Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ranger
Are we comparing apples to apples, or apples to oranges here?
|
Apples to apples then:
There were two guys, aged 18.
One volunteered to serve, the other was drafted.
Both did the boot camp together. Both served under the same unit.
The draftee finished his tour 2 years later and leaves.
The volunteer stays for 5 more years under contract.
The draftee goe into the Territorial Reserves.
The "regular" goes into advanced weapons training, close quarters, and explosives, or whatever.
The draftee goes to the local pub and drinks a six-pack.He gains weight, maybe gets out of shape.
The "regular" trains all day with his weapon. Runs the course twice a day.Is as fit as a Triathlon athlete.He spends 80% of the year dserving kitchen duty, and other shit.But the remaining 20% that he has left he uses it to train, war-games, exercises,stay fit, learns to march, whatever. He practices in the firing range, gets to be a crackshot at it.
The draftee practices once a year, fires a few rounds.
A couple of years after, a war erupts. Both never seen combat before, but both are called in. They fight the insurgents in Fallujah.
Wich one is better trained and prepared for battle?
They come across an IED (Improvised Explosive device). Both are called to disarm the device.
Wich one manages to disarm the device without blowing himself up? One has explosive training, the other has whatever the drill sargeant managed to teach him in such short time. Wich one has better chance of sucess?
Get my point now?
The draftee had his training condensed.Because he is there for a "short" period, there is no time for him to go through every piece of training, every program, every class. He has to compromise. He leaves the army having learned some 40% or less(hypotetical) of all there was to learn.
You are right. The battle field of today is dinamical, filled with threats from all sides. No one can expect to be prepared for ALL eventualities. But the more you train possible scenarios, the more you know of what you might find in that battlefield, the more chances you have of coming out alive.
Another thing, regarding the "accidents". Do you really think 1/3 one third of the total casualties in a war is an acceptable number to chalk for "battlefield dynamics"? well then! If it were, then every Army on this earth would have to hire 1/3 more people just to cope with those offwar "acceptable" losses.If there were 236 fatal casualties, we can imagine there were ten times as much incidents and injureds. And that is too high a number to have in a state-of-the-art Army.
You should also note that most of these accidents did not happen in the battlefield, per se. They took place in Kuwait, the Gulf, and in areas where the only shots you hear are from US firing ranges. Therefore there isnīt the "under fire stress" factor to account with.
Quote:
|
Draftees [here] can and often do become tank commanders, etc. Those positions are given out based upon ability, and are not based upon whether you are a draftee or not
|
Well, then he isnīt a "draftee" anymore, is he? He becomes a "regular", even if he was drafted to get in. I doubt a draftee would get to become a tank commander during his 2 year term. Arenīt tank commanders sargeants (at least)? Donīt they need to go to Sargeant course first? Canīt be done in a drafteeīs 2 year term. Or can it?
Quote:
|
I have known guys that were in excellent physical shape, and were mentally as sharp as a tack, and yet they were still rejected for military service because their "body-fat calculation" was considered too high, and they were unable to bring it down enough (the military uses both the caliper "pinch test" and also full body submersion tests to calculate exact body-fat to weight ratios). It did not matter that they could pass every physical test - they could not meet the standards and that was that - they were out.
|
Are you telling me that those fat guys that we see on TV are not really fat? Maybe itīs the being on TV that makes everyone look fatter, i donīt know.
When you have a lot of people to choose from, like in draft time, maybe you can have such high standards. But i propose to you that the Army has since become more flexible on that issue. Special forces criteria might be inflexible, but maintenance units and other low key units may not be.
Just look at that maintenance unit that got ambushed in Nassiriyah. There were guys with glasses, meaning less than 20-20 vision, and there were at least 2 with overweight problems, like the black girl, Shoshona i think she was called.
Anyone that examines every footage that came out of Iraq will find quite a few soldiers with a few pounds too many. Itīs a fact. No way around it...