No disrespect zionist, but until you have been to atleast one of the two initial training programs, OSUT at benning or boot camp and SOI, I do not think you are qualified to say which one is more rigorous. And I strongly disagree with your assertion that quality control can be better managed in a school environment. In fact, in another post I was arguing the opposite. There are limited instructors (US Army DS; or USMC DI) in a school environment that have to teach hundreds of people. Whereas when you are in your unit, the platoon or squad can focus on training. The army accomplishes this by mixing the inexperienced with the experienced. It is much more productive to train with a small unit, where most of the people in the unit have been in the army for a while and are more than qualified to cross train with the new guys. What you get out of this is a considerably higher number of people who can show you a thing or two, in a much smaller unit.

Thanks for your answers... and I understand your arguments.  But that rationale doesn't deal with the problem of .... cherries, I believe they are called... being posted to operational units shortly before deployment.  I am sure that happens.

And what about my sniper school question.

Why is USMC sniper training twice the length of the US Army course?

Thanks,

ZZ

Because of the nature of IDF military service, and because officers are drawn from the ranks and there is no initial requirement for a college degree, most of the high-quality personnel who, in the US or British armies might qualify as snipers, end up as officers in the IDF.  The qualities of high-intelligence, maturity and discretion that are required to be a good sniper are very similar to the qualities that make good company grade officers.  Case in point Vietnam USMC sniper Charles Henderson - he would have made an excellent platoon commander.  

But then that goes to the class distinction between officers and ORs/EMs that exists in the US and most other armies where a university degree is seen as a requirement for a pip on the shoulder.  That is not the case in the IDF.

But back to sniping - there are advantages and disadvantages to each system... and one of the disadvantages of the Israeli system is that the people who end up as snipers in the IDF aren't necessarily the best and brightest.  And I think this is a problem.  I'm not quite sure how to solve it... but there it is.  I'm quite willing to criticize my own where warranted.

Cheers,

ZZ

Your right, it doesn't deal with the problem of cherries getting sent to the sand box two weeks out of OSUT. But this only happens when they are put in a deployed unit. And it doesn't happen too often. Remember, only 175,000 men are deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, less than 1 tenth the total strentgh of the US military (remember, 40% of deployed units in Iraq are National Guard and reserves). If it just so happens that you are put in a unit that is deployed, you are paired with an experienced grunt to show you the ropes and get you caught up on a few things. If you do end up being sent to a unit that is scheduled for deployment, then you will be the recipient of the best predeployment training you can get (IMO). It may not be the perfect system for deployed cherries, but unfortunately that's just the way it is.

However, I will admit that the USMC scout snipers are better than their army counterparts. I am of the opinion that the corps has the finest training program in the world for snipers. SCCO Marine will be able to fill you in on that. USMC snipers have a different mission than their counterparts in their army, hence the longer training time. But the corps has always been known for their excellence in sniping.

Why does it not surprise me?

""I am of the opinion that the corps has the finest training program in the world for snipers""



My opinion is that the French/German sniper training is the finest .



Cheers .

""I am of the opinion that the corps has the finest training program in the world for snipers""



My opinion is that the French/German sniper training is the finest .



Cheers .

Level One SOTIC is the best sniping program in the US military, superior to both the (conventional) Army and USMC schools.  But, again, it's just a school.  Neither it nor the USMC school nor anyone else turn out expert snipers, same as infantry traiining programs don't turn out expert infantrymen.  They turn out guys who now have the basic skill set they need to perform the job.  It will subsequently take additional training outside the school house to become a truly proficient sniper, same as with infantrymen, again.

 

As for where sniping programs stack up internationally . . . that's one of those "my country's tougher than your country" arguments I won't get into. 

I have to agree with you Horsesoldier, that the initial program only gives one the basic foundation, which he will later build upon in training within his unit. I don't know much about the target interdiction course, but it seems like it would be only 1 of the jobs SOF personell would perform. An 18B for example, might be trained as a sniper in the SOTIC, but he still has the responsibilities of an 18B. Whereas snipers and scout snipers solely concentrate on sniping after the initial training program. I had always thought that for SOF personell sniping was just one of many skills he is supposed to have, and cannot concentrate full time on sniping. I could be wrong though, I am not exactly qualified to say anything but the most basic and accessible facts on SOF units.

Infantry OSUT has definately not been watered down. The people going through OSUT today have it harder than I did, and are learning things I didn't learn for a long time. I know that people have been saying basic training at Jackson has been watered down, and that may be true. The article you are reading may be about that. Quite frankly though, the only thing that has changed in basic in Jackson is that DS's don't yell as much, and they are not allowed to swear. They still run a lot. I read an article that I largely agree with about the "softeneing" of basic training. It said that people have been saying this for the past 50 years. The only difference is the army has become more politically correct and they try to instill confidence instead of breaking the recruits down, something other armies have been doing for years. The same standards in AIT are still required, and if people aren't running their 2 miles in 15:54 in AIT, they take a hike. I hardly believe recruits are less fit than they were 20 years ago, perhaps a little bit due to the internet and what not. Even if they were, it's nothing 9 weeks of basic can't change. Here is the article I read: link