1950 to 1952One anecdotal to hundreds to the contrary. Did your father just do two and out or stay in???
What time frame are you talking about?
So, back in the 'simple' times. No anti-aircraft missile, or guided AT missile, no ground mounted radar, no encryption radios, Can you imagine what a 50's tanker would say if he sat in an Abrams??? He wouldn't understand the detection and sighting systems. Do you think an Abrams tanker can be trained in the same time as an old Chaffee tank crewmember??? The Military of the 21st Century is as far removed from the 50's as the Civil War was to Korea.
Really? Yet aren't we expecting the Ukrainians to effectively use Stinger SAMs and Javelin anti tank missiles with relatively minimal training?So, back in the 'simple' times. No anti-aircraft missile, or guided AT missile, no ground mounted radar, no encryption radios, Can you imagine what a 50's tanker would say if he sat in an Abrams??? He wouldn't understand the detection and sighting systems. Do you think an Abrams tanker can be trained in the same time as an old Chaffee tank crewmember??? The Military of the 21st Century is as far removed from the 50's as the Civil War was to Korea.
I know the Infantry of today has to know and use without hesitation gear and equipment I never dreamed of. The Army knows that as well. Instead of the 14 week Basic/AIT training period the Infantry will go to 22 weeks in a OSUT program. We trained with all branches in Basic and only when getting to Ft. Puke did we concentrate on what it takes to be a DFG and not a REMF.
Now compare the 50's Airforce with the 21st Century aircraft, support systems, munitions, and repair facilities. Two-year draftees would be a hinderance.
Draft sounds great to those wishing for the 'good old days' where many men had a common bond and supposed greater love of country. 'Gun' rubbers like to pretend it made America more firearms friendly.
But time has marches on and the 'cures' of the 50's just don't hold up.
One more time, a paper tiger everyone knows will not be used and is only good for running up the debt is not helping...
We've been supplying these weapons to the Ukraine for years. They've already been trained.
Relatively is a very interesting word. Most likely the soldiers selected for training have training on similar weapon systems already in their inventory. Someone once said something about 'better than nothing'. Better 3 weeks of training than none at all and far better the threat than real effectiveness when going against semi-trained, poorly lead, seriously under motivated invaders. (Tends to prove my poor draftee standard doesn't it???) But do we really expect effective use across the board???
Do Ukrainians have a choice? Most of the time, the sophisticated weapons will be used only by their trained people, or used while being supervised by trained people. If the war lingers on, there will be many who will get OTJT. But we've already seen news footage of what the average inner-city citizen soldier will be armed with. Molotov cocktails.
And why wouldn't American conscripts be supervised by trained people?
