About Military Recruits: Whats the Best Way To Train Them?
| || |
|View Poll Results :How hard should recruits be trained?|
|Extreme: Challenge them till they break, and rebuild their esteem.||12||50.00%|
|Moderate: Challenge them only enough to see their character.||9||37.50%|
|Mild: Challenge them till they pass the skill exceptionally||3||12.50%|
|lukewarm: Challenge them till they pass||0||0%|
|Cold: Dont Challenge them at all.||0||0%|
|Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll|
| || |
|June 17th, 2004||#1|
| || |
Military Recruits: Whats the Best Way To Train Them? info
Go ahead: describe in a short paragraph, what you think training for a recruit should be like. Tell us why your way would be better than the methods employed today.
Lets not think beyond boot camp on this one, unless you think that post boot camp training is just as important achieving your ideal training goal.
This is not a right or wrong way type thing. Discuss politely with each other why you think their method wouldnít work, if you disagree with it, but no slamming.
My Contribution: I want the training to be longer: about six months, for all the services. For the purposes of training, I want that recruit to temporarily lose his basic civil rights, in order for those people to be legally available for the next part. I want those that enlist to know this fact, and that the following will be done to them in basic before they sign the dotted line. I want that TI or DI to have physical and mental challenging privileges short of homicidal abuse, so they can be equipped to really shake that recruit up so that his ultimate character can be revealed. If a person is revealed to have a character flaw that is not correctable, I further want a DI group to meet and make the decision to remove him at the squadron level.
I believe that a person who might not really want to join the military might back away from this, if an when they know its coming. Just my opinion.
ďIf we should have to fight, we should be prepared to do so from the neck up instead of from the neck down.Ēó General James H. Doolittle, USAAF
|June 17th, 2004||#2|
| || |
I answered Moderate: Challenge them only enough to see their character, but there are some flavors in between Moderate and Extreme (what's the point in breaking a person's spirit? You might not be able to get them back togther again).
Let me exaplain: I think that training, particularly Basic Training should be as hard as possible on purpose. That is, specifically designed and controlled to test the prospective candidate (soldiers, marines, airmen, guardsmen or sailors) and weed out the ones who can't make it - with retraining available for those who just missed.
I have always felt that Basic Training was too short (8 weeks for me plus in and outprocessing) and should be about 12 weeks long with much more weapons and infantry type training. This would call for teams of Drill Sergeants/Instructors to run the training and evaluate each trainee. Has anyone ever read Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein? That's the system I envision here
AIT should also be expanded with more emphasis on weapons and combat skills (fire and manuever, patrolling, land navigation, convoy operations, etc.). This is in addition to teaching more of the basic skill set for that MOS. One of the things that used to (and still does) frustrate me is that we get PFC Smith back from AIT, but still have to spend numerous hours training him on what he or she needs to know to function in his or her duty position.
However, Mark, I am curious to know what you mean by
I'd rather be a Soldier with a mule and mountain gun, than Knight of old, with spurs of gold, or Roman, Greek or Hun. For when there's trouble brewing, they always send for me!
Mortui Non Mordent - Celeritas Et Accuratio
|June 17th, 2004||#3|
| || |
I say train in the way that will be the best for them. Like when you're parents told you when you were a kid "It's for your own good". I'm not a psychcologist or anything so I don't know what type of training that would be, but logic says to the absolute extreme, for when they complete it successfully they will be of steel, with the absolute self confidence and abilities, and those who do not make it, so be it for they will only drag down the rest.
I personally love challenges. I love tackling them head on and defeating them, crushing them under the soles of my jackboots, and then bathing in the sweet glory of triumph. And when I fail in the path of something greater than me, it drives me to push harder.
Two quotes which illustrate what I think.
Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory!
Let them fail.
Edit: This is my personal unqualified and unprofessional philosophy, molded to suit me, and me alone.
|June 17th, 2004||#4|
| || |
I'm in favor of a Moderate/Extreme approach. Simply driving the recruit to the breaking point with the intention of (hopefully) building him back up again can backfire; what happens to those who are broken and CAN'T be built back up?
I like the Starship Troopers idea, where the recruits training is made hard enough that in order to succeed, the recuit must reach deep down within himself.
Magician, Sailor, Adventurer...Been There, Done That
|June 17th, 2004||#5|
| || |
Actually I love the whole idea in that book: That those that make the decisions for others must show their service that they care about the others.
Only veterans voted. But you could only vote after you got out of the service. Notice though, that it wasnt all infantry...your service was geared to your ability. In Juans case, it was Mobile Infantry. when he sat down and made his decision to go career, he thought about why he joined in the first place. He wanted the right to vote. But he didnt really need to do that right away..because he voted with every drop he made on the enemy.
Its a great story. I still keep a copy in my nightstand. Ilike the fact that someone had the guts to bring it up in the topic.
|June 17th, 2004||#7|
| || |
Speaking from experience, itís not fun being in a foxhole and your buddy breaks under pressure. You want someone who can handle it. If you train to light, you may never see just exactly what you can take. If you train to the extreme, you know. You know because hopefully you were broken before. You know what to expect the next time. During the course of your training, your instructors have a duty to break you and rebuild you as the military sees fit. If for some reason they hurt your self-esteem, get over it. Itís their way of weeding out the people who canít hack it. Itís best you go home with your feelings hurt than an officer knocking on your mother/wifeís door telling them you ainít coming home.
As for youíre technical training, I agree with Gunner. They should put more emphasis in weapons and combat maneuvers. Iím a member of the Security Forces. Yeah, many people see us as only cops. However, they donít realize we are the infantry of the Air Force. While the flyers are tucked away in their tents taking advantage of their crew rest, weíre out patrolling the perimeter. If something catastrophic should happen, 90% of the Air Force wouldnít know how to properly use a weapon, let alone take up a defense fighting position. More or less, itís a race to the bunkers for them.
No offense to any Air Force individuals out there who are fortunate enough to be in a unit that takes time to train you. I know there are some out there!
\"Courage is fear that has said it\'s prayers\" Unknown
|June 17th, 2004||#9|
| || |
I'd say that Marine Corps way. Because they have a fine record of creating great warriors. Also comfort is something a Marine, soldier, sailor, or airman cant afford, makes them go soft.
The Devil wanted a refund on my soul; I told him all sales final.
|June 17th, 2004||#10|
| || |
I have to say The Marine Corps way is about the best. They have it to a extreme without bein to extreme. The recruits need to be treated as if they were a POW. That is the only way to break someone down, if they can pass this kind of trainin then they will be able to handle any situation they are put into. I do believe that trainin needs to be longer in all aspects, boot needs to be longer ITS needs to be longer, everything, before the get to the Fleet. This way they have more than a basic knowledge of things and will be able to adapt easier to Fleet trainin.