You do live in Switzerland?

And not so much of a kleptocracy.

Switzerland has the option for civil service for all conscripts

I don't know why men complain so much about the military service....isn't that supposed to make you a....man? My brother did his military service back in the day and it wasn't that bad. Maybe because my parents visited him every other week....:-)
But seriously: discipline, great friendships that usually last for life, plus if you're in proximity of Russia is a good thing to have (relatively) trained people. I don't know why isn't compulsory anymore. Of course I get it that Nato members have professional army only now but then again there is a war in Ukraine now and I think this law should be changed. And don't start a male vs. female discussion, maybe even girls should do some form of military training.
CH is smart.

What a ridiculous post that highlights your old-skool Eastern European traditionalist views on gender, and of course it's easy to say those things when you wouldn't be drafted.

CH is smart? Pretty much every Swiss guy I have ever spoken to thinks military service is a joke and a waste of time.

Thank you, chuff. Oh, how nice of you as usual. It probably took you just 2 seconds to read the post and react. Not reflect, just react.
Yeah, you got me all figured out....a ridiculous post that highlighted your Western European traditions....lol

I used to think this is a old school mentality, not necessarily Eastern European btw, but then it came the war in Ukraine......are Israel, or Cyprus, which is in EU, also old school Eastern European mentality? And about that.....if you really want to know I'm kind of proud of it.

A professional, well trained soldier will always be a much better soldier than the fodder meat that an 18 year old poorly trained and inexperienced boy is. A professional soldier wants to be there, a conscript doesn't, motivation is very often the difference between losing and winning.

Moreover, modern warfare is much more tech-driven affair, requiring expert understanding of sophisticated weapon systems, logistical precision and coordination of disparate military units, something that takes huge amounts of time, dedication and money to achieve. If you look at the performance of the Russian military in Ukraine, one of the many issues they have is that their infantry, air force and navy act as if they are independent armies with separate objectives and almost no military reconnaissance.

One great example of a direct conflict showing a high tech coordinated army vs. old school philosophy is between Russia and the US in the famous clash in Deir al-Zour Province in Syria where the American troops were surprised and attacked by Wagner and Assad forces in a typical Russian fashion: mass waves of pummeling with little precision, the T72s acting separately from the soldiers and artirely fire with little reconnaissance. After the initial shock, the Americans took the initiative, they led the Reaper drones and the F22s to hit precisely and open a window for the ground troops who using Javelins and joystick remote controlled heavy machine guns countered and were able to give exact GPS coordinates of the enemy targets for even more precise air strikes. The outcome: 300 Russians and Syrians killed, none of the Americans was killed, a few were injured.

Switzerland's case is unique, as usual, as the military doctrine has always been that as this is a small country surrounded by much stronger armies, having hundreds of thousands reservists that can lead guerilla warfare from the mountains turning any potential invasion into an asymmetric conflict. Finland's case is similar as it has an over 1k km border with Russia and the memories of the "Winter war" are still painful as Finland fought bravely, but lost a chunk of it's territory then.

men should be men and women should be women. how radical.

Men have penises, women have vaginas, this is what differentiates them, not whether one served in the outdated institution called conscript army.

The beauty of liberalism in the classic way is that we can all discuss about it and each is allowed to have an opinion. And that without shouting at and insulting others.

I am sure that conscript army was the subject of a public debate in various places, especially when circumstances have propelled it out of the closed subjects list. I'm personally not totally against it these days, seeing what happened in Ukraine. On the other hand having a professional army (made up by men and women too, btw) is costly enough, don't know if the benefits it would produce (if any) exceed the costs.

You continue to ignore the fact that a professional army is a much more efficient machine, in fact one HAS to be professional in order to be able to be effective in a modern army. And no, a conscript army is NOT cheaper, in fact it's more expensive and inefficient as the conscripts would be just an add-on to the professional soldiers anyway, you can't replace them even if you wish.

No, I don't ignore anything, the costs vs benefits are very important. I agree that
and it would be probably way too expensive and not all countries can afford to increase their military expenditures more than say 3% of GDP.

And small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri should be small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri.

Not really. Kind of dinosauric.

Not so much unique but different. Nato membership would change that, but that would have massive consequences on multiple "fronts". Hence our membership of Partnership for Peace but that appears to have kind of outlived its usefulness (btw Russia's also a member IIRC).

Yes, Europe has got more to lose than Russia, but it has a lot to lose if they let Russia slowly choke Ukraine and/or bomb it into oblivion. Already the refugee crisis is placing a huge burden on the continent, food and energy will just pile on. It's lose/lose for Europe, but showing weakness is just working well for Russia.

So long as NATO are clear there military actions would not extend beyond Ukraine borders, Russian use of nuclear weapons of any type would blow back. I am sure there is nobody in the Russian military who would let Putin pull the trigger on nukes.

__________________
So sayeth the 'Speed
* I do look like my avatar

i think its pretty clear by now that european leaders are not willing to risk a direct confrontation with russia over ukraine. you're not wrong but its unrealistic.

The Russian GDP will shrink by 30% by year end, probably even more next year. Inflation will probably hit 20% even before year end and unemployment is already around 10% if you include the workers who are still being paid for the next few months by the foreign companies that left. Europe, in the darkest scenarios will not experience negative growth, inflation and unemployment will be low single-digit figures.

To those interested in understanding this conflict and other things, don't miss the opportunity to watch or listen to Stephen Kotkin speaking about the war in Ukraine (and other themes of course, he's one of my favourites), he is one of the biggest historians at the moment, specialised in ex-USSR and Eastern Europe space. He's been interviewed by Lex Fridman here, who was playing a bit of the devil's advocate role so both sides are represented, it is not a monologue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a7CDKqWcZ0

when talking about sending poorly trained troops to their deaths its important to remember that ukraine has already undergone mobilisation whilst russia has not.
quite a few videos on telegram in the last few days of ukrainian battalions complaining they don't want to be cannon fodder with some saying that they had never even held a gun prior to the war.

its a shame they can't just skip to the part where they kowtow to russia without all the death and destruction.

Which is precisely why a country has reservists: to defend itself against aggression. And Russia has not undergone massive official mobilisation, but has been quietly mobilising especially from the far east regions of Russia and from Donbas.