NationStates

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:05 pm**

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Conscription_in_Menghe

I think the page is "done" now but I might make changes later on.

Ended up going with selective conscription, but done in a way that's designed to filter out the least willing recruits and the ones most important to the civilian workforce. Also included programs to draw in more return volunteers for skilled and technical roles, and for elite units.

Actually, now that I'm writing this, I think I'll go back and tack on a "future prospects" section along the lines of "the Ministry of Defense is considering an all-volunteer military at some point in the future but keeps kicking the can down the road."

e: already did.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:17 pm**

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Neo-Pontic Empire wrote:It also kills people, and fighting fewer people makes things easier. Especially once you consider thermobaric and incindiary munitions artillery really does help make assaulting a city easier. Besides it isn't like there aren't places to hide in an intact city.

Beyond that being willing to collapse major buildings means your soldiers don't have to spend three weeks fighting their way up the Burj Khalifa or whatever even larger buildings NS countries build.

Generally speaking, experience has shown this to not be true.

The number of people killed in an artillery bombardment of a reasonably dense city is quite low, certainly not worth the expenditure of ammunition for this purpose alone. And it creates a plethora of hiding spaces and basically barricades all the roads so mechanized advances grind to a halt, which is more beneficial to the defenders than it is to the attackers. This is why barricading the streets is usually the first order of business for a defender, regardless of whether they're a revolutionary rabble or a professional army.

No one is arguing that artillery is somehow not useful when assaulting an built-up environment, but "shelling it to level skyscrapers" is a waste of ammunition for no tactical gain. It is unlikely that skyscrapers would even be favored as a particularly good hiding space for a defending force; modern glass skyscrapers provide virtually zero protection or even concealment from enemy fire for troops trying to fight from inside the building.

Also, communications networks are a great source of potential intelligence. If military forces are active in a city with millions of people, a few people are certainly going to be talking about it and probably taking photos of it. Blowing it all up obviously prevents this.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:31 pm**

More importantly, cities are important. That's why people defend them and why you want to capture them. If you destroy a city in order to capture it than you basically fought and bled for nothing. In fact, worse than nothing, as you now have to find a way to handle the humanitarian disaster that has, thanks to your valiant efforts, found it self on your side of the front line.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2017 5:38 pm**

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Neo-Pontic Empire wrote:Conscription is a fairly new concept, the British didn't have conscription during the start of WW1 and their professional, motivated, and well drilled army made an excellent account of itself in the early battles of the war, not to mention the US never had peacetime conscription. Even then Britain didn't start conscription until 1916 and allowed it to lapse after 1920 up until 1939 where they attempted to have conscripts drafted into essentially the equivalent of the national guard rather than being full time soldiers (obviously WW2 scrapped those plans). I mean peace time conscription may be necessary depending on your strategic situation, but volunteer militaries are hardly a new concept created by neoliberals, especially in the Anglosphere where peacetime conscription was very rare.

Conscription in the United States started over a year before the United States entered WWII, when the nation was still at peace.

It's a much older practice in any event, and the modern incarnation of the system can be more or less directly traced back to the levée en masse of Revolutionary France in the 1790s. Oddly enough it happened to appear alongside the emergence of the second modern democracy in the Western world.

The various chinese dynasties were more or less doing it all the way back to the Qin Dynasty and maybe even before so there is that.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:00 pm**

Kazarogkai wrote:
The Akasha Colony wrote:
Conscription in the United States started over a year before the United States entered WWII, when the nation was still at peace.

It's a much older practice in any event, and the modern incarnation of the system can be more or less directly traced back to the levée en masse of Revolutionary France in the 1790s. Oddly enough it happened to appear alongside the emergence of the second modern democracy in the Western world.

The various chinese dynasties were more or less doing it all the way back to the Qin Dynasty and maybe even before so there is that.

Hammurabi's Code, of the 18th Century BCE, referred to a system of conscription and peacetime service, and noted that the hiring of substitutes was already common. Coerced service broadly speaking probably predates the development of writing.

Though it should still be noted that modern conscription, of the kind pioneered by the French Levée en masse, was still a revolutionary development in and of itself, in that it made the requirement temporary and universal. Part of this had to do with France's own emerging nationalism, in that it made every citizen a soldier for the nation. But it was also enabled by the growth of powerful and wealthy states with the bureaucratic capacity to oversee such a system. Rounding up local peasants on an ad-hoc basis, or picking out a few people from each village and having them serve for 25 years, were both much simpler for pre-modern states to carry out, in spite of their obvious defects.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:06 pm**

The Soodean Imperium wrote:
Kazarogkai wrote:
The various chinese dynasties were more or less doing it all the way back to the Qin Dynasty and maybe even before so there is that.

Hammurabi's Code, of the 18th Century BCE, referred to a system of conscription and peacetime service, and noted that the hiring of substitutes was already common. Coerced service broadly speaking probably predates the development of writing.

Though it should still be noted that modern conscription, of the kind pioneered by the French Levée en masse, was still a revolutionary development in and of itself, in that it made the requirement temporary and universal. Part of this had to do with France's own emerging nationalism, in that it made every citizen a soldier for the nation. But it was also enabled by the growth of powerful and wealthy states with the bureaucratic capacity to oversee such a system. Rounding up local peasants on an ad-hoc basis, or picking out a few people from each village and having them serve for 25 years, were both much simpler for pre-modern states to carry out, in spite of their obvious defects.

That's pretty much what Kazarogkai did until the late 19th early 20th century. It was done on a Household/Clan rather than village level but still. My general Rp narrative for why the system ended was more or less they were involved in an extremely destructive war resulting in the large scale loss of are Sakari, aka said Warrior class. During the middle of said conflict, which they won mind you, they ended up implementing on a system of regular conscription. It was first used to deal with shortfalls in the logistics forces but later on they started using them for combat. Not super popular but necessary. A bit after the war ended they in the process of trying to modernize implemented a system of universal rather than limited conscription and the rest is history.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:32 am**

It's worth noting that 25-year service had its advantages. Namely superior training levels compared to most of the rabble European powers fought against in the Colonies.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2017 5:02 am**

The main limitation of pre-modern conscription systems is they tended to net a lot, maybe even mostly, very low-quality manpower. If every village or block or clan or whatever has to send so many men with no expectation they will ever return, they won't be sending their best. The citizens-soldiers of classical antiquity were probably the best quality wise because the burden fell on the elite rather than the masses. But this obviously limited the amount of manpower available.

Universal conscription when properly implemented (without extensive deferrals) nets something close to a cross section of a particular cohort of young men. This inevitably nets a lot of low-quality men, but also a lot of excellent men.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2017 9:32 am**

Allanea wrote:It's worth noting that 25-year service had its advantages. Namely superior training levels compared to most of the rabble European powers fought against in the Colonies.

Sakari service is technically for life, until they die or retire, but still. Also the system that I speak of was more or less inspired primarily by the Mali empire but your point still kinda stands.

Austrasien wrote:The main limitation of pre-modern conscription systems is they tended to net a lot, maybe even mostly, very low-quality manpower. If every village or block or clan or whatever has to send so many men with no expectation they will ever return, they won't be sending their best. The citizens-soldiers of classical antiquity were probably the best quality wise because the burden fell on the elite rather than the masses. But this obviously limited the amount of manpower available.

I got some ways of more or less getting around this sorta: First In order to encourage talent Sakari are as a reward for their service not required to pay certain types of taxes. Namely corvee Labor, they spend that time training, and their immediate family is not counted for in their Clans hut tax burden. Second, in order to actually be a Sakari they have to have atleast a certain level of quality and to survive their training. If they don't their Clan has to send another replacement immediately. Said training is technically done at the local level by whatever Mari(Regiment) their area is connected too so this does create certain... Discrepancies but still. Third and final is the Sakari Pre Training. Within the Kaza education system rather than regular PE martial skills are taught to young boys so that they atleast know the basics of war. Things like wrestling, marching, and maybe some basic weapons skills. This was the case even when schools were an institution of the Monasteries rather than a state institution in a system reminiscent of the Burmese Pwe-kyaung system. This is combined with the fact that Sakari are generally during their service are expected to have retainers some of which will effectively be apprentices, usually Nephews, who will be personally trained by the Sakari and upon his retirement, or death, will replace him.

Not perfect but something. my general thinking as part of this is that with enough training I can turn low quality manpower into something that is reasonably serviceable. Even then I rely more so on my raw numbers(relatively large population) and the discipline of my troops rather than their raw fighting power so meh. Even if I get a bunch of low quality men I could always pop them over to the logistics and make them porters while keeping the creme de la crop for combat jobs if I must. That's a solution.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:49 pm**

Please forgive the haphazard cut and paste reply look to your following post as the majority of your post I felt there was little left currently I could expand upon, beside the snippets below.

The Soodean Imperium wrote:Deprecation of knowledge not applicable outside the military is if anything an advantage from the military's point of view, as it makes that skilled technician more likely to sign up for a second four-year term as a volunteer.

Various empirical studies various individuals have done over the preceding decades seem to indicate the above is in fact an advantage neither to a nation’s military nor to its overlying civilian economic structure.

When I went digging through the sources listed of the sources I consulted, I was able to unearth some of those various references that were publicly accessible, it’s quite a bit of reading, but I’ll post the sources I was able to dig up at the end of the post.

The Soodean Imperium wrote:I'm less certain about whether the military should give university credit or scholarships after graduation. Given Menghe's level of development, the tertiary gross enrollment ratio is probably in the 50-60% range, and the Ministry of Education works very hard (probably too hard) to make sure these are the very best 50-60% of high school graduates. Having gone over the numbers again, probably only like 30% of HS graduates will get conscripted anyway, so I can maybe work in an exemption for students accepted to the top 20 universities, or those accepted with certain other scholarships, or something.

Given the closest analog of your nation I know of in RL with conscription and its state socialism system is China, IIRC China uses a University credit system. The majority of RL western democracies just gave blank deferments to those enrolled in college/university and since manpower numbers themselves were never a major problem given a large population base [Over 50 million] for the majority of nations, just completely exempting these people from conscription is generally what ended up happening without much effect on conscription numbers. However, that system led to its own sociality ills over the long term.

The Soodean Imperium wrote:TBH my other concern would be people who get put on the technical school track and then spend two years six months without seeing a lathe. Though I guess this is what maintenance and construction units are for?

Depending on the individuals specific technical skill set there’s quite a few roles they could fill besides in maintenance and construction. Given what I assume is the wide spread of computerization within your armed forces, that alone will create the need for a massive I.T. personnel requirement, now most nations in RL have turned to PMCs to fill that role, but this isn’t the real world now is it. THIS IS NS!

[Sorry, couldn't resist using the movie quote]

The Soodean Imperium wrote:How does this work in RL volunteer militaries? i.e., if 50,000 incoming personnel choose "armored forces" when enlisting, but there are only 10,000 armored forces openings that year. Or if someone wants to be in signal troops but their pre-conscription examination suggested they would be very fit as front-line infantry.

Which volunteer military though? Each nation has adapted and implemented pretty much their own unique system. The only one I’m the most familiar with in its function is the US military version.

The Soodean Imperium wrote:As I argued earlier, my main (OOC) objection to volunteer active forces and conscripted reserves is that it even if the reserve forces get the same basic training and refresher exercises under both systems, ex-conscript reserves will have the added benefit of having served in a similar role for two years. And based on my admittedly rudimentary knowledge, I can only assume this is enough to make a noticeable difference when the mobilization reserves are abruptly shipped off to their units and told to be ready for a massive conventional war in a week or less.

Depending on the variables like the size of former ex-conscript reserves, how long since it’s been since your nation switched over to an all-volunteer active force, etc…there may be little noticeable difference when the mobilized reserves are shipped off.

Ex. What new procedures have your nation implemented or new equipment has your nation introduced into service following the discharge of said reservist from the system? All knowledge atrophies over time if not continually refreshed from time to time.

The Soodean Imperium wrote:"All volunteer-military" (or at least all-volunteer active troops with conscripted reserves) is something I may use as the "future prospects" section in writeups, something the Ministry of Defense is periodically debating and increasingly favorable toward but has not yet put into practice.

That’s the way I ultimately decided to go, now I’m trying to figure out the best way to integrate the two components into an effective fighting force.

The system I envision goes something like this [Note Basic Rough Draft]: Each annual cohort of around 48,000 to 65,000 is conscripted which is enough to assemble and meet the divisional TOEs of one armoured, one or two infantry [mechanized] divisions with the remaining cohort being assigned to the other branches. The active volunteer units are used as the building blocks for mobilized divisions both in peacetime and if required war time, so once the conscripts have completed basic training in their respective branch, they are assigned to cross train and accrue familiarization with active units, which is also the unit they would be assigned to should the call go out to start mobilization of the reserves.

Without further ado, here's the source reading material I promised.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2006/R1450part2.pdf-PDF & http://www.ifn.se/Wfiles/conferences/07varnplikt/Poutvaara_Wagener_Conscription.pdf-PDF

Neo-Pontic Empire wrote:Wouldn't not conscripting people give you a better moral high ground?

In theory yes, but as a citizen are you not morally bound to serve your country, military or otherwise? Wouldn’t also not taxing your citizens give ones people a better moral high ground since from an economic point of view conscription is viewed as a form of tax on a nation’s citizens mostly falling on the burden of the poorer strata of a sociality?
Even with conscription in effect, by offering people the ability to be exempt through conscientious objector are your people now retaining the moral high ground even with conscription or is it now a more of a moral neutral ground?

Or you could just reread what Sood wrote so beautifully and elegantly.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:53 pm**

Is this as big as they are saying it is? From what it sounds like all they did was jam the tankers' communications, and said tankers didn't know the plan well enough to stick to it.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:15 pm**

This is a very old US Army problem. That the US Army needs to be constantly chatting to fight was observed as far back as WWII. The US Army dislikes using SOPs for tactical problems (which greatly reduce the amount of communication needed on the battlefield at the cost of stereotyping tactics to a degree) and places a very high emphasis on central control by senior officers so constant communication is necessary for coordination. It was already apparent in the Gulf War that mechanised units would, upon reaching their furthest objective, simply halt and try to raise higher commands for more orders. This didn't amount to anything because the Iraqi Army never took advantage of the delays to counter attack or withdraw to better positions but it highlighted a weakness.

This was compounded by a deliberate decision in the early 2000s to develop the Army network without trying to harden it against interception, jamming or infiltration because it was assumed the US would remain so far ahead of likely adversaries technologically, who were imagined in terms of Iraq/Serbia/North Korea - technologically backwards and using Soviet-like equipment and tactics, this would not be a problem.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:23 am**

But but battle drill #4 ):

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:35 am**

we just need to use psyco surgery to implant a comprehensive array of battle maneuvers and procedures in the minds of every soldier so that he doesn't even need to think about what to do next.

it will just be instinct

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:37 am**

Laritaia wrote:we just need to use psyco surgery to implant a comprehensive array of battle maneuvers and procedures in the minds of every soldier so that he doesn't even need to think about what to do next.

it will just be instinct

You mean "practice"?

That requires spending money.

The US Army of the 1980s was a lot better and stronger than the US Army of the 2010s, which is really just a paper tiger to anyone who isn't a dirt farmer. Thankfully, it seems everyone else are also paper tigers.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:39 am**

Gallia- wrote:
Laritaia wrote:we just need to use psyco surgery to implant a comprehensive array of battle maneuvers and procedures in the minds of every soldier so that he doesn't even need to think about what to do next.

it will just be instinct

You mean "practice"?

That requires spending money.

no i mean implant it using electricity and science

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:43 am**

Heh,Realism is for NERDS I always have my trusty piranha shooting piemaking dragon to ride

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:44 am**

Laritaia wrote:
Gallia- wrote:
You mean "practice"?

That requires spending money.

no i mean implant it using electricity and science

It's just as effective to train soldiers to conduct battle drills prior to combat. Since most soldiers are reasonably intelligent and at least medium-quality humans given the end of universal conscription, it isn't particularly difficult for a person to understand what his job is in Battle Drill #24: React to Contact during HLZ Disembarkation. It's probably not much different than in Battle Drill #1, Battle Drill #4, etc.

Given it's SOP and stereotyped, it would be infinitely easier than the chaotic nonsense mess that the US Army (or any Anglo-American military) does. Which is really just "move 10 feet, radio for orders, move 10 feet, radio for orders" ad infinitum. Would have more creativity and variety than the brain-dead outsourcing of thought to higher command that happens now.

The only problem is it might require actually trusting the people next to you, which goes against the concepts of libertarianism that have taken root in Western mindsets in the past 30 years.

Anyway I wonder if it's possible for a radio-heavy army to ever learn how to undo that and start using standardized tactics. Did the USSR ever grow radios or whatever to the extent that USA or UK did in WW2?

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:17 pm**

Federated Kingdom of Prussia wrote:Is this as big as they are saying it is? From what it sounds like all they did was jam the tankers' communications, and said tankers didn't know the plan well enough to stick to it.

semaphore tank will rule the battlefields of the futurrrrr

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:22 pm**

Gallan tank crews just have a little metal cylinder that holds their flags.

Attack only in simple formations and only in company strength or greater.

Cuteness awaits.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:36 pm**

"They jam our comms. Oh well...
*cupola opened*
*Semaphore code*
2nd and 3rd tank left, 5th and 4th right"

Read : a tank platoon attacking with 2-1-2 formation.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:43 pm**

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAOITDzehLo

Is Lindybeige still viable?

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:55 pm**

Grenver wrote:Heh,Realism is for NERDS I always have my trusty piranha shooting piemaking dragon to ride

The ability to launch piranhas from dragons is insignificant next to the power of thermonuclear arms.

Gallia- wrote:
Laritaia wrote:
no i mean implant it using electricity and science

It's just as effective to train soldiers to conduct battle drills prior to combat. Since most soldiers are reasonably intelligent and at least medium-quality humans given the end of universal conscription, it isn't particularly difficult for a person to understand what his job is in Battle Drill #24: React to Contact during HLZ Disembarkation. It's probably not much different than in Battle Drill #1, Battle Drill #4, etc.

Given it's SOP and stereotyped, it would be infinitely easier than the chaotic nonsense mess that the US Army (or any Anglo-American military) does. Which is really just "move 10 feet, radio for orders, move 10 feet, radio for orders" ad infinitum. Would have more creativity and variety than the brain-dead outsourcing of thought to higher command that happens now.

The only problem is it might require actually trusting the people next to you, which goes against the concepts of libertarianism that have taken root in Western mindsets in the past 30 years.

Anyway I wonder if it's possible for a radio-heavy army to ever learn how to undo that and start using standardized tactics. Did the USSR ever grow radios or whatever to the extent that USA or UK did in WW2?

Didn't Allanea post a series of standardised battalion-company manoeuvres of the Soviet Army somewhere?

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 1:14 pm**

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a183185.pdf

There are probably more books translated including actual nomograms.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2017 1:16 pm**

Western Pacific Territories wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAOITDzehLo

Is Lindybeige still viable?

no

NationStates

NS Military Realism Consultancy Thread Mk X Purps Safe Space