 14 October 2012 09: 47
          +1
          Officers are not educators. Parents of soldiers - educators. Raised a squelch, then a squelch in the Army and shakes. And since the soldiers change like a kaleidoscope every year, they don’t care about everything, the officers also chase a freebie: they put the older one and know that the senior with the personnel will fulfill the order exactly and on time. Why strain? It’s better to go through the next CoD level in the office ...
        3. UrraletZ1982
          UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 09: 48
          0
          Do you even know what hazing is? Have you experienced it on yourself?
          1. adolph1
            adolph1 14 October 2012 11: 55
            0
            there are different concepts of hazing do not confuse them! One kind of wash my socks. You have to kill for her! And the second is the ability of the more experienced to guide the true less experienced! By the way, in the USA, the senior in rank has the right to use physical force to restore order, etc. And nothing bad happens there, they serve normally. And we have a flocking sheep in the herd started up and there is no council on it!
            1. UrraletZ1982
              UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 13: 34
              +1
              There is hazing - when the more experienced less experienced teaches. And there is lawlessness when one soldier or officer mocks another soldier. And lawlessness is called lawlessness, and hazing was called by those who mow down from the army and compose fables about it or exaggerate to justify their cowardice, hiding from the army in institutions and in psychiatric hospitals.
  14. atesterev
    atesterev 14 October 2012 00: 11
    +1
    And in Israel, by the way, the draft army and they somehow do not take a steam bath with the transition to a contract. Yes, and serve 3 years ...
    1. adolph1
      adolph1 14 October 2012 09: 41
      0
      Yes, it’s only here so happened that it’s a shame to serve in the army! In other countries, an honorable duty.
      1. UrraletZ1982
        UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 10: 19
        0
        February 23 is a holiday of those. who served, serves even female soldiers, and for all other males a professional holiday is March 8th. If our grandfathers were mowing from the army. then we wouldn’t exist now or we would be labored in the mines of the Third Reich or lived on the territory of the Golden Horde. Someone who loves not to speak speaks. that will go to the army only if war happens. That's bullshit! If he is afraid in peacetime to join the army, then in the military he will simply manage to do it, much less go to defend his homeland.
        1. Patos89
          Patos89 14 October 2012 11: 08
          -1
          Not the army makes a man a man.
          here's a link to you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb3B95niW_8
          1. UrraletZ1982
            UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 13: 31
            -1
            The army doesn’t give a mind, but it fools you ...
            For the majority of deputies and ministers, children do not serve in the army and study at institutes abroad - this is the main indicator of the priorities of the "authorities".
            1. Patos89
              Patos89 14 October 2012 14: 33
              0
              And all the time it seemed to me to turn around. In the army, if you did not notice the orders obey and do not discuss them.
        2. adolph1
          adolph1 14 October 2012 11: 42
          0
          said well, but not the topic
  15. Patos89
    Patos89 14 October 2012 01: 20
    +1
    Well, they are under siege there. They also have women
    1. atesterev
      atesterev 14 October 2012 22: 00
      0
      And here they are, ginseng, neither in the police, oh, call me, the police, nor in the army, do they? They sit on the stove and give birth to children?
      1. Patos89
        Patos89 14 October 2012 23: 52
        0
        Well, the army does not take part in hostilities.
  16. Patos89
    Patos89 14 October 2012 10: 57
    0
    Not the army makes a man a man.
    here's a link to you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb3B95niW_8
  17. Lucky
    Lucky 14 October 2012 15: 52
    0
    contractors are needed now as never before.
    1. UrraletZ1982
      UrraletZ1982 14 October 2012 16: 46
      0
      But the draft army can’t be canceled. Mercenaries are fighting for money, not for their homeland, and are not ready to die. Two-thirds of conscripts and a third of contract soldiers are needed. We can’t stand the budget. Those who have served an urgent term should be given privileges to those who have not served. And double basses and officers should have even more benefits.
    2. atesterev
      atesterev 14 October 2012 22: 14
      0
      Let us, dear sir, separate flies from cutlets!
      1. A conscript soldier is by no means an illiterate soldier. Israel is an example.
      2. The draft army may increase several times per hour
      3. An army that gives its supplies to the Markitans is an army that is not operational.
      4. In the Army for half a year, it is impossible to teach a soldier (half the year to learn the basics) to competently perform his duties.
      Well, there you can pick and 6 and 7 and ... 20.
  18. Patos89
    Patos89 14 October 2012 21: 18
    0
    What right now, Motherland is only for money