[Suhiir]

Old, old discussion - Conscript VS Professional.

It depends on a number of factors.

How "technically literate" is the population?

During WWII the average American conscript could drive and maintain a motor vehicle. A good many of them were country boys that already knew how to shoot. America tends to encourage individual initiative, even in our armed forces, so when our soldiers ran into situations not covered by their training or orders they tended to improvise, not wait for new orders.

How complex is the military hardware they have to use?

It really doesn't take more then a few days to teach anyone how to fire a rifle, machinegun, mortar. Heck, even drive and fire a WWII tank. These days an M1 Abrams has more insturments and other gizmo's then a WWII bomber.
Artillery has always been a technical branch, but up until WWI most artillery was line-of-sight. These days you have to deal with many types of rounds (HE, cluster, laser guided, WP, illum, smoke, snti-armor, mines, etc) and fuses (surface burst, delayed, airburst) that just plain didn't exist previously. Much less computers that measure and allow you to correct for individual gun characteristics, take into account wind, air pressure, humidity, air density, heck even magnetic deviation. Then there's GPS and laser range finders for the FO - nice, VERY nice, but if you don't know how to use then they're very expensive trash.

How competent is your cadre?

As examples (and these are generalizations - NOT intended to be taken as "truth")
The Brit system tends to produce "professional" senior enlisted men, who train not only the troops but the officers.
The American system is to have "professional" officers who train the enlisted men.
The Soviet system tended to have "professional" officers and only required the enlisted men to do what they were told and ONLY what they were told.
The Germans had a cadre of "professional" officers and senior enlisted men so the officers trained new officers and the enlisted new enlisted.
Most 3rd World Countries have a officer class of folks with the "right connections" who look down on their enlisted men as scum.

Who are you fighting?

Germany VS Poland 1939?
Germany VS USSR 1941?
Germany VS USSR 1945?
Korean War 1950?
Korean War 1952?
France VS Vietnam?
USA VS Vietnam?
Gulf War I?
Your opponent is as important, probably more important then your own forces in a good many ways.

Do your conscripts "want" to be there?

During WWII the US Army was mostly conscripts, they "wanted" to be there,
During Vietnam the US Army was mostly conscripts, they "didn't want" to be there.

Is a professional army "better" then a conscript one?
Sure.

Can most nations afford the manpower, training costs, to pay, a large enough professional army to matter?
Nope.

Like many things, what you want or "should" have VS what you can afford is a major factor in the size and "professionaliam" of your army.