5 ms·

Powers are not balanced in Switzerland. The reason most modern countries stopped conscription is because infantrymen are far less useful than they used to be in

Powers are not balanced in Switzerland. The reason most modern countries stopped conscription is because infantrymen are far less useful than they used to be in combats - they remain useful if you want to control the place you have invaded but are not that useful to do the actual invading. Advanced weaponry is just too efficient: artillery, helicopters, planes, drones, missiles. Switzerland is not even really trying to defend itself. The chief reason it’s safe is because it’s surrounded by countries with an actual army. They rely on France for part of their air defence.

mantas 4y ago
Not do invading? Long-running conscription could work with advanced tech. Not 1-year-to-train-and-then-back-to-civilian-life. But train-and-then-keep-training-till-40+.
antman 4y ago
Which of the weapons you mentioned has capability to occupy ground? I think Ukraine taught us that 2k soldiers in a factory area can delay a much more expensive army for months or until they run out of food/ammo. Russian needed a million infantry men to have a chance of occupying UKraine. Afghanistan collapsed by mere infantry in a few weeks, only because they could not move fast enough. If one wants to occupy and keep land in today’s nationalist states, swarming is still the most viable proposition.
kkfx 4y ago
Hem, Swiss do have conscription, they only relaxed them a bit, for instance not allowing anymore ammo at home, just weapons, anyone can buy ammo of course but classic sealed packages for the service use only aren't anymore a thing. Mandatory bunkers and scattered cornerstones are not mandatory anymore either, but still shelters must be provided by the public, mandatory long-lasting food supply are there etc Mined roads are far less mined than before, but still there. So I think Swiss STILL care it's defense. Also my point is about protecting against foreign invasions instead of build armies to invade other countries because that's the point of peace. If we want peace dialogue is mandatory and a good weapon aside help well, si vis pacem para bellum, BUT being MUCH more able to defend instead of offend is a good stability key.
xhevahir 4y ago
I think they're wrong about modern Switzerland, but they raise an issue that's crossed my mind occasionally: that Athenian democracy followed the emergence of the phalanx, a technology that favored the use of large, non-specialized citizen armies, and that our current military technology is the polar opposite of that.
- Gollapalli 4y ago
  It's the opposite. Phalanxes are the kind of thing where a break in coordination by any one man results you all getting rekt. The conflict between the Greeks and the Persians is a pretty good example of what happens when you have specialized men against a much larger force of levied up men of dubious quality. The Greeks won.
  - xhevahir 4y ago
    I probably shouldn't have used the word "non-specialized." I mean that in comparison with the armies of early Iron Age Greece the hoplite army of democratic Athens was relatively non-hierarchical, without such heavy dependence on a class of professional, full-time soldiers. (The author of this article compares that earlier type of combat to the sort of battle waged by indigenous New Guineans: https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/greek-warfare-homer/ https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/greek-warfare-... ).
anilakar 4y ago
> most modern countries stopped conscription is because infantrymen are far less useful than they used to be in combats The fallacy here is that conscripts == infantry, when frontline troops account for a minority of the whole force. Sweden had to overturn their decision to abolish conscription in less than a decade.
wnkrshm 4y ago
Less than two years ago, the Swiss air force, which is there for intercepting air space incursions had business hours [0]. [0] https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/26815-no-more-office-hours-for-swiss-air-policing-missions https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/26815-no-more-office-hour...

mantas 4y ago

Not do invading? Long-running conscription could work with advanced tech. Not 1-year-to-train-and-then-back-to-civilian-life. But train-and-then-keep-training-till-40+.

antman 4y ago

Which of the weapons you mentioned has capability to occupy ground? I think Ukraine taught us that 2k soldiers in a factory area can delay a much more expensive army for months or until they run out of food/ammo. Russian needed a million infantry men to have a chance of occupying UKraine. Afghanistan collapsed by mere infantry in a few weeks, only because they could not move fast enough. If one wants to occupy and keep land in today’s nationalist states, swarming is still the most viable proposition.

kkfx 4y ago

Hem, Swiss do have conscription, they only relaxed them a bit, for instance not allowing anymore ammo at home, just weapons, anyone can buy ammo of course but classic sealed packages for the service use only aren't anymore a thing. Mandatory bunkers and scattered cornerstones are not mandatory anymore either, but still shelters must be provided by the public, mandatory long-lasting food supply are there etc Mined roads are far less mined than before, but still there. So I think Swiss STILL care it's defense. Also my point is about protecting against foreign invasions instead of build armies to invade other countries because that's the point of peace. If we want peace dialogue is mandatory and a good weapon aside help well, si vis pacem para bellum, BUT being MUCH more able to defend instead of offend is a good stability key.

xhevahir 4y ago

I think they're wrong about modern Switzerland, but they raise an issue that's crossed my mind occasionally: that Athenian democracy followed the emergence of the phalanx, a technology that favored the use of large, non-specialized citizen armies, and that our current military technology is the polar opposite of that.

Gollapalli 4y ago
It's the opposite. Phalanxes are the kind of thing where a break in coordination by any one man results you all getting rekt. The conflict between the Greeks and the Persians is a pretty good example of what happens when you have specialized men against a much larger force of levied up men of dubious quality. The Greeks won.
- xhevahir 4y ago
  I probably shouldn't have used the word "non-specialized." I mean that in comparison with the armies of early Iron Age Greece the hoplite army of democratic Athens was relatively non-hierarchical, without such heavy dependence on a class of professional, full-time soldiers. (The author of this article compares that earlier type of combat to the sort of battle waged by indigenous New Guineans: https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/greek-warfare-homer/ https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/greek-warfare-... ).

anilakar 4y ago

> most modern countries stopped conscription is because infantrymen are far less useful than they used to be in combats The fallacy here is that conscripts == infantry, when frontline troops account for a minority of the whole force. Sweden had to overturn their decision to abolish conscription in less than a decade.

wnkrshm 4y ago

Less than two years ago, the Swiss air force, which is there for intercepting air space incursions had business hours [0]. [0] https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/26815-no-more-office-hours-for-swiss-air-policing-missions https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/26815-no-more-office-hour...