I doubt you're in a position to accurately make such an assessment. While I have no doubt that UK/US training is not as good as it should be -- I constantly rattle on about poor US training -- I also have little doubt that on an individual and small unit basis they are way ahead of most of their opponents.
I suggest that the training and the prescribed employment are two quite different issues. Had you written ".
..the standard US/Brit employment which has not proved to be successful this far." I would agree.
That's not a semantic quibble. By knocking the training -- on which you do not have detailed knowledge -- you're focusing attention on something that may need a tweak but is not terribly bad. The
employment of those troops, however trained, is bad. It is the major issue and the item that needs attention.
It is also an item that, rightly or wrongly, will get little attention -- as there is no perceived urgent need for it to be fixed.
Bookmarks