I thnk we should have national service for a year for everyone.

Would do most people a great benefit.

The guns have just stopped. must be finished or on break.

Yes to National Service.

Why not take the Greek or Robert Heinlein point of view, full citizenship ergo the right to vote, access to government jobs and contracts, become a member of parliment/council/senate or the judicary or police force. Access to free or subsidised higher education, all these can only be open to those that have served in Nasho.

I also think that the national service does not necessarily need to be military. It could be as part of the workforce for national projects like redirecting rivers, or increasing the connectivity of our existing rail and road systems. Or maybe in the fields of nursing, or beautification schemes. Predominately it should however be military.

The Swiss model would be an excellant choice for Australia. This is a country that makes much of its own military equipment as well, including a very capable jet aircraft.

It works something like this..

They have a standing professional army of about 8000 full time soldiers. These are largely made up of instructors and special forces. National service is compulsory which is 12 months full time and then being a member of the reserves until the age of 60. After your 12 months full time your are expected to take your automatic weapon home with ammunition and maintain it.

Yes! You heard correctly, most Swiss homes are armed with automatic weapons. This is so they can go from a standing army of 8000 to full armed mobilisation in under 24 hours. You train and fight with your neighbours. they form a cell or squad that increases in size to platoon, regiment etc if needed. The key factor however is that they stay small and form the basis of a protracted guerilla war.

The Swiss decided on this system because they knew that they would have no chance of taking the Soviets on in a fight of conventional warfare. So they would have to defeat the WILL of the Soviets, and take from Soviet mothers so many of their sons that not even Soviet dictators could ignore the internal pressure and rage. It is what the Swiss call a

HIGH ENTRY PRICE

The conventional way to take an well armed or defended position is to have 10 - 20 times the soldiers to do it. Therefore the Soviets would have to comitt 10-20 million men for Switzerland ALONE. Not including the other theatres of battle they may be involved in.

Every neighbourhood group is armed, knows where it's emergency meeting points are, who their group leaders are and there is a ready made intelligence gathering network amongst the civilian population. Most groups will have a preset plan of attack or defence which can mean destroying infrastructure before it becomes of use to the enemy. For eg, bridges will often be build with cavity points already build into them, that the engineers have determined the correct explosive charges required to bring them down, all the defender has to do is read the label, place the explosives and wait, if that is an option.

It is a model that Australia would do well to adopt. Certainly more effective than buying F18 Super Hornets.

BTW, one of the reasons that mainland USA and Australia were unattractive targets for the Japanese in WW2 was due to the National Character of the people and a "gun behind every bush".

Does that same national character exist today? Can we get it back? Cetainly the guns have been reduced. Thanks Johnnie.

locutius wrote on Aug 28^th, 2008 at 4:49pm:


Thanks easel, Yes I'm not against them choosing, but for the Greeks or Heinleins 'Starship Troopers' (superb read BTW) you need to do Nasho to be a FULL CITIZEN and enjoy the privledges of full citizenship.

Sounds like a caste system to me. Isn't that how the aristocracy arose in Europe? Soldiers should ge paid, and free education is one of doing it, except it's a bit of a lame duck for those soldiers who aren't suited to taking advantage of it. However people should not be denied rights based on lack of national service. I'd much prefer a draft when needed to the sort of system that creates an internal need for perpetual war. Your suggestion denies people rights in order to solve a problem that does not exist.

easel, I wanted to mention before that the system probably needs for it to work as a compulsory system for it to operate effectively. As the enemy needs to meet organised and experienced resistance everywhere. There is a superb book on the subject called "Total Resistance". Experience, as you rightly pointed out to FD, is preferable to the rush job of the unprepared.

Now another option could be that only volunteers can be used for overseas conflicts that do not involve an invader. Nashos are only obligated for defence. I don't know, just throwing out ideas

FD
No, doesn't sound like a caste system to me, freedom does not mean lack of obligation, actually just the opposite in my opinion.

Of couse people would be paid while doing service, possibly at a reduced rate because certain living expenses would obviously be taken care of such as clothing, food and board.

There may be other programs besides access to free or subsidised education for those that can't take advantage of it. Government apprenticships or fast tracking to junior government positions. etc.

Peoples rights and obligations are at the very core of the issue. I don't think the Swiss feel that way. It seems it is an obligation they take both seriously and with zeal. They love their country and their way of life and understand the realities of protecting it. Expansionist aggressors don't usually have sloppy armed forces.

Of course the Swiss system IS compulsory, so denying a citizen access to some of the things I mentioned would be a non issue fore them.

You don't have to do it, but if you don't you miss out on certain benefits.

Quote:


I wouldn't. Can you tell me why you would?