Cannon fodder is just what we would need in the case of N. Korea or China, just bodies with weapons.
Larry Lyons wrote: >> Easy Company was stood up as a new Ranger battalion, a new type of unit, >> so they had to train for a while to get into the proper shape and learn >> the new tactics that they will need to use to fight. Today's Rangers are >> in training for up to a year before they get to wear the tab. I doubt a >> lot of draftees are going to want to be a Ranger, although some will and >> that is fine. And you are comparing apples to oranges. >> What I was referring to was soldiers that need to be trained for >> armored, infantry or cavalry operations. This training is far less >> demanding than Ranger training and a lot shorter. > > Agreed, but its not an overnight thing. From what I remember of my own > military training, it was 6 weeks basic, then another 6 weeks for the RCIC > course (Royal Canadian Infantry Corps) - basic and advanced infantry courses) > then other cross training but command and OTC. All in all at least 12-16 > weeks to train an rifleman in a Canadian infantry unit plus whatever else is > required - armour, uptraining on the LAV-III etc. > > Anyhow while the training could be done in a shorter time period, I suspect > that the performance of those going through the shortened course would be > worse. I'd much rather have soldiers that have gone through the full 12-16 > weeks rather than work with a group of speed bumps. > >> And forcing people to serve is not a reflection of whether or not this >> country is worth defending, it is a matter of ensuring that we have >> enough people in place to defend her. And you can compare volunteers to >> draftees. Many men and women who were drafted performed brilliantly in >> combat, all the way back to WWII. There are plenty of people around who >> will perform whatever task if offered them to the best of their ability, >> even being forced into the military. > > You're arguing individual cases/exceptions rather than the group or average > performance. There was a very good study called The American Soldier - a four > volume detailed study of the US soldier in the 2nd World War, (see > http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3719/is_199907/ai_n8850053). I'll > have to dig up the specific reference but on the average, draftees did not > perform nearly as well as volunteers. > > Other examples would be from non-American military establishments, ie the > Canadian military in ww2 (draftees performed much worse than the volunteers) > or in Vietnam (again the average draftee showed a much lower performance than > those who volunteered). > > If you need mass armies, ie cannon fodder, then have mass conscription, give > them 3 weeks training. Tell them to fix bayonets and march to glory, if they > don't run away first. That's about all you'll get from them. Myself I'd > rather work with well trained and committed volunteers who know what they're > getting into and still go through with it. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;192386516;25150098;k Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:258204 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
