Lesson of arithmetic

The contact of worldviews is always interesting, since usually there is no contact at all: each of the sides is oppressed by its own line, and it is with the end. Around the army plot there are so many sprayed passions that the opportunity itself is already calmly given, provided by the Public Chamber that organized a meeting with the participation of multi -star generals, formed a qualitatively new field of interaction. It is a pity that, as usual, the journalists left the scene just at a time when the multi -nakedness, natural for such an institution, began to generate new meanings, which forces the reporter to play the role of the reporter.

The expression "the army is not ready for a transition to a call at the age of twenty" implies several interpretations. It is not technically ready (which is true): the institute of training the main sergeants, without which to work with the matured contingent of conscripts is inconceivable, is just starting to work. Not ready mental - due to the natural conservatism for the army, which is also true. It is not ready organizationally - in fact, it is not so easy to make a transition from one model to another, without exposing and so incomplete parts. It is important, however, at least the fact that the generals, accustomed to the only one to defend from the attacks of public organizations (often justified), realized: the armies are substituting their shoulder.

As for the call, it is curious: the army authorities and the working group of the Public Chamber were equally captured by abstract reckoning - not so long ago there were three years of service, now two, since 2007 - one and a half, and since 2008 - one. This is a strange score, and I allowed myself to offer a slightly different approach to a painful topic.

I repeat: the draft army in our conditions is necessary not only for considerations of the high cost of contract, but also due to the fact that another tool for the primary socialization of youth is not visible now. The age of the call, in a good way, should be a function of two variables: the qualities of human material and the quality of training of recruits. With the second, as anyone who has encountered an army car knows, the case was bad: a significant part of the time is spent on the point only to fill this time with any nonsense. The first thing is difficult.

Already, as part of the discussions on the working group, the generals from the personnel service were ready to seriously relate to the offer of civilian experts to separate contingents: if graduates of universities serve a year, then separately from graduates of secondary school (more often incomplete), among themselves, already connected by a student subculture. By the way, only this circumstance is relieved by the issue of a twenty-year line-after all, the university is graduated by a couple of three years later. This is reasonable, but we can’t get away from the vastness of the contingent of street punks, more and more often, barely knowing literacy. Not to take it into the army at all - it means to completely yield to its "army" criminal; To pick up - so it would also be necessary separately from the more or less normal mass of yesterday's graduates of full school.

Having said "A", it is reasonable to say "B".

For yesterday's students, one way or another, they received a diploma of higher education, there are quite six months of intensive training - subject to the debugging of the system of regular military fees lasting six weeks. It was tested by experience: healthy is healthy, for mental unloading is also not bad. Without knocking out of life for a long time, six -month preparations can give more than a year -old weak. Of course, this implies a much higher level of military pedagogy than that hack to which everyone is accustomed, but the task is from the class of solved.

For yesterday's schoolchildren, a year of service is needed, since exemption from the residual teenage fool in itself requires half of this period.

For a punks, all a year and a half is needed: a third of the term for bringing to the sense of sergeant means and the elimination of primary or secondary illiteracy, two -thirds of the term - to connect military education with professional, civilian. This is also not so simple, but this task refers to the class of solved.

Three contingents, three periods of service, instead of the usual account on shaved foreheads, it is clear that it is an offshoot to turn on such a system by clicking, and you need to prepare seriously for this, and first you just get used to the refusal of the unitary approach. I just want to note that the Army General Pankov, responsible in the Ministry of Defense for all these affairs, recorded carefully. He not only wrote down what could have been with sign courtesy, - agreed to discuss the scheme at the same time at the same time as the topic of housing for officers (the army spends money on this goal rarely mediocre, and not so important, by virtue of incompetence or from the brown of rear services) and the topic of jobs for officer wives (it has long been necessary to introduce as one of the development plans of territories and municipality).

In general, there was a lot of curious at this meeting of the educated sword and the educated scream, when it turned out that the relations of the army and society were by no means reduced to the old battle of the committees of soldiers' mothers with the military commissariats, with all the importance of this battle.