"Keith Willshaw" writes:
Apart from the experience of the last 30 years during which
conscript armies havent done terribly well in combat
in comparison with professional forces.

Vietnam?

The only example that supports your point is the Falklands war.

[...] its notable that even those European nations that
traditionally used conscription are tending to move to a volunteer
military.

Because they (think they) don't need large armies anymore.

When the Strv 103 was new in the seventies, it was evaluated by the
British army (in Munster), and the U.S. army.

(http://home.swipnet.se/~w-42039/COMPTORN.htm)

| A positive effect of these foreign tests was the opportunity to
| compare the Swedish conscript to the proffesional soldier of the
| british army and the US army. Most swedes were surprised to see that
| despite years of experience the foreign proffessionals were unable
| to fulfill the requirements we have on our conscript soldiers
| regarding firing, driving and maintainance. Very few of the
| retrained american and british gunners were able to satisfy the
| requirements in our qualificationfirings. The concript army gives
| excellent opportunity to put the right man in the right spot.

/Tomas