How long does it take to train an Army?

[davidbfpo]

I cannot comment as an expert, being a non-military observer; that aside my reading of a history article recently on the WW1 US Army illustrated the pain it underwent in France / Belgium. In WW1 it took a long time, at horrendous cost, for the British & Commenwealth armies in France to reach combat superiority - in which training was one factor.

In my reading on WW2 the training pre-1939 and into the war of the German Army NCO and junior officers is highly rated (see Peter White's 'With The Jocks').

Post-1945 history has plenty of examples IMHO where expatriate officered armies, or ex-colonial armies have failed or regressed to a mob, e.g. Nigerian Army when the Biafra War started.

I don't know what the mixture is for success, although I'd hazard a list: fit commanders, able staff officers, excellent battalion level officers and NCOs. Resting on a base of willing and disciplined soldiers - who mindful of Ken & Tom - who are paid, supplied and cared for.

Now back to my armchair or "bunker".

davidbfpo

[marct]

In WW1 it took a long time, at horrendous cost, for the British & Commenwealth armies in France to reach combat superiority - in which training was one factor.

Hmmm, I would have phrased that somewhat differently - it took years before enough British officers of the Old School were killed off so that we could show them at Vimy how to actually fight in that environment . Then again, I am biased .

[Ron Humphrey]

Hmmm, I would have phrased that somewhat differently - it took years before enough British officers of the Old School were killed off so that we could show them at Vimy how to actually fight in that environment . Then again, I am biased .

Been told the truth hurts, but man that takes the cake

[marct]

Hey Ron,

Just another example of organizational culture change through natural selection . As to my bias, outside of being Canadian, my great-Uncle fought in most of the major battles on the Western Front in WW I, including Vimy, and had some very pointed things to say about "Red Tabs" and the best way to deal with them (his suggestion was personal inspection tours of no-man's land...).

[Tacitus]

Gentlemen,

Fuchs, is the problem really training at all, in some of the historical episodes you enumerated? Meaning, in the narrow sense of competently drilling troops on a parade ground, marching them to a rifle range, equipping them, etc.

Take Iraq and Afghanistan, and our problems training national armies there. Is the problem we Americans have some kind of genetic predisposition to not knowing how to train foreign troops, or that there is no loyalty to a central government above the clan, region, tribe, or sect in the places we have tried to do it?

To use a German example, consider the troubles with the Weimar Republic, the people who are really willing to fight--Freikorps or Spartacist League--they've got something else in mind if they are going to risk their necks. The Weimar government failed not because of inadequate training of the police and security forces, but something deeper.

Our problem has more often than not been wading into places where we have tried to prop up governments that have serious political problems inside their own country.

[William F. Owen]

Is the problem we Americans have some kind of genetic predisposition to not knowing how to train foreign troops, or that there is no loyalty to a central government above the clan, region, tribe, or sect in the places we have tried to do it?

I suggest that the answer is not one or the other. If the US Army can't train a clan, region, tribe, or sect, then the methods need to be found to enable them to do so. Just because their belief system does not correlate with western values does not mean that are incapable of generating effective combat power if well trained and led.

[Steve Blair]

I suggest that the answer is not one or the other. If the US Army can't train a clan, region, tribe, or sect, then the methods need to be found to enable them to do so. Just because their belief system does not correlate with western values does not mean that are incapable of generating effective combat power if well trained and led.

Concur. Folks seem to forget that we did have a fair amount of success training Montagnard elements in Vietnam once we focused on basic skills. If Americans have a failing (and it's not genetic...it's more cultural) it's trying to do too much too soon. You can even find examples of this historically within our own training efforts (the Civil War springs to mind).

I'd also argue that we were successful in training activities in Central America during the 1920s. Granted, we were propping up some questionable regimes, but the training seemed to work well enough.

[William F. Owen]

Hmmm, I would have phrased that somewhat differently - it took years before enough British officers of the Old School were killed off so that we could show them at Vimy how to actually fight in that environment . Then again, I am biased .

Well almost. Who was actually commanding Battalions in 1918, as opposed to 1914? (So think, 2004-2008) In 1918, Battalion Commanders were mostly junior officers, soldiers and Corporals from 1914, or even those who were still at school in 1914.

That said, IIRC, a lot of Brigade and Divisional staffs were mostly unchanged, and Training was a Divisional responsibility.