Beholder

Member
Cellphone disruption ( and landline, media) won’t affect the military very much but will for the civilian population. Without a reliable means to communicate with the public, confused civilians could easily be a problem for military operations.
It's possible to knock out cellular network in relatively wide area and RF for example certainly capable of this. Even if they not target specifically cell phones.
But isn't the answer to this is army, who has communication, to establishing contact with civilian population(you know leaflets, direct contact with civilian authorities in area etc.) and guide them to stay at home for example, while military provide relief when needed?
Military can't actually shrink responsibility in this case.
In Israel we have Home Front command, that do guide civilian population. During the operation in enemy territory, army do similar things to a lesser extent.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
It's possible to knock out cellular network in relatively wide area and RF for example certainly capable of this. Even if they not target specifically cell phones.
But isn't the answer to this is army, who has communication, to establishing contact with civilian population(you know leaflets, direct contact with civilian authorities in area etc.) and guide them to stay at home for example, while military provide relief when needed?
Military can't actually shrink responsibility in this case.
In Israel we have Home Front command, that do guide civilian population. During the operation in enemy territory, army do similar things to a lesser extent.
I assume several European countries might have established secure links to civilian leadership but how leadership then communicates to citizens might very well be limited to leaflets, not exactly ideal. I would imagine the situation in Canada would be even more limited.
 

Beholder

Member
I assume several European countries might have established secure links to civilian leadership but how leadership then communicates to citizens might very well be limited to leaflets, not exactly ideal. I would imagine the situation in Canada would be even more limited.
That what military needs to identify.
Civilian leadership can use firefighter, police, ppl that give you parking tickets, medics, volunteers, postal services etc.
Same things you use when natural disaster strikes.
In general you plan how to do it before actual fighting start for home front.
In our history home front command was established in 1994 and first was directed mainly toward preparedness for chem weapon use(by Syria), now it's more toward heavy conventional rocket attack, but principles are similar.
Dysfunctional cellular network is very light in comparison. IMO
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Conscription, part of the mandatory set of tasks to mark off in the first couple weeks to complete basic training.

Was part of a longer overnight thing with multiple stations that also included a detectability and observation at night lesson as well as a rather claustrophobic crawl on our backs through a rather wet storm drain under a street. Trek - split down to squad level, with light gear (15 kg plus rifle) - started after that, at something past midnight and went until about 3 am, with pickup an hour later and regular day service training starting a bit late the next day at 6 am.
Like most training, you have to start of with basics. Conscription never really gets out beyond it. I am curious to hear how Germany is going now its dropped the conscription. I hear of calls for it to be reinstated, conscription had a lot of negatives sure, but it also address some issues which seem to be coming more apparent.


Yes, Scouts has a religious element to it, and in Australia, a very strong monarchist slant. However, plenty of atheist republicans exist in it, particularly in countries where its enjoys wide membership. I guess for many Australians religion is a tradition more than an active belief. I could see that experience perhaps not existing in other countries. I assume its implementation varies by country significantly. I know they have wide membership across CANZUS. Wide membership is the key. Scouts is just one organization, there other similar entities.

The ADF here has Army cadets, Navy Cadets and Air Cadets. While not massively popular, they have around half a dozen units in each of the capital cities, and usually a few around each major regional military base, usually catering to children of military staff. The Air cadets are very popular here, there are waiting lists.

Most of the school cadet programs here in Australia are in private schools, however not all. Some selective and specialist public schools also have them.

I don't think any of these programs significantly shorten training periods, but they probably do help with retention in boot camps and help inform defence career choices. They also all very interested people, to really work on strong basic core skills.

The GAP year program here seems very popular. It seems Germany is interested in a similar program.

Recent COVID19 has seen defence recruitment massively surge in Australia.

I assume several European countries might have established secure links to civilian leadership but how leadership then communicates to citizens might very well be limited to leaflets, not exactly ideal. I would imagine the situation in Canada would be even more limited.
Here in Australia we have things like the New South Wales State Emergency Service - Wikipedia and New South Wales Rural Fire Service - Wikipedia.

The NSWRFS has been fantastically modern at communicating. Everyone in regional areas, has the app downloaded, and tells you when they are back burning, controlled fire, uncontrolled fire. Governments can also SMS people in areas to evacuate. We have boards that warn of fire danger located near roads leading or entering towns. RFS and SES also have radio coms, can patching to police coms, etc.

Australia has also looked at mobile phone tower replacement, after the fires this year when many were damaged. So mobile phone trucks that can be driven into an area and offer regional replacement.

There is also the capability to utilise every wifi hotspot as a point to make calls and to help navigation. In Australia, every public phone now is a Wifi hot spot, and most peoples Wifi router in their home offers a public connection.

Every set of traffic lights also has at least bluetooth connection (to collect data) and could be upgraded to a wifi hotspot.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Off-topic alert. Sorry about that.
Conscription never really gets out beyond it. I am curious to hear how germany is going now its dropped the conscription.
Technically not true — may be true in Taiwan and Korea, where the level of training is deliberately limited, but not true in other systems.

Finland and Israel are differing examples of how to train conscripts to a high level. These conscript armies are designed to fight in specific roles in defined terrain types with detailed and classified drawer plans — that are wargamed for optimal outcomes.
Like most training, you have to start of with basics. Conscription never really gets out beyond it. I am curious to hear how germany is going now its dropped the conscription.
Broad brush stereotypes don’t illuminate. Conscription is not one size fits all and national system design matters with regard to building a commitment to defend at an individual level (which takes some effort to explain and understand). It’s not only a matter of spending $30k or $100k per conscript, based on talent and need.

In systems that work, conscription means training a solider, sailor or airman to their vocation specific task. I am a great admirer of Finland’s total defence concept and the above video is part of their communications effort for their conscripts.

Singapore has much to learn from Finland in their total defence plans. And you may be shocked how much was spent training my son over 47 weeks; as part of his 22 month NSF cycle before he is rotated to the operationally ready reserves for a 10 year cycle in the Singapore context.
 
Last edited:

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The GAP year program here seems very popular. It seems Germany is interested in a similar program.
The Bundeswehr has had a "voluntary conscription" programme in place for 25 years now, with (in financial planning) up to 12,500 volunteers per year serving between 7 and 23 months in enlisted posts. Usually there's between 11,000 and 19,000 applicants for such postings. Interest has been falling since about 2016, when a strategic change let to recruiters shifting possible applicants over to regular army enlistment instead.

To be realistic: For the most part it's not considered worthwhile to invest any meaningful training in these people, and they're shunted off into auxiliary posts in administration or as drivers and such. People serving longer than 12 months may get deployed, with any less you'll be considered a deadweight. It also tends to not be very satisfactory for those serving in it. First 6 months - the full training period basically - are a probation period, during which 23% of voluntary conscripts quit their job and 4% get fired by the military.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Finland and Israel are differing examples of how to train conscripts to a high level. These conscript armies are designed to fight in specific roles in defined terrain types with detailed and classified drawer plans — that are wargamed for optimal outcomes.

Broad brush stereotypes don’t illuminate. Conscription is not one size fits all and national system design matters with regard to building a commitment to defend at an individual level (which takes some effort to explain and understand). It’s not only a matter of spending $30k or $100k per conscript, based on talent and need.
"After a few short sentences, we are dropped straight into the storyline, with shadowy attacks on infrastructure. Notable among these is that on the water supply in Lappeenranta. "

...
Lappeenranta? Well, at least they have the lake for fresh water, though to make sure, I'd boil or otherwise treat the water..

Yes, I've been there. Swum in the lake, & been across it by ship. I recall that on midsummer day most of the population seemed to be incapable from drink. I'd invade then.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Lappeenranta? Well, at least they have the lake for fresh water, though to make sure, I'd boil or otherwise treat the water..

Yes, I've been there. Swum in the lake, & been across it by ship. I recall that on midsummer day most of the population seemed to be incapable from drink. I'd invade then.
If a COVID cure is found by 2021 midsummer I think there will be many national populations incapable from drink!
 

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
Off-topic alert. Sorry about that.

Technically not true — may be true in Taiwan and Korea, where the level of training is deliberately limited, but not true in other systems.

Finland and Israel are differing examples of how to train conscripts to a high level. These conscript armies are designed to fight in specific roles in defined terrain types with detailed and classified drawer plans — that are wargamed for optimal outcomes.

Broad brush stereotypes don’t illuminate. Conscription is not one size fits all and national system design matters with regard to building a commitment to defend at an individual level (which takes some effort to explain and understand). It’s not only a matter of spending $30k or $100k per conscript, based on talent and need.

In systems that work, conscription means training a solider, sailor or airman to their vocation specific task. I am a great admirer of Finland’s total defence concept and the above video is part of their communications effort for their conscripts.

Singapore has much to learn from Finland in their total defence plans. And you may be shocked how much was spent training my son over 47 weeks; as part of his 22 month NSF cycle before he is rotated to the operationally ready reserves for a 10 year cycle in the Singapore context.
Pretty sure the part about the IDF is not true.
I wasn't an infantryman. I did no combat, I was in the intelligence corps. But I do know that all combat soldiers are expected to go through rigorous training in multiple different types of terrain and scenarios.
By the end of their service, every soldier would have accumulated a significant amount of time in the desert, urban areas, rocky fields, mountains, flats etc.

Our veterans are in eternal grief over the poor state of weapons proficiency of our infantrymen, but at least the terrain thing they do right.
 

Beholder

Member
Four Allies launch multinational initiative on Rapidly Deployable Mobile Counter Rockets, Artillery And Mortar Capability

Experts from the four Allied nations will investigate options for the multinational development and procurement of capabilities in this area, with a particular focus on innovative solutions such as directed energy based capabilities. The signature of the Letter of Intent launching this initiative was added virtually from the capitals of participating nations on 23 October 2020, in the margins of the meeting of NATO Ministers of Defence.

C-RAM capabilities are key for NATO’s readiness. Development and procurement of effective solutions to defend Allied forces from rockets, artillery and mortar threats will contribute to effectively protecting personnel, facilities, and equipment.

“This C-RAM initiative will significantly increase capacities to conduct high-intensity operations, while enhancing the protection of personnel, facilities and equipment from rocket and mortar artillery attacks, and conventional air threats,” said the Deputy Secretary General Mircea Geoană.

This multinational initiative will provide for a lower cost and more resilient solution, while increasing interoperability among participating Allies.



Interesting, what part of it is due to NK war and what is continuation of NATO countries rising commitment to collective self-defence.
Direct energy C-RAM is relatively new trend, UK also have at least one in inventory(Drone Dome).

P.S.NK = Nagorno-Karabakh.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Four Allies launch multinational initiative on Rapidly Deployable Mobile Counter Rockets, Artillery And Mortar Capability

Experts from the four Allied nations will investigate options for the multinational development and procurement of capabilities in this area, with a particular focus on innovative solutions such as directed energy based capabilities. The signature of the Letter of Intent launching this initiative was added virtually from the capitals of participating nations on 23 October 2020, in the margins of the meeting of NATO Ministers of Defence.

C-RAM capabilities are key for NATO’s readiness. Development and procurement of effective solutions to defend Allied forces from rockets, artillery and mortar threats will contribute to effectively protecting personnel, facilities, and equipment.

“This C-RAM initiative will significantly increase capacities to conduct high-intensity operations, while enhancing the protection of personnel, facilities and equipment from rocket and mortar artillery attacks, and conventional air threats,” said the Deputy Secretary General Mircea Geoană.

This multinational initiative will provide for a lower cost and more resilient solution, while increasing interoperability among participating Allies.



Interesting, what part of it is due to NK war and what is continuation of NATO countries rising commitment to collective self-defence.
Direct energy C-RAM is relatively new trend, UK also have at least one in inventory(Drone Dome).
Just be careful with anachronyms and terminology on here. NK is the usual form for North Korea.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
NATO is working on a unified approach towards the PRC and a Reflection Group, consisting of advisers, has delivered a report that recommends that NATO form a body within itself that specifically deals only with the PRC. This body would talk about the PRC, not to it and formulate NATO policy towards it. The advisory group sees the PRC as a long term danger to NATO and the world because of the present govts authoritarian nature and its predatory approach to territory.


The current NATO SECGEN also wants the organisation to become more political in order to deal with the PRC problem in the Asia Pacific and work with countries in the region such as Australia, NZ, South Korea and Japan.

 

Beholder

Member
Question if NATO will get support(or even commitment) from major EU countries on this issue.
And what actual resources NATO can muster in Asia without undermining it's main mission in Europe vs RF.
After all NATO charter doesn't hold in Asia Pacific.
In general West have ample resources to counter this threat if there is will to do it.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Question if NATO will get support(or even commitment) from major EU countries on this issue.
And what actual resources NATO can muster in Asia without undermining it's main mission in Europe vs RF.
After all NATO charter doesn't hold in Asia Pacific.
In general West have ample resources to counter this threat if there is will to do it.
Possible Chinese incursions into the Arctic would get Denmark and Norway’s attention as well as Canada’s. Canada is also a Pacific nation with important trade relations with Asia other than China. Other EU members have similar trade interests. WRT resources that is an issue and NATO needs to address this. Increased naval assets should be the first priority and several members are already doing this.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Question if NATO will get support(or even commitment) from major EU countries on this issue.
And what actual resources NATO can muster in Asia without undermining it's main mission in Europe vs RF.
After all NATO charter doesn't hold in Asia Pacific.
In general West have ample resources to counter this threat if there is will to do it.
I think that NATO would most likely undertake more of a diplomatic political role in the Asia Pacific region. Although you could see various NATO navies undertake FON operations in areas such as the SCS. Australia and NZ also have special relationship status with NATO through various operations with them in the Middle East, Afghanistan and I think, the former Yugoslavia.
 

Beholder

Member
Mmm, I see in article, that they allow "coalition of the wiling" to act, but NATO itself is still require all to agree to act militarily. That does not change anything. That is what we have now. Or maybe it does.
It can go both ways. IMO
What we see is possible framework of cooperation, it still requires major EU economies to be effective i think.
Maybe they don't need to participate in direct military cooperation to counter China, but if we go for some collective application of economic or political power, then alliance can be very effective in deterring China from direct military action and actively counter psyops and economic influence in developing countries.
With China actively hijacking international organisations, some framework of cooperation for democratic countries certainly needed.
 
Top