Yes I can see that the Israelis have built their system around their 3 year national service cycle. Given that fixed parameter they have to make the most of it and other than insist on an extra year for officers its three years active serve then into the Reserve after that.
They probably do the best they can under the circumstances.
Purely in terms of instructor experience, maturity and training the Brit system (as I understand it) is way ahead of the Israelis (as I understand theirs).
Instructor corporals involved with basic recruit training would have 5-7 years service? Sgts involved with recruit training would have 7-10 years service? Add to that they would have done a drill and weapons course and/or a minor tactics course (maybe these courses have nes names now). Certainly the course officer would not be a 2Lt with what 18 mths-2 years service.
I'm talking quality of training given. No comparison.
One understands the Israeli need to get the most out of the 3 year national service, train them quickly, identify and train leaders quickly, get these conscripts into active service units quickly... because the next big war may be just around the corner.
Given the limitations of operating within the 3 year national service system the Israelis have done exceptionally well.
As to my comment about "appalling". I stand by my comment that an NCO with 2 years or less total military service being used for recruit instruction is an appalling thought.
Bookmarks