The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - March 20, 2010




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: US Army training seems to be wanting by comparison to US Marine training
ZealousZionist    6/5/2007 6:41:09 AM
Speaking as an interested allied observer (IDF infantry officer) it seems to me - admittedly from the outside - that the USMC has a more rigorous training regime for infantry MOSs than the US Army. Let me assure my American friends that I mean this with the utmost respect. We face the same enemies - jihadi Islam. I am thus asking this question in the best of faith.

Every marine recruit does 13 weeks of boot camp, while army recruits do only 9. Marine grunts then go on to do another 7 weeks infantry training at SOI - a total of 20 weeks training - while army OSUT is only 14 weeks long. The Marines also break down infantry squad tasks, alloting a distinct MOS to AT missilmen, machine gunners, assaultmen, mortarmen and riflemen. In the Army the only distinction is between riflemen and mortarmen.

And the same seems to be said for the sniper schools - the Army course is 5 weeks in length while Marine scout-sniper training extends over 10 weeks. Why does Army training seem to be so much less rigorous?

Why is this so? There is much to be said for concentrating training at purpose-built centralised schools rather than in units. At schools the quality-control is much easier to maintain, while there is inevitably substantial variation between the operational and training levels of combat units. And what happens when an army infantryman is assigned to a unit just a couple of weeks away from deployment to a combat zone? Given my personal experience with how militaries work (personnel wonks are the same in any army) I'm sure that has happened in the US Army. Doesn't that shortchange all concerned.. the half-baked grunt and his fellows by creating a weak link in the unit.

So help me please to understand the thinking here, because I don't get it. US Army officers are intelligent and well educated. There must be a rationale for this. But it sure has escaped me.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: 1 2
ZealousZionist    The piece was about infantry OSUT   6/7/2007 4:51:22 PM
The article was about infantry OSUT at Benning, written by a 10th Mountain Div. alum who just finished a four-year hitch in 2006.  He went back to Fort Drum and spoke to his old first sergeant, who told the author that over the past couple of years the level of incoming OSUT graduates had declined markedly.  And that this was directly attributable to watered-down training.

Have a look here:

link >
I hope you are right.... but....
 
Quote    Reply

dirtykraut       6/7/2007 8:56:49 PM
Incoming OSUT graduates have declined? Wouldn't that mean it would be the opposite of watered down training? If less people are graduating OSUT, wouldn't it mean that it might be harder? I hardly think 1 Sargeant who served 4 years in the tenth is qualified to speak on the declining quality of OSUT graduates for the whole army. But what you have to realise, zionist, is that people have been saying this throughout the army's history. Like it said in the article I posted, everyone you meet who was there a year before you said they were in the last hard basic training. OSUT hasn't watered down, like it said in the article, Jackson and OSUT have gotten smarter. I only left the army 2 and a half years ago, and I was very impressed with the quality of the E-1s coming out of OSUT. I doubt that has changed in such a short time. The changes they made to boot and OSUT were in 2004, when I was still in. Sure, there will always be some who disagree, but the vast majority of NCO's feel that OSUT is a more than adequate foundation for our infantry soldiers.
 
Quote    Reply

dirtykraut       6/7/2007 9:01:23 PM
There was a private who wrote a diaree about OSUT a while back. I'll try and find it.
 
Quote    Reply

atokato       9/8/2009 1:20:32 AM
to both of you and other readers of this forum - it does not matter who has the extensive and hardest training - you can not keep comparing the U S Army and the U S Marine training - at the end of the day they are both in one TEAM and both are needed - the Armed Forces of the United States - just like any other branches of the service. There maybe a difference on how each branches of the services trained their unit/individual but this is based on how the Chain of Command works and how they have to be mobilized based on contingencies on hand - but it is every ones individaul effort that counts - if one individual do not perform - one of the Team Member steps in either to encourage or motivate that individual to become part of the TEAM - so at the end of the day when Uncle Sams call - we all have to depend our Mother Land as a TEAM and not one branch of the service only - it is not only the Marine that made the landing in Guadacanal succesful nor it is not only the U S Army landing in Normandy that made it possible - every branch of the Armed Forces of America took part on this conflict and so us the recent conflict in the Middle East - all the branches of the service are involved - So it does not matter who have the hardest or most conflicated training all branches of the Service are needed - and to those who served this country. the country owes you just as you owe this country. and please stop making the other TEAMMATE look bad and with negative comments, we are all here to depend this country with PRIDE. remember the old saying DUTY, HONOR AND COUNTRY.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2010StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy