This essay is on the subject of the changes that the Swedish military is undergoing. This essay will take the old ways of alignment thinking, were the military was to protect the nation against an invasion and compare it to the newer way of alignment thinking, where the military is to go abroad and do peacekeeping operations as there main objective. This comparison will be done by using Bengt Abrahamson theory about professions. He uses three parts one is specialised theoretical knowledge, another is ethics and the last is corps spirit. This theory will then be connected to four interviews. Two with officers representing the defence thinking and two officers representing the peacekeeping thinking. Through this theory and interviews there will be a comparison which tells the different skills and mental attribute the soldiers of the different alignment way of thinking requires. The results shows that the soldiers from the defensive alignment are not capable to do the samet hings as the soldiers from the peacekeeping alignment, but the soldiers from the peacekeeping alignment can handle both the defence and the peaces keeping. Most importantly it shows that there is a difference in the mental attitude between the two ways of alignment thinking. Something I think should be looked upon further to show if it has any effect on how the different soldiers act depending on which alignment they have been trained under. Can the soldiers from these two alignments be combined, or are they too different to do so?