4 ms·

I dont understand how they can achieve this. They have given themselves an extreme short timeline. Military bases must be built or at least extended. Barrack

I dont understand how they can achieve this. They have given themselves an extreme short timeline. Military bases must be built or at least extended. Barracks. kitchens, medical services, bunks. recreation Uniforms, shoes, Camping / field equipment for everyone. Aquisition of weapons and weapon systems for the recruits, A wide assortment of training grounds needs to be prepared. Instructors need to be trained and dedicated to the task. and a lot more. I would think that would take years not months. It does say in the article that they had mandatory service for men that ended in 2006. If they were really smart, they have kept up maintenance and upgrade for all the infrastructure they needed back then and its ready for use. That would be an outstanding achievement for any western government. Retaining all the instructors and other personal would have been smart to but I bet they did not do so. I guess the big question would be "how many soldiers per year". Are they requesting everyone to show up for recruitment and will only pick a few for service. That woud make it a lot easier. If they take everyone they have a close to impossible plan.

where-group-by 3y ago
I don't think retaining the old instructors would be a good idea. Their training methods were probably very heavily influenced by the Soviet times, which will not work well with modern approach to warfare. Of course there are other aspects of being in the army.
- fullspectrumdev 3y ago
  It requires like at least 10 clerks, logistics workers, cooks, drivers, etc for each “fighting man” in the army in modern times - warfare is largely applied logistics. I’d suspect that a lot of the conscripts will get some basic weapons training and then end up in a “rear” role while the professional soldiers and best of the conscripts are assigned to the “combat units” and train more rigorously
fullspectrumdev 3y ago
There’s an alternative civil service route and several different ways you can complete your military service - along with a whole host of exceptions. I’d suspect a relatively large number of conscripts will be diverted to the civil service route on basis of fitness, choice, suitability, etc initially - doing work such as driving ambulances, fire service, auxiliary policing work, working in care homes, being porters in hospitals, etc. It also sounds like there’s a route similar to ROTC for university students?
bjornsing 3y ago
> I dont understand how they can achieve this. They have given themselves an extreme short timeline. I don’t think the state is under any obligation to conscript everyone they possibly can. Towards the end of mandatory military service in Sweden the armed forces simply became very selective. In the last few years it was enough to just say you didn’t feel like it and they wouldn’t conscript you. I would expect the same to happen now in Latvia, but in reverse.
- ThinkBeat 3y ago
  It is a choice as to how you believe you can resist an invasion. One model is the citizen soldier. The model Norway used to have. Everyone is trained, and everyone is in some manner ready to go to war The benefit is that occupation becomes quite difficult. A strong resistance is guaranteed. The other one is the professional soldier. Great for going to war in other countries. Great if you can repel the invasion quickly. As we see in Ukraine, the number of soldiers you can mobilize becomes important as well. And in other to have many to mobilize you need a lot of trained soldiers. Or its just a canon fodder.
Zanfa 3y ago
I’m assuming they probably didn’t demolish everything when mandatory service ended in 2006, they maintained an active (though smaller) professional force and have been hosting NATO rotations, so there’s likely additional capacity to host conscripts.

where-group-by 3y ago

I don't think retaining the old instructors would be a good idea. Their training methods were probably very heavily influenced by the Soviet times, which will not work well with modern approach to warfare. Of course there are other aspects of being in the army.

fullspectrumdev 3y ago
It requires like at least 10 clerks, logistics workers, cooks, drivers, etc for each “fighting man” in the army in modern times - warfare is largely applied logistics. I’d suspect that a lot of the conscripts will get some basic weapons training and then end up in a “rear” role while the professional soldiers and best of the conscripts are assigned to the “combat units” and train more rigorously

fullspectrumdev 3y ago

There’s an alternative civil service route and several different ways you can complete your military service - along with a whole host of exceptions. I’d suspect a relatively large number of conscripts will be diverted to the civil service route on basis of fitness, choice, suitability, etc initially - doing work such as driving ambulances, fire service, auxiliary policing work, working in care homes, being porters in hospitals, etc. It also sounds like there’s a route similar to ROTC for university students?

bjornsing 3y ago

> I dont understand how they can achieve this. They have given themselves an extreme short timeline. I don’t think the state is under any obligation to conscript everyone they possibly can. Towards the end of mandatory military service in Sweden the armed forces simply became very selective. In the last few years it was enough to just say you didn’t feel like it and they wouldn’t conscript you. I would expect the same to happen now in Latvia, but in reverse.

ThinkBeat 3y ago
It is a choice as to how you believe you can resist an invasion. One model is the citizen soldier. The model Norway used to have. Everyone is trained, and everyone is in some manner ready to go to war The benefit is that occupation becomes quite difficult. A strong resistance is guaranteed. The other one is the professional soldier. Great for going to war in other countries. Great if you can repel the invasion quickly. As we see in Ukraine, the number of soldiers you can mobilize becomes important as well. And in other to have many to mobilize you need a lot of trained soldiers. Or its just a canon fodder.

Zanfa 3y ago

I’m assuming they probably didn’t demolish everything when mandatory service ended in 2006, they maintained an active (though smaller) professional force and have been hosting NATO rotations, so there’s likely additional capacity to host conscripts.