one BMT for all DoD

[Combat correspondent]

I always thought the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard could all attend one BMT where they all learn the Basics of Military Training. The training would be about 2 months long and would be taught by a Joint Cadre of DIs.

After graduating the BMT, each service would then go to their own respective training to learn component specific jargon, customs, riflemanship and whatnot.

It seems the DoD could save a ton of money and bring all components together for future Joint Operations by putting all DoD enlisted on the same sheet of music from day 1 ---- for the Basics, that is.

This is just something I've thought about since day 1.

What are your thoughts on this.... I'll elaborate on more of my thoughts concerning this thread once others chime in.

[BRUWIN]

Never really thought about it but I think the idea has some merit.

[Smeghead]

Hell no.

Not enough? Okay, um. Because a Marine is not a Sailor is not an Airman is not a soldier. Maybe army and Marine Corp basic could be merged, but why does the average Airman or Sailor need to learn bayonet drills, pugil sticks, or other infantry type things. I realize the ground training at Parris Island and the army BMTs is very limited, but it's still way more than the avaerage Airman will ever need.

Is it nice to know stuff? Yeah. But in 12 years I've never used the land nav training I received at PA Combat Course (stop laughing, that was a no shit, real course), I've fired an M-16 5 times and M-9 twice (never in anger), and I never used that squad movement crap I was taught at Ft Dix. The majority doesn't need it.

I could however see a benefit in sending new Airmen in the fields likely to deploy outside the wire to MCT or whatever the army version is. Vehicle operators, EOD, CE, folks like that. Maybe BMT-->Tech School-->MCT-->first duty station.

But then, how do you sustain that training? Stuff gets forgotten very quickly if you're not using it regularly.

[Combat correspondent]

Hell no.

Not enough? Okay, um. Because a Marine is not a Sailor is not an Airman is not a soldier. Maybe army and Marine Corp basic could be merged, but why does the average Airman or Sailor need to learn bayonet drills, pugil sticks, or other infantry type things. I realize the ground training at Parris Island and the army BMTs is very limited, but it's still way more than the avaerage Airman will ever need.

Is it nice to know stuff? Yeah. But in 12 years I've never used the land nav training I received at PA Combat Course (stop laughing, that was a no shit, real course), I've fired an M-16 5 times and M-9 twice (never in anger), and I never used that squad movement crap I was taught at Ft Dix. The majority doesn't need it.

I could however see a benefit in sending new Airmen in the fields likely to deploy outside the wire to MCT or whatever the army version is. Vehicle operators, EOD, CE, folks like that. Maybe BMT-->Tech School-->MCT-->first duty station.

But then, how do you sustain that training? Stuff gets forgotten very quickly if you're not using it regularly.

Once again, I said Basic - the Corps and Army would learn ground combat-specific training after BMT was complete and they reported to their individual basics.

I am talking about drill, ceremony, customs, courtesies, PT, grooming standards ---- basically, I am talking about breaking down the bad habits of the average 17 or 18 year old and building up a Joint Warrior out of all of them for 8 weeks - then, as I said, they'd report to their individual service-related training.

Its about the basics and, honestly, joint basics.

[Smeghead]

So what about the stuff outside of drill, profession of arms, PT etc? There are areas common to all branches, but the classroom stuff differs wildly. Whose do you keep and whose do you ditch? We don't even march the same. 24 or 30 inch pace? If in those 2 months you teach common, basic military skills, but then have to set up a service specific school where exactly are the savings?

[Combat correspondent]

So what about the stuff outside of drill, profession of arms, PT etc? There are areas common to all branches, but the classroom stuff differs wildly. Whose do you keep and whose do you ditch? We don't even march the same. 24 or 30 inch pace? If in those 2 months you teach common, basic military skills, but then have to set up a service specific school where exactly are the savings?

It would be up to the Joint Chiefs to determine what stays and what gets ditched - but at least for ever and ever, we do these simple things the same.

There would be a huge cost savings because rather than running (what?) 10 MBTs, we could consolidate to maybe 2 and cut the number of DIs to what is necessary. In addition, once all DoD completes the 2 months Basic Military Training, they'd only need a very condense service-specific version topped off with Combat Skills Training then MOS/AFSC specific technical training.

[Smeghead]

Something to add. I guess what bothers me more about something like this is losing our identity. As has been said many times on here, joint means army. I like being in the Air Force. When I was 7 yrs old I decided I wanted to join to join and fix Tornadoes. When I grew up I realized how not that good of a deal serving in HM Forces is and was glad I had my green card. I like the Air Force, no other branch has ever appealed to me. They didn't even cross my mind until I got to DINFOS where, though I'll never admit this again, I seriously considered trying to cross to the Corps. A joint BMT is the first step toward a unified, army controlled US Forces, where we are just an Air Corps. IMVHO.

[BRUWIN]

Could Marines handle our obstacle course? I can't see making it easier just because of them.

[Silver Fox]

Hell no.

Not enough? Okay, um. Because a Marine is not a Sailor is not an Airman is not a soldier. Maybe army and Marine Corp basic could be merged, but why does the average Airman or Sailor need to learn bayonet drills, pugil sticks, or other infantry type things.

Oh I don't know, ask Jason Cunningham or Mark Chapman why we might need to.... oh you can't. They're dead.

But Timothy Wilkinson is still around. You can go ask him why this might be a good idea.


This is something I've thought of a lot and written a lot about, and in addition to forcing every branch of the service to know the basic function of the military: How to effectively destroy the enemy on the ground, it would probably save the DoD a TON of money in the long term. I'm also for combining training for jobs that are for all intensive purposes, identical. They already do this for many jobs (example: medical, k-9 handlers, fire fighters.... all branches of the service get the same training in many of these duties), but why not MP/MA/Security Forces all doing the same training? Why not the Army and Marine infantry getting the same training? Etc. etc. etc. Then you get the best everyone has to offer, there are things the other branches of service are thinking about that we are not, and things we are thinking about that they are not. This is one of those things that I think is hotly debated behind closed doors, but everyone's so afraid they'll somehow lose their branch independence and identity they stay away from it and cover it up with beauracracy.

[Silver Fox]

Could Marines handle our obstacle course? I can't see making it easier just because of them.

I hope my sarcastic meter is broken and you aren't being serious. :confused:

[Smeghead]

Oh I don't know, ask Jason Cunningham or Mark Chapman why we might need to.... oh you can't. They're dead.

But Timothy Wilkinson is still around. You can go ask him why this might be a good idea.


This is something I've thought of a lot and written a lot about, and in addition to forcing every branch of the service to know the basic function of the military: How to effectively destroy the enemy on the ground, it would probably save the DoD a TON of money in the long term. I'm also for combining training for jobs that are for all intensive purposes, identical. They already do this for many jobs (example: medical, k-9 handlers, fire fighters.... all branches of the service get the same training in many of these duties), but why not MP/MA/Security Forces all doing the same training? Why not the Army and Marine infantry getting the same training? Etc. etc. etc. Then you get the best everyone has to offer, there are things the other branches of service are thinking about that we are not, and things we are thinking about that they are not. This is one of those things that I think is hotly debated behind closed doors, but everyone's so afraid they'll somehow lose their branch independence and identity they stay away from it and cover it up with beauracracy.

Number 1, try reading. I said AVERAGE. Read it again, see? A-V-E-R-A-G-E. Are PJs and CCTs the average Airman? No.

Thanks for educating me on Jason Cunningham's status, but I was at his funeral. Sure he appreciates you throwing his name around try to make your point though.

[Silver Fox]

Number 1, try reading. I said AVERAGE. Read it again, see? A-V-E-R-A-G-E. Are PJs and CCTs the average Airman? No.

Thanks for educating me on Jason Cunningham's status, but I was at his funeral. Sure he appreciates you throwing his name around try to make your point though.

I don't think the dead have an opinion, and I never belittled his sacrifice in any way so I don't see a problem.

I also am well aware you said average, I'm sure they were your average everyday PJs and CCTs, put in extraordinary situations, just as easily as Joe Security Forces Guy and Bob Logistics Guy could be at any given moment. This is the military after all, it's not like we're fighting wars.

[BlueLabRat]

Yes. A single joint all service basic training is a good idea. Basic training for countries military forces makes sense. A solid new defined military core skill foundation to build different military technical skills or specialties. DOD paying way too much for pleasure of separate service unique duplicate or triplicate training just to save traditions or bragging rights.
I recommend DOD start at the top with one service academy or single ROTC organization first, to produce one joint minded new breed of officer corps that then branch off to Army, Air Force, Navy, USMC, Coast Guard, or Merchant Marine.
Perhaps even do away with all five service academies to fund new joint training centers that break old modes and get some fresher, new thinking leaders to take on the new challenges of a joint military mission and mindset. First I would correct a serious mistake made by a former Secretary of Defense, by allowing all US services to research, develop, and procure their own distinct battle dress uniform. How insane. Look how the USAF screwed that one up a few times, just get our own ABU, it was almost blue. Ugh! But what a waste of resources and talk about making a bigger in your face divide in the “joint” effort not to mention the harder to recognize you own side, meaning US side.
DOD should have determined which ONE US military battle uniform was the best and mandated it for ALL. Period. I just that would be to “uniform” and less political and service snobbish. Who made the money off that harebrain decision anyway? The “J” factor is brazenly splashed around in pubs, billet designators, and our very own JET tasking as the future of war fighting and operations.
About time we stopped dancing around the issue and be smarter to rethink to whole DOD mindset. Like the joint medical training being spun up at Ft Sam Houston, all military training should be carved up to be only done by one designated OPR. Why waste all our soon to be cut and precious DOD budget funding screwing around with separate traininging, procurements and operations. Separate UAV visions and paths is one example of current interservice bickering and double, triple wastage of time and funds.
Give each service specific missions and training corners to own in the Joint vision of the future. Why have a ABU, ACU, a USAF, a Marine Corps Air Force, a Navy Air Force, a Army artillery, a USMC artillery you see where I am going……….

[BTDTNM]

The Army would never let it happen. It's the Army way or no way. Try merging the Marines with the Army in any way and watch the fireworks. I'll go get some popcorn and watch.

[Combat correspondent]

The Army would never let it happen. It's the Army way or no way. Try merging the Marines with the Army in any way and watch the fireworks. I'll go get some popcorn and watch.

I did not advocate merging anyone - I advocated a joint BMT. Just that.

[DAKOTANATIVE]

20 years ago this might have been a crazy plan, but the Air Force is doing alot more than before, so it may be feasible.

[EclecticAngela684]

It sounds like a good idea but the logistics of it and the cost to move troups around would be a nightmare. Not to mention we might not want to put all our eggs in one basket, if we have all those trainies in one location that would be a very tempting target for terrorists. It would be best to keep our 'assets' spread out across the country in different locations.

[Smeghead]

It sounds like a good idea but the logistics of it and the cost to move troups around would be a nightmare. Not to mention we might not want to put all our eggs in one basket, if we have all those trainies in one location that would be a very tempting target for terrorists. It would be best to keep our 'assets' spread out across the country in different locations.

When was the last terrorist attack on a basic training base?

[EclecticAngela684]

There has not been one i was just pointing out that it would be a juicy target to them. Sometimes prevention is the best medicine.

[Smeghead]

Why attack BMT? It's not taking out any operational assets. It's a soft target, but not particularly attractive or strategically important. The mission would go on without those recruits.

[EclecticAngela684]

Yes the mission would go on, however it would be a big blow to moral and i'm sure it would effect recruitment. :(

[Combat correspondent]

Don't think it would happen. And, anyway, we'd need at least 2 -- an East and West coast BMT. Go ahead and hit one - we'll get a group on the other side of the country genuinely pissed enough to spend about the next 20 years of their lives kicking a$$ ;)

[EclecticAngela684]

True, being pissed off is a great motivator too isn't it?

[Combat correspondent]

True, being pissed off is a great motivator too isn't it?

It certainly is.

[Sergeant T]

I actually think this idea has merit. Plenty of merit.

Personally, I'm an advocate of doing away with all the overlap currently in the military and narrowing our focus as services to those things that make us unique.

Do we need services, finance, PA, Security, Intel, etc DIFFERENT for each branch? No. Other militaries in the world have successfully merged many of these disciplines so that an intel weenie in one branch can support intel in another. Heck, we do it now as IA's anyway (can't make myself say JET).

But, at the very least, combining BMT and CST into one entry level joint U.S. BMT makes sense. Financial sense, logistics, all of the above.

Personally I'd just merge us all into ONE branch, ONE uniform, ONE standard. Maintain heritage within units as opposed to branches.

It would be painful at first, but long term, would make sense and would save the taxpayers a LOT of money. We're already going to JOINT strike fighters, JOINT Cargo aircraft, why not JOINT branch?

Sergeant T

[Rastaman]

I always thought the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard could all attend one BMT where they all learn the Basics of Military Training. The training would be about 2 months long and would be taught by a Joint Cadre of DIs.

After graduating the BMT, each service would then go to their own respective training to learn component specific jargon, customs, riflemanship and whatnot.

It seems the DoD could save a ton of money and bring all components together for future Joint Operations by putting all DoD enlisted on the same sheet of music from day 1 ---- for the Basics, that is.

This is just something I've thought about since day 1.

What are your thoughts on this.... I'll elaborate on more of my thoughts concerning this thread once others chime in.


I don't think it's a good idea. It wouldn't eliminate duplication--the Services would still need to maintain their own post-BMT training facilities--where they would have to teach things that are now taught in BMT--component specific jargon, customs, riflemanship and whatnot

For us Air Force types, who are overwhelmingly working in technical/skilled jobs, training with the Marines and Army would just be an extended PT session--nothing more. The vast majority of us won't utilize the combat skills learned at a joint BMT school in a deployed location--it's just the nature of our jobs. As for the joint thing--isn't the whole point of bringing a Marine, Soldier and Airman together on a mission to take advantage of their specialized skills? If we're all going to start off with the same BMT, why spend all that money to make us "different" afterwards?

My two cents...

[OIFCOMBATVETNYC]

Seems like someone is trying to make one Marine Corps.

[Sergeant T]

Yes, many nations do have different branches of the military, but not all of them.

Here's the big question, once you get past the service specific jobs (Army Grunt/Armor/Artillery, Marine Grunt/Armor/Artillery, Navy Ship' personnel, Air Force pilots) whats the difference?

What's the difference between a mechanic on the JSF who wears a Marine uniform vs a mechanic on the JSF who wears an Air Force uniform vs a mechanic on the JSF who wears a Navy uniform? Are the planes themselves somehow different (other than the V/STOL version)? Or are the same technical skills needed?

Same can be said for Intelligence, Logistics, Construction, Services, Public Affairs, Medical, Dental, Admin, etc.

Btw, the Marine Intel weenie is just as likely to be outside the wire fighting as an Air Force Intel weenie... I've worked with them, and they have just about the same degree of "grunt"-ness as the AF guys, which is to say not much.

Tradition is good when it serves a purpose and doesn't impede or limit accomplishment of the mission. I'd wager that combining services or at least BMT (and then rolling the service specific training into the technical schools) makes sense and will help the mission.

I don't think 2 months is necessary though for a in "intro" BMT... 4-6 weeks would be sufficient if still teaching service specific training later.

[Gunner007]

This would be a great idea actually! Hell why not include the weapons, hand to hand, pugil sticks, swimming? Include it all! It is there you could then set a baseline and begin to weed out the wheat from the chaff. In addition to something like this how about vocation specific testing to see where peoples natural ability is. Tweak the ASVAB thing a bit and make it user friendly on a grand scale and partition out the recruits based on their ability.

So what the BMT course would be 3-4 months long? Everyone would learn the same crap and be familiar in the history and traditions of all the services instead of just one. That in my opinion might make the services bonded together and better able to inter operate in the joint environment. Everyone cut their teeth the same way!

From the ASVAB and technical testing you then filter people to various jobs in various services. You might even solve some recruiting issues? Perhaps you can specify a preference for which branch you want to be in when you sign up but its dependant on your testing meeting the criteria for that service.

There would no doubt be that rivalry about who has higher standards but we already know different standards exist. If you spent 2 years going to school to work on computers you would score higher in the computer portions of the testing and be sent to sonar operator school or guided missle training (for example). If your a bit rednecky like me and have a knack for firearms, during the rifle qualifications you would stand out and get a job as maybe a gunner or 18B.

Train to one standard! No variations! Once you get into a given branch your shipped off to your tech school to begin your career. At some point down the road maybe you have gone to college and you can retake some of the qual tests and if you meet the criteria you can just step across service boundaries and become something else. No going through BMT again, no losing a stripe, just walk across to another branch and begin training to do something different???

Could save a crap ton of money and send retention through the ceiling!

[Combat correspondent]

This would be a great idea actually! Hell why not include the weapons, hand to hand, pugil sticks, swimming? Include it all! It is there you could then set a baseline and begin to weed out the wheat from the chaff. In addition to something like this how about vocation specific testing to see where peoples natural ability is. Tweak the ASVAB thing a bit and make it user friendly on a grand scale and partition out the recruits based on their ability.

So what the BMT course would be 3-4 months long? Everyone would learn the same crap and be familiar in the history and traditions of all the services instead of just one. That in my opinion might make the services bonded together and better able to inter operate in the joint environment. Everyone cut their teeth the same way!

From the ASVAB and technical testing you then filter people to various jobs in various services. You might even solve some recruiting issues? Perhaps you can specify a preference for which branch you want to be in when you sign up but its dependant on your testing meeting the criteria for that service.

There would no doubt be that rivalry about who has higher standards but we already know different standards exist. If you spent 2 years going to school to work on computers you would score higher in the computer portions of the testing and be sent to sonar operator school or guided missle training (for example). If your a bit rednecky like me and have a knack for firearms, during the rifle qualifications you would stand out and get a job as maybe a gunner or 18B.

Train to one standard! No variations! Once you get into a given branch your shipped off to your tech school to begin your career. At some point down the road maybe you have gone to college and you can retake some of the qual tests and if you meet the criteria you can just step across service boundaries and become something else. No going through BMT again, no losing a stripe, just walk across to another branch and begin training to do something different???

Could save a crap ton of money and send retention through the ceiling!

Glad to see you agree and I am with you on every point. I've always believed this. I know from experience in 2 branches that not all will agree - but it is the best idea, in my book.

Wish there were a forum to have the idea seriously addressed by "they." ;)

[Combat correspondent]

again trying to emulate the corps with PI and San Diego. Please stop lol You thinking more Marine than Airman lol. You no longer a Marine but Semper Fi.

Keeping in keepin', brother :)

I'm not trying to think Marine or Airman on this thread - I'm trying to think this SMART-21 (or whatever its called) and think DoD --- trying to stay Semper Gumbi!!

[Smeghead]

This would be a great idea actually! Hell why not include the weapons, hand to hand, pugil sticks, swimming? Include it all! It is there you could then set a baseline and begin to weed out the wheat from the chaff. In addition to something like this how about vocation specific testing to see where peoples natural ability is. Tweak the ASVAB thing a bit and make it user friendly on a grand scale and partition out the recruits based on their ability.

So what the BMT course would be 3-4 months long? Everyone would learn the same crap and be familiar in the history and traditions of all the services instead of just one. That in my opinion might make the services bonded together and better able to inter operate in the joint environment. Everyone cut their teeth the same way!

From the ASVAB and technical testing you then filter people to various jobs in various services. You might even solve some recruiting issues? Perhaps you can specify a preference for which branch you want to be in when you sign up but its dependant on your testing meeting the criteria for that service.

There would no doubt be that rivalry about who has higher standards but we already know different standards exist. If you spent 2 years going to school to work on computers you would score higher in the computer portions of the testing and be sent to sonar operator school or guided missle training (for example). If your a bit rednecky like me and have a knack for firearms, during the rifle qualifications you would stand out and get a job as maybe a gunner or 18B.

Train to one standard! No variations! Once you get into a given branch your shipped off to your tech school to begin your career. At some point down the road maybe you have gone to college and you can retake some of the qual tests and if you meet the criteria you can just step across service boundaries and become something else. No going through BMT again, no losing a stripe, just walk across to another branch and begin training to do something different???

Could save a crap ton of money and send retention through the ceiling!

Why is my Spidey Sarcasm Sense tingling?

[USMC_8156]

The whole thing sounds to me like the gradual shift to one military that will eventually happen. I'm damn proud to be a Marine, and I wouldn't have joined any other service. That being said, we sure do waste a lot of money when you look at it from an outsider's perspective on maintaining four different branches. We could all still give each other shit if we were one branch doing different jobs, I assure you.

[Sergeant T]

Hell, we give each other shit within services. Grunts vs POGs, flyers vs ground units, you name it, we'll think o of a way to tease and make fun of others. ;-)

But it is a good idea. A hard one to implement, Canada did it, and its still bumpy and their whole military is smaller then one of our branches.

[OIFCOMBATVETNYC]

Hell, we give each other shit within services. Grunts vs POGs, flyers vs ground units, you name it, we'll think o of a way to tease and make fun of others. ;-)

But it is a good idea. A hard one to implement, Canada did it, and its still bumpy and their whole military is smaller then one of our branches.

I wonder what the uniforms will be like since now everybody went away from the woodland BDU. I am not wearing no faggoty white uniform lol. But it will be nice to go with the Marines MARPAT or hey finally MultiCam for all.

[USMC_8156]

MultiCam is pretty sexy. I'd say it gets my vote for future uniform.

[OIFCOMBATVETNYC]

you think the Marines will give up the diggies for that?

[USMC_8156]

No, I don't think it will happen anytime soon. All of the services just bought new uniforms, which all suck except for ours, and they aren't going to throw them away. I think it will take another couple of wars where the Army and the Marine Corps do similar jobs, and the Navy and Air Force keep ILO'ing out to us. The Navy is already losing a lot of its' naval traditions (to a lesser extent than the Corps), and the Air Force practically has multiple personality disorder.

If I may make a completely uneducated and random guess...I'll say 30 years from now.

[Silver Fox]

When was the last terrorist attack on a basic training base?

Doesn't mean they aren't targeted, believe me.

I remember getting moved to an entire different building when it was discovered that Lackland had been under watch and that folks on the terrorist watch list who weren't even supposed to be in the country had narrowly missed capture at a hotel right outside the gate.

I'm sure it happens elsewhere.

[Stang5150]

and the Air Force practically has multiple personality disorder.

So true.

New Air Force Motto: "Air Force: Not Quite Above All: but somewhere in-between......"

:cool:

[S97Batess]

This idea has a lot of potential....the medical community has been bouncing around the idea of a 'purple' force for a while now. Medical care is the same no matter what service the body is from. The only differences are in those special jobs like pilot, submariner and the like where the body is exposed to extemes....and the medical flight surgeons can have service specific medical training......while the rest such as pathologists, radiologists, emergency docs and the like, can take care of any services members and their families.....how many time are there two or more medical facilities from different services within 50 miles of each other.....DC, San Antonio, Fort Bragg, etc etc......these could be combined and the total medical force could be decreased to remove doubling of services provided......support issues such as food and linen and logistics would be decreased as well......there would be an intial outlay, but then there would be a lot of savings......

The joint BMT would do the same on a larger scale....military customs and courtesies are basically the same for most items (differences could be addressed in MOS/AFSC school after joint BMT). There are many other items that are taught across services that could be done in a 6-8 week BMT. Great idea CC.

[TRDL]

......these could be combined and the total medical force could be decreased to remove doubling of services provided.......


Please God no. I have the "pleasure" of being on Oahu while on TRDL, I have one option for seeing a military specialist here, dispite at least 4 clinics. It took 2 years and a trip to the emergency room to get to see a specialist, thanks to the deployments. Wilford Hall is huge, services the base, and all of the Trainees. Ft. Sam Houston has one of the best burn trama teams around. Which would you shut down?

[SSgtRenegade]

The joint BMT would do the same on a larger scale....military customs and courtesies are basically the same for most items (differences could be addressed in MOS/AFSC school after joint BMT). There are many other items that are taught across services that could be done in a 6-8 week BMT. Great idea CC.

What if we took this one BMT idea another step? What if you picked what branch you wanted to go into and your job while at BMT?

[smarg]

Hey, just go to Canada where they have combined services and join right up! :D

[CMSBROWN]

IMO....everyone should be an Infantryman first....basic soldiering skills should be the same for all the branches and then vector off to your job skill training.

[Rastaman]

I really believe that the competency of the Armed Forces is directly correlated to the mission specialization that each branch practices. Is it coincidence that so much seems to be going wrong in the AF at the same time that we are so desperately trying to be all things to all people?

I wouldn't fall on my sword to fight against a joint BMT...I just don't see how it saves money, IF we then turn around and focus and specialize on branch-specific activities. In other words, if we go joint BMT then it is only logical to go to one Armed Force. No point in keeping AF/Navy/Army/Marine technical training facilities open--unless they are going to maintain the joint training received in BMT. If they are going to do that, then it just makes sense to consolidate them--and it follows that we might as well consolidate everything else.

Cheaper? Yes. More efficient? Most likely. The same or higher end-product when deployed? I honestly don't know. Only time will tell.

[Sergeant T]

CMS Brown,

I agree with you 100%. We're all supposed to be "warriors" now, so why not actually train to that standard as Infantryman first? Would save a lot of time and money on CST and CBAT later...

[AIRFORCEAGGIE]

I'm not in favor of it. The Canadien military tried it back in the late 60s by unifying their military as the Canadien Forces. Over time, the services started to split off again. Yes, there are joint jobs and jobs which are common for all services. For those jobs, have a joint training, but as a tech school and not a basic training. Basic is where you instill the values of your individual service among the raw recruits. If you don't start it in basic, then where will you start it because by the time they come out of basic, it is too late. For those who think a joint basic will cause all of us to become Marine like, it can also go the other way and make all services like the AF. I'm sure that would really please a Marine Sgt. Major. :)

[Yggdrasil]

Are you serious? A couple of questions here:

What uniform would they be wearing in this BMT? If they each wore the uniform for their respective services, then there's no uniformity among the recruits - WTF?

How would you march? The Air Force puts their hands on the "buttocks" during parade rest, while the other services places them in their "small of their backs". During "open ranks" and "close ranks" in the Air Force, the fourth rank remains stationary, while the first remains stationary during closed ranks. In the Army, the third rank is always stationary, while in the Navy, the fourth rank is always stationary. These are only two examples.

And the thing about "soldiering first" among all services is laughable. What if I tried to impose "seamanship first" among Army and Air Force personnel? These are skills that, in all likelihood, they won't need.

[Combat correspondent]

Are you serious? A couple of questions here:

What uniform would they be wearing in this BMT? If they each wore the uniform for their respective services, then there's no uniformity among the recruits - WTF?

How would you march? The Air Force puts their hands on the "buttocks" during parade rest, while the other services places them in their "small of their backs". During "open ranks" and "close ranks" in the Air Force, the fourth rank remains stationary, while the first remains stationary during closed ranks. In the Army, the third rank is always stationary, while in the Navy, the fourth rank is always stationary. These are only two examples.

And the thing about "soldiering first" among all services is laughable. What if I tried to impose "seamanship first" among Army and Air Force personnel? These are skills that, in all likelihood, they won't need.

Easy fix - we all used cammies before - 1 BDU/DCU for all - not a problem.

Parade rest, marching and everything else goes to the common denominator.

[AIRFORCEAGGIE]

Easy fix - we all used cammies before - 1 BDU/DCU for all - not a problem.

Parade rest, marching and everything else goes to the common denominator.


So, you're going to keep the issue of an uniform that is now out of service with all four services???? How about the issue of instilling the traditions of each service on the raw recruit? Are you going to do that AFTER you already indoctrinated them on a generic vanilla military? Good traditions are in place because they instill service pride and the sense of mission. How are you going to have a generic tradition that will satsify all services? Having one military or one bmt is not practical. The Canadiens tried it and it became a veritable mess for them. A big thumbs down on this idea.

[Combat correspondent]

Traditions stand the test of time and don't necessarily need to be indoctrinated day 1. BMT is to tear down the sloppy kids and make disciplined warriors. Once in the fleet/field, traditions will come to play. Mess Night will be Mess Night regardless.

As far as the cammies - doesn't necessarily have to be the BDU/DCU. But, there's no reason to have 4 separate utility uniforms anyways.

[sigecaps]

When the ABU came out, my NCOIC predicted that the big push amongst the different services for their own unique uniforms was to further reinforce the petty differences that would be used to argue against force integration.

[Combat correspondent]

Pretty wise guy/gal, that NCOIC of yours. Remember when all Uts were cammies? Then the Corps came out with their MARPAT, then the Army and Air Force said I want my own too - as if the cammies all of a sudden sucked. So, the Air Force tried many designs and patterns to match a flightline while the Army came up with some ugly gray thing they call an ACU. Well, then the Air Force decided it didn't want to be like the Corps or the Army and wound up designing a Utility almost exactly like the Army's failure. Now, low and behold, the Navy is getting their new Utility. All for what?

Your supervisor was probably right ;)

[Yggdrasil]

If you ask me, I think that the very suggestion of a merged basic training/boot camp stems from an inferiority complex that people in some services have about people in other services whose basic training/boot camp is considered to be "tougher."

What's the problem, are your feelings hurt, for example, because Marines are laughing at you because your basic training/boot camp isn't as tough as theirs? What is it - do you want to be in the Air Force, while being able to say that your basic training was the same as the Army and Marines?

That's what this seems to all boil down to.

[BigBaze]

This is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. You will do well as a leader in the Air Force, Combat Correspondent:)

[Combat correspondent]

If you ask me, I think that the very suggestion of a merged basic training/boot camp stems from an inferiority complex that people in some services have about people in other services whose basic training/boot camp is considered to be "tougher."

What's the problem, are your feelings hurt, for example, because Marines are laughing at you because your basic training/boot camp isn't as tough as theirs? What is it - do you want to be in the Air Force, while being able to say that your basic training was the same as the Army and Marines?

That's what this seems to all boil down to.

This is not a Parris Island versus Chair Camp discussion here, Yggdrasil. And, so you know, either one is very doable with the right attitude and motivation. There's very few Airmen graduating BMT today who could not do the same in any other branch. Trust me guy, not a complex - just a discussion of ways to consider expanding the expeditionary joint mindset, streamline differences and move forward --- p.s., save $$ too.

[Combat correspondent]

This is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. You will do well as a leader in the Air Force, Combat Correspondent:)

Right! Make the dumbest mistakes and skyrocket to the top :)

But, seriously BigBaze, this idea is not bad and could really improve all.

[Yggdrasil]

This is not a Parris Island versus Chair Camp discussion here, Yggdrasil. And, so you know, either one is very doable with the right attitude and motivation. There's very few Airmen graduating BMT today who could not do the same in any other branch. Trust me guy, not a complex - just a discussion of ways to consider expanding the expeditionary joint mindset, streamline differences and move forward --- p.s., save $$ too.

I'm not denying that an Airman couldn't complete another service's basic training/boot camp. All I'm saying is that it appears to me like some of the people here feel like they're lesser of a warrior for not having a basic training/boot that was as tough as another service's - so they want to make of for it via a merged BMT. Sounds like an inferiority complex to me.

I'm in the Navy. I could care less how tough someone else's training is. If I wanted Marine Corps boot camp, I would have joined - though I think it's pure idiocy to choose a service based soley on how tough the boot camp/basic training is.

[Combat correspondent]

I'm not denying that an Airman couldn't complete another service's basic training/boot camp. All I'm saying is that it appears to me like some of the people here feel like they're lesser of a warrior for not having a basic training/boot that was as tough as another service's - so they want to make of for it via a merged BMT. Sounds like an inferiority complex to me.

I'm in the Navy. I could care less how tough someone else's training is. If I wanted Marine Corps boot camp, I would have joined - though I think it's pure idiocy to choose a service based soley on how tough the boot camp/basic training is.

Got my vote on that shipmate. Are you green- or blue-side Navy? That will add perspective what sort of experience this stems from.

[AIRFORCEAGGIE]

Traditions stand the test of time and don't necessarily need to be indoctrinated day 1. BMT is to tear down the sloppy kids and make disciplined warriors. Once in the fleet/field, traditions will come to play. Mess Night will be Mess Night regardless.

As far as the cammies - doesn't necessarily have to be the BDU/DCU. But, there's no reason to have 4 separate utility uniforms anyways.


Actually they do. since the times of the roman legions, a professional service survives by its traditions. As such, the traditions are imprinted from the very beginning of service. Also, Navy bmt has shipboard drills, do you really need that for the other services? How about flight line etiquette and behavior? Do we need to impose that on the other services? CC, if you want to be in the Marines, then re-enlist back in the Marines. This is the AF, a separate service, and we like it that way. Otherwise, we would have stayed the Army Air Corps.

[sigecaps]

I'm not denying that an Airman couldn't complete another service's basic training/boot camp. All I'm saying is that it appears to me like some of the people here feel like they're lesser of a warrior for not having a basic training/boot that was as tough as another service's - so they want to make of for it via a merged BMT. Sounds like an inferiority complex to me.

I really don't see how you could have assumed anyone here wanted to merge BMT due to a complex. Believe me, Air Force dudes generally don't give a shit about the pissing contest that the grunts try to rope us into.

[Yggdrasil]

Got my vote on that shipmate. Are you green- or blue-side Navy? That will add perspective what sort of experience this stems from.

I'm bluewater - Tin Can Sailor all the way.

The way I see it is this - after boot camp/basic training is over (a mere 6 to 13 weeks of your life, depending on what service you joined), you're in the military and getting paid the same as anyone in any other service who is of the same paygrade with the same amount of time in service.

For those of you who want that merged BMT - if your whole self esteem rests on how tough you are compared people in another service, then maybe you need to spend the $75 a month and go take Tae Kwon Do or Jujitsu or something. Maybe once you get that black belt, you'll stop being so insecure.

[BigBaze]

Right! Make the dumbest mistakes and skyrocket to the top :)

But, seriously BigBaze, this idea is not bad and could really improve all.


Dammit I wrote like 10 paragraphs and closed the screen by mistake:> Anyhow, I think it is a bad idea, I don't want hoorah meatheads in my shop, I want skilled technicians. Gung ho and hoorah don't solve a dual hydraulic failure in IFR conditions in a KC10 with the last good system powered by a windmilling engine, trying to determine if the landing gear will extend while calculating fuel needed to get to your alternate airport, but wait that has fog down to the runway, and we have to divert to another airport..but they are snowed in too...it is different from charging a foxhole with a grenade in both hands, get my point? It would be a complete waste of time to do one boot camp for all, it would not benefit anyone. The Air Force is a technical branch, albeit for our people on the front lines with the Army/Marines (JTAC, TACP, CCT, PJ, SF, EOD what have you..and they have their own unique training....

[Yggdrasil]

Dammit I wrote like 10 paragraphs and closed the screen by mistake:> Anyhow, I think it is a bad idea, I don't want hoorah meatheads in my shop, I want skilled technicians. Gung ho and hoorah don't solve a dual hydraulic failure in IFR conditions in a KC10 with the last good system powered by a windmilling engine, trying to determine if the landing gear will extend while calculating fuel needed to get to your alternate airport, but wait that has fog down to the runway, and we have to divert to another airport..but they are snowed in too...it is different from charging a foxhole with a grenade in both hands, get my point? It would be a complete waste of time to do one boot camp for all, it would not benefit anyone. The Air Force is a technical branch, albeit for our people on the front lines with the Army/Marines (JTAC, TACP, CCT, PJ, SF, EOD what have you..and they have their own unique training....

Ummm, there are aircraft mechanics in ALL services, who are just as skilled a technician as you.

Either way, you bring up a good point - the SpecOps that you mentioned. If someone regrets the service that they choose merely because they they believe that their boot camp was not as tough as another service's, they could always go into their respective service's SpecOps. Of course, if they don't have the physical stuff to make it through such training, there's still martial arts - get that black belt and go beat up a Marine if it strokes their ego.

[BigBaze]

Ummm, there are aircraft mechanics in ALL services, who are just as skilled a technician as you.

Either way, you bring up a good point - the SpecOps that you mentioned. If someone regrets the service that they choose merely because they they believe that their boot camp was not as tough as another service's, they could always go into their respective service's SpecOps. Of course, if they don't have the physical stuff to make it through such training, there's still martial arts - get that black belt and go beat up a Marine if it strokes their ego.


I wasn't suggesting that the USAF has the only good aircraft mechanics, ( but in my prior experience as a flightline maintainer, we do have the best) my point was: we need technically minded people in the AF not just people with big muscles and a hoorah Semper Fi mentality that the Marines have, they have that because of the job they do which is completely different then ours. I joined the Air Force to fly and after 6 years I got to retrain and fulfill that dream. Having a boot camp with all the other services would not benefit me one iota, I already have my tech school, survival schools and simulator training completed and am now in KC10 flight engineer flight school. I have all the training I could ever ask for, and don't need some crazy warrior mentality to do my job, I need my brain, my TO's and my fellow crew to solve any problems that arise.

[AGE Guy]

One bootcamp for all the services wouldn't make sense. A 6 week or 8 week program is required to break civilians. AT LEAST. The thing is, during that time, you can teach them other things that they will need to know later. If you take out all of those other things (like shipboard drills or basic infantry), you'll need to teach them seperately, removing the cost savings benefit.

One service WOULD make a lot of sense though. You could teach all the customs and courtesies and very basic military skills in a six week course, then send people to tech school. Infantry would then get their school, mechanics another. Think about it- does a Marine Intel weenie benefit a lot from the infantry training they get in basic? If you put all that kind of extra stuff into tech schools, you save quite a bit. Then, at a base with airplanes, you'd have the same military police as at a base with tanks, and the same support personel. Only the core mission would change.

Do I really need to be a seperate service with all the bueracracy that entails to fix airplanes or work on a ship? It would allow you to combine all of that support stuff that is neccessary but is the same in every branch. And remember, then there wouldn't be a need for every service to have F-35 mechanics... there would be one pool of them, trained at the same tech school. Sure would make it easier and more efficient.

[BUSAMASTER]

I always thought the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard could all attend one BMT where they all learn the Basics of Military Training. The training would be about 2 months long and would be taught by a Joint Cadre of DIs.

After graduating the BMT, each service would then go to their own respective training to learn component specific jargon, customs, riflemanship and whatnot.

It seems the DoD could save a ton of money and bring all components together for future Joint Operations by putting all DoD enlisted on the same sheet of music from day 1 ---- for the Basics, that is.

This is just something I've thought about since day 1.

What are your thoughts on this.... I'll elaborate on more of my thoughts concerning this thread once others chime in.


You must be smoking CRACK rock. Marines would still have to be trained as MARINES, Army et al. The basics are not the basics because if you had done anytime in more than one branch you would see the obvious differences. Watch how Marines march and then attend an AF graduation and see them diddy bop across the parade grounds. Watch how Marines can complete rifle movements together and how that instills discipline and teamwork and wonder why the AF doesn't have anyone who can even compete with a basically trained group of Marines. I'd put up the next graduating platoon from Parris Island against the AF Honor Guard any day. They are there to peform separate missions and the training required to do such would still require the same amount of time in Army or Marine basic as what you are projecting that they cut out.

Whatever you teach at the ALL SERVICE BASIC would have to be WEEDED OUT in the branch specific basic training because of the missions that require different mindsets.

[BRUWIN]

You must be smoking CRACK rock. Marines would still have to be trained as MARINES, Army et al. The basics are not the basics because if you had done anytime in more than one branch you would see the obvious differences. Watch how Marines march and then attend an AF graduation and see them diddy bop across the parade grounds. Watch how Marines can complete rifle movements together and how that instills discipline and teamwork and wonder why the AF doesn't have anyone who can even compete with a basically trained group of Marines. I'd put up the next graduating platoon from Parris Island against the AF Honor Guard any day. They are there to peform separate missions and the training required to do such would still require the same amount of time in Army or Marine basic as what you are projecting that they cut out.

Whatever you teach at the ALL SERVICE BASIC would have to be WEEDED OUT in the branch specific basic training because of the missions that require different mindsets.

Well you guys have fun twirling your rifles like majorettes....it scares the hell out of Al Qeada.

[Combat correspondent]

You must be smoking CRACK rock. Marines would still have to be trained as MARINES, Army et al. The basics are not the basics because if you had done anytime in more than one branch you would see the obvious differences. Watch how Marines march and then attend an AF graduation and see them diddy bop across the parade grounds. Watch how Marines can complete rifle movements together and how that instills discipline and teamwork and wonder why the AF doesn't have anyone who can even compete with a basically trained group of Marines. I'd put up the next graduating platoon from Parris Island against the AF Honor Guard any day. They are there to peform separate missions and the training required to do such would still require the same amount of time in Army or Marine basic as what you are projecting that they cut out.

Whatever you teach at the ALL SERVICE BASIC would have to be WEEDED OUT in the branch specific basic training because of the missions that require different mindsets.

Dude, first off, our BMT is as long as the Army's---so, not sure what you mean there. Secondly, based on talking do some boot-a$$ Soldiers from the 101st in Afghanistan, ours is much more rigorous and disciplined.

Still, Chair Camp aside....

We could all learn the basics together and it would benefit all. Right now, the Army, Air Force and Navy only to BMT for <9 weeks, not enough. All should go for longer and learn more.

As far as the me being around other branches, you are barking up the wrong tree devil dog - I earned mine!

[Combat correspondent]

Based on your posts in other threads, I now assume you're not a Marine - take back my devil dog...you don't rate it. In any regard, get off the Marines' jocks zoomie, and how about finding some Air Force pride!

[49erfan]

You must be smoking CRACK rock. Marines would still have to be trained as MARINES, Army et al. The basics are not the basics because if you had done anytime in more than one branch you would see the obvious differences. Watch how Marines march and then attend an AF graduation and see them diddy bop across the parade grounds. Watch how Marines can complete rifle movements together and how that instills discipline and teamwork and wonder why the AF doesn't have anyone who can even compete with a basically trained group of Marines. I'd put up the next graduating platoon from Parris Island against the AF Honor Guard any day. They are there to peform separate missions and the training required to do such would still require the same amount of time in Army or Marine basic as what you are projecting that they cut out.

Whatever you teach at the ALL SERVICE BASIC would have to be WEEDED OUT in the branch specific basic training because of the missions that require different mindsets.


BUSA...you obviously haven't seen the AF Honor Guard. Non-DC marine honor guards are at a much lower level than the USAF Honor guard. Go see for yourself. You obviously feel threatened in some manner to mention the AF in every line of your post. Your mentally inflated image of the marines is laughable. You must have low self esteem.

[Combat correspondent]

Or enjoying a chilled plate of homo-'erect'us sushi.

[Smeghead]

The problem is that, as far as AF enlisted are concerned, the ability to follow a simple set of instructions are a vital part of our job. Simple sets of instructions = technical orders. If I can't trust a guy to not follow a simple AFI regarding sleeve length, then how can I trust him to repair a jet engine following a TO? That could get some one killed. I know not everyone works on the flight line (I don't) but we all have aspects of our job that directly affect someone else. If the finance troop screws up someone's pay, then that can lead to all kinds of things, etc, etc. Small actions can have giant unintended consequences.

Quoting Techno from another thread, but I said the same thing in an unrelated conversation with an Army coworker yesterday. This is why Air Force BMT is not all about bayonet drills, hand to hand and crawling through mud. We folded T-Shirts, lined beds and shoes, and paid a lot of attention to nitnoid minutae. Because that's exactly the mindset we want with someone working on aircraft. Is that super particular attention to detail required for every branch? Is it too late to start instilling that mentality into out Airmen post BMT?

[blacksheep1208]

I'm not sure what the Air Force wants, but I know it's not someone that is technically skilled in their job. Basic got dumbed down, and the tech schools are about to be dumbed down. I'm not sure where the people that don't belong in the Air Force are going to get weeded out anymore. Recently we were briefed on the intelligence career field transformation. Which in other terms can be called the systemic destruction of intelligence professionals in the Air Force. People that weren't going to hack it used to be weeded out at tech school. Now though, you won't learn anything really technical about your job until you get to your actual assignment. And since we are so desparate to have 1N's to support the deployment workload, we have to let people make it through that wouldn't have in the past. I guess for now we will pretend we are "warriors", carry around a rifle at basic that you won't ever see again until you deploy to the middle east or get orders overseas and have to qualify again. The other services that do land combat have follow on training after basic to learn how to fight, are we going to start doing that or stick to pretending to be something we're not, then having combat skills training prior to a deployment? Just curious. I'm sure I sound bitter, and you're right, I am, we're moving from being the most advanced and proficient air force in the world to a who knows what at this point.

[kdiesel]

In my honest opinion, there should be no joint BMT for the DoD services. There are certain aspects aside from just drill, ceremony, and basic discipline that are inherently unique to each individual service. They all have their deep rooted heritage that should be taught at BMT so they don't have to go to branch specific schools and learn why they should be proud to be Army, Air Force, Navy or Marines. Despite the intended idea of perhaps saving money or streamlining the process, I believe it detracts from the very nature of being an airman, soldier, sailor, or marine. When you graduate from BMT (at least in the Air Force) and you're truly bestowed the honor of being called 'airman' at that point there should be no greater pride, because you know the history, heritage, and pride of the men and women who came before. Some things shouldn't just be about money or convenience, some things should be about tradition and pride.

[Rob13]

The best way to save money on training, start more joint training for those cross-dept. jobs. Security, medical, supply, those joint fighters/cargo planes etc. We all go to school for that, why not combine those schools? Then when we go "IA" or GWOT then we would all know what level of training we had. One force, One fight.

[S97Batess]

Please God no. I have the "pleasure" of being on Oahu while on TRDL, I have one option for seeing a military specialist here, dispite at least 4 clinics. It took 2 years and a trip to the emergency room to get to see a specialist, thanks to the deployments. Wilford Hall is huge, services the base, and all of the Trainees. Ft. Sam Houston has one of the best burn trama teams around. Which would you shut down?

I am surprised that you were not taken care of at Tripler AMC (big pink).

Since the BRAC has decided this issue, Wilford Hall will become a 'super' clinic and BAMC will become the medical center for the San Antonio area for military. I gather that Randolph AFB will still have a small clinic for that side of the town, but other than that, the next nearest place would be at Corpus Cristi Naval hospital (or clinic now) vs the clinic at the base in Del Rio, Tx.:(

[scotty1972]

I think that it could lead to something positive, and could cut some costs throughout the DOD. And you can boot BCT in the Army and add a couple of weeks in AIT to train what a common BCT didn't. I think theres alot in all Services that we can learn from, and it may biuld a more cohesive DOD, and make us aware of other customs and courtesies within DOD. It's something that may not be realistic right now with the wars, but maybe when we return to a peacetime OPTEMPO, then that may be something to consider.

[Unregistered]

There are no economies of scale to be gained -- so no cost savings.

The services are markedly different in missions and in how they need to prepare their personnel. This means each should conduct its own basic training for the greatest effectiveness.

The power and capability of each service comes from the uniqueness of each -- the special qualities related to the challenges of their unique missions, which accounts for their different histories and traditions -- not from "jointness." Jointness is not good in and of itself; we could have perfect jointness and still lose wars; jointness is a just means to apply the different service capabilities together. Combat power appropriate to the mission is the end we seek, and it is best reinforced by service-specific capabilities. Jointness simply applies in how the units are employed together, and is not something that is influenced by initial training or my individuals in their primary jobs -- it is a quality of units and headquarters. It is a shame it is misunderstood.

The author is really advocating something other than jointness -- the quality of the various forces working together -- he is advocating unity of the services into one service. In a sense, this is the opposite of jointness, it is really a loss of the capabilities of the various services and the formation of one service. If anyone thinks this is a good idea, please take a look at the experiences of the Canadian Forces, which most of us would agree are filled with nice people with minimal fighting qualities. Those Canadian units that have the ability to perform military missions are those with the greatest variance from the Canadian Defense one-ness ideal.



Jointness, the ability of the services to work together, is not particularly relevant to personnel in the lower grades

[Unregistered]

There are no economies of scale to be gained -- so no cost savings.

The services are markedly different in missions and in how they need to prepare their personnel. This means each should conduct its own basic training for the greatest effectiveness.

The power and capability of each service comes from the uniqueness of each -- the special qualities related to the challenges of their unique missions, which accounts for their different histories and traditions -- not from "jointness." Jointness is not good in and of itself; we could have perfect jointness and still lose wars; jointness is a just means to apply the different service capabilities together. Combat power appropriate to the mission is the end we seek, and it is best reinforced by service-specific capabilities. Jointness simply applies in how the units are employed together, and is not something that is influenced by initial training or my individuals in their primary jobs -- it is a quality of units and headquarters. It is a shame it is misunderstood.

The author is really advocating something other than jointness -- the quality of the various forces working together -- he is advocating unity of the services into one service. In a sense, this is the opposite of jointness, it is really a loss of the capabilities of the various services and the formation of one service. If anyone thinks this is a good idea, please take a look at the experiences of the Canadian Forces, which most of us would agree are filled with nice people with minimal fighting qualities. Those Canadian units that have the ability to perform military missions are those with the greatest variance from the Canadian Defense one-ness ideal.

[BRAVO10000]

Once again, I said Basic - the Corps and Army would learn ground combat-specific training after BMT was complete and they reported to their individual basics.

I am talking about drill, ceremony, customs, courtesies, PT, grooming standards ---- basically, I am talking about breaking down the bad habits of the average 17 or 18 year old and building up a Joint Warrior out of all of them for 8 weeks - then, as I said, they'd report to their individual service-related training.

Its about the basics and, honestly, joint basics.

Interesting thought - but playing Devil's advocate - I'm wondering how we address a few things.

A joint boot camp calls for a joint standard - for both entry AND graduation. The Air Force's BMT is more chalenging academically than our other components, because the AF has higher entry standards. What you're proposing means trainees are in training longer...2 months in the joint boot camp, and then off to component-specific schooling. That equals higher cost. I am not for that - I just don't see the return on investment. Read the posts here from people that went to Dix/bragg/Riley to take the Combat Skills course...

For crying out loud - if you want to run-n-gun, play with pugil sticks and act like a bada$$ - just JOIN ANOTHER BRANCH! Blue-to-Green is still available.

[Combat correspondent]

No, I was not advocating that at all. If you look at the funnel diagrams which show each services unique capabilities, they are all topped with the universal similarities - call it the Principals of War. We should learn the Basics at a joint BMT (learn the principles of war) and could focus on individual specialized missions, tenants and functions when we reach our individual service components. There would be increased efficiency, knowledge and understanding, with a cost savings....while not jeopardizing any traditions or heritage.

This doesn't need to be an arguing point among services, either. Sec. Gates could wave his magic DoD wand and make it so.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, though.

[Blue Badge]

Until we get around to breaking down all the "MY service is better" silliness, and join all the services into one, ie, the USM (United States Military), this won't become a reality, fiscally smart as it may be. The principal realities of the core differences of the different services stand as too different to make it a reality.

Take the ever present USMC v. USAF debate. Our dear cousins in the Corp are hard charging. They are lean, mean killing machines. When their NCO's say "Run around this corner and charge that tank... at least one of you has to survive and get close enough to toss a grenade in it's hatch!", they don't even blink... they move out and get it done.

My AF team, when presented with the same order would take a moment, and one would tell me, "Hey Sarge... I have a LAW left... would that work better?"... to which I'd listen to my subordinate's idea, interlace it with the mission and press on with a frago... Getting it done smarter.

The difference is, the Corp completely brainwashes their troops to react without question... Leap for the sky as high as they can without even asking "How High",... because in MOST missions they deal with, their NCO's are expected to be completely 100% right all the time, without fail, without question... and as such the troops are to react instantly to orders so the least number of (good) people die, best improving their mission effectiveness.

The Air Force also teaches complete compliance with orders... but allows for the leeway for troops to THINK, and under correct situations, add their input, possibly altering the directives. This is based on the precept that MOST USAF careers are technical in duty and not direct combat minded (not all of them though).

These little details and styles are a huge part of the differences of Basics... and why currently, combining them wouldn't work.

[Blue Badge]

Tad bit hostile there unregistered... If you actually read what I wrote, you'd realize I was complimenting the Corp on doing what they do because it's how they need to do it...

Brainwashing isn't always a pejorative... in this case it defines the process used by the USMC to remove the logical thinking mind of normal people and turn them into what the Corp wants... Unquestioning, instant obediance... The kind of obediance to do the work they are sometimes called on to do.

As for the less than steller parts of our service you mention, you are correct in what you've seen; That said, assigning that thought to the entire service is rather foolish. Also, to think that examples like you list aren't present in all the services also speaks to foolishness.

:: Internet tough guy mode on ::
As for your wish to "climb through your monitor", be glad you can't... not all AF troops live behind computer screens doing Intel work... Some of us actually do a lot of work with our sister services in true joint missions and could/would gladly hand you your posterior to correct your attitude.
:: Internet tough guy mode off ::

Please feel free to rant further, but try to keep it at least tangently to the topic at hand... :rolleyes:

[Combat correspondent]

I heard Chair Camp is pretty darned easy. Then again, I've heard the exact same thing about Army BMT and Navy BMT.

On the other hand, I've heard Coast Guard BMT is pretty hard and I can say 1st hand that USMC BMT has its challenges.

Still, from talking to many people downrange in the deployed environment, I'd say Navy is easiest, followed by Army - with AF being slightly harder than Army. I understand that physically it is exactly the same but mentally the AF has challenges. I heard the Army BMT has some kind of stress time outs, cant be hazed, cant cuss, etc., etc. I heard thats not the case in the AF. I wonder if others can clear that point up???

[TimesRover]

The services do different missions, and thus have different skill requirements, histories, and traditions. They need different training and education to accomplish their missions.

Jointness is obviously being misunderstood. Jointness is about units of different services being able to work together; to do this, a headquarters with the ability to understand and use all of the service units under is must exist. Thus joint training.

What the original author is suggesting is not "jointness" but "oneness," that everyone in the military be trained the same. This sounds appealing to those who do not understand what makes the Marines, the Army, the Navy, and even the Air Force great -- and different from each other.

And it sounds appealing to those who think there is some economy of scale in doing this -- although it cannot be shown that there would be.

Reminds me of the story of the McNamara boys (college professors and such) who took over the Defense Department in the 1960's (just in time to run the Vietnam War so well) and said out loud, "why do the different military people have different uniforms? Wouldn't it save money if they all wore the same uniform?" Made perfect sense to them. Like the idea of training everyone in the military the same way.

Just ask the Canadians how well it has worked out for them...

[frankebryantjr@yahoo.com]

Absolutely why have we not done this before, I was a drill sergeant, and retired infantry men I know this will work implement ASAP save big bucks.

[Combat correspondent]

Uniforms? We did, we all wore the same Uts when I came in!

I remember being stationed in Oki and wearing my cammies. The Sailors and Airmen there wore the same darned cammies, just the Airmen rolled their sleeves different.

I still think all branches should have the same utility uniform - why not? What good does it do having separate Uts. I am now AF and on my last deployment to Afghanistan had to wear several Uts. For instance, when on the FOBs I wore ABUs. When on Army missions, I wore ACUs. When on Marine missions, I wore MARPAT. What logic does this make? What sense?

Talk about FWA!

When I look in my closet right now, not only do I have all my old Marine uniforms and new Air Force uniforms, I also have a new MARPAT woodland, MARPAT desert, ACU and flight suit....a ton of money wasted when good old desert cammies (DCUs) did the trick just fine!

[BRAVO10000]

No, I was not advocating that at all. If you look at the funnel diagrams which show each services unique capabilities, they are all topped with the universal similarities - call it the Principals of War. We should learn the Basics at a joint BMT (learn the principles of war) and could focus on individual specialized missions, tenants and functions when we reach our individual service components. There would be increased efficiency, knowledge and understanding, with a cost savings....while not jeopardizing any traditions or heritage.

This doesn't need to be an arguing point among services, either. Sec. Gates could wave his magic DoD wand and make it so.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, though.

Alright FIRST - we are all familiar with the Principles of War. I noticed nothing, however, about our "core competencies"...the factors that drive the need for separate, distinct services. These competencies, developed in 2003, are "developing airmen, technology-to-warfighting and integrating operations". Clearly, they don't even teach our core competencies at boot camp - nor do I think that they should. You realize that 75% of them won't ever be an NCO, correct?

Okay - so a joint BMT where we all learn the "Principles of War". Then we go off to our service-specific schools? This saves money and increases jointness how? It just adds schooling without a quantifiable return in efficiency. We're talking about pipeline airmen here. At this point in their military careers, they are infants - you want to start talking doctrine to them right off the bat?

The US Air Force is the best in the history of mankind, and yet we keep looking for ways to change it based on this organizational self-esteem problem that the AF seems to have developed. Look, I am a change-oriented guy, but it is getting out of hand. Because a few idealistic glamour boys want to holler "HUA", we need to change the AF? Sorry, it makes no sense. We need to get over this envy of real infantrymen and embrace our roles. Either that or the end is coming for my career, because I am missing something...

[BRAVO10000]

...When we see a troop step out of line or do something the wrong way, we stop and correct them as soon as possible...

From top to bottom your organization represents what is wrong with the military. The USAF is nothing but an overweight, disrespectful, bus driver uniform wearing, flip flop wearing, first name basis, grossly overfunded and irresponsible shit organization. You are a joke, and nobody is laughing with you only at you. FIX YOURSELF!

THESE are the people you want to train with? I don't like chest-thumping knuckleheads. That's as compelling a reason for a separate (read:smarter) AF.

Look - Unregistered - I've worked with your Corps many times. I've deployed with them too. What I DIDN'T do in the field WITH MARINES was PT, because they wouldn't come out and run with me unless someone held a gun to their heads. They were certainly disciplined enough to keep to the 3-beer limit that was "on your honor"...it's just that none of them could remember how to count past 2. Oh, I went to your tanbelt course too, and whaddya know, I passed it (as an old fella, mind you) with no more injuries than the next guy. Not saying it was easy, because it wasn't - but I wasn't wearing flip-flops in my bus-driver uniform either.

So laugh away, leatherneck - but keep that Iridium nearby and don't hesitate to call on the Chair Force when you can't do your job all by yourself. Hopefully, our guys that SHOULD be loading the aircraft with ass-saving munitions won't be busy driving your convoys.

[Unregistered]

Never happen...I do not think this would be good for the services. Each enjoys their own identity. You would just be further confusing young servicemembers, and adding logistics issues and length to their training. Let each determine their own training.

[CplH5811]

There's already enough of the "different branch" animosity around as it is. If this were to happen, there would probably be little to no small-unit cohesion in training. A big part of that is because each branch is out to achieve their own operational goals. Marines, we go in and kill people after the Air Foce has maped out the area and the Navy has dropped us off. Then, the Army comes in and sits on the bodies left in our wake. That's a large reason why our boot camp is longer and (many would argue) tougher than the others. Because we are trained from beginning to end about killing. It's brain washing at its finest. If you consolidated everything, you would wind up with a soft Marine and psycho Airman. Then dogs start kissing cats, the sky turns green and all hell breaks loose. Now, if we were going to make a move to take over the world, I would say consolidate and make everyone killers. Any other way just wouldn't work. The thought does get an A for effort though.

[mfjdspence]

Just one more step towards the looming "US Force" monicker. Better yet, how about we just contract out the whole thing that way we could theoretically save even more money.

*NOTE: Sarcasm is intended in heaping loads! Use only as directed.*

[Blue Badge]

There's already enough of the "different branch" animosity around as it is. If this were to happen, there would probably be little to no small-unit cohesion in training. A big part of that is because each branch is out to achieve their own operational goals. Marines, we go in and kill people after the Air Foce has maped out the area and the Navy has dropped us off. Then, the Army comes in and sits on the bodies left in our wake. That's a large reason why our boot camp is longer and (many would argue) tougher than the others. Because we are trained from beginning to end about killing. It's brain washing at its finest. If you consolidated everything, you would wind up with a soft Marine and psycho Airman. Then dogs start kissing cats, the sky turns green and all hell breaks loose. Now, if we were going to make a move to take over the world, I would say consolidate and make everyone killers. Any other way just wouldn't work. The thought does get an A for effort though.

If we could still give out prestige points, I would vote some for this post... Well Said! :D

[Coach]

I can see a joint training environment only with initial training I.E., physical fitness training (whoever has the toughest), drill and ceremony (everyone marches the same from here on out) and understanding of the DOD as a whole. From there you can weed out the social misfits, gang bangers, drug addicts, alcoholics, wife beaters, molesters, criminals and otherwise undesirables. The school lasts two months and everyone wears the same uniform - the work utility uniform, BDU -whatever - no service identifying tapes, only a name tag. They get their service specific uniform items when they get to their service specific training.

[CplH5811]

I can see a joint training environment only with initial training I.E., physical fitness training (whoever has the toughest), drill and ceremony (everyone marches the same from here on out) and understanding of the DOD as a whole. From there you can weed out the social misfits, gang bangers, drug addicts, alcoholics, wife beaters, molesters, criminals and otherwise undesirables. The school lasts two months and everyone wears the same uniform - the work utility uniform, BDU -whatever - no service identifying tapes, only a name tag. They get their service specific uniform items when they get to their service specific training.

A couple problems that I noticed here.

1.) How do you pick whose drill and ceremonies are best? Remember, we need to be fair about this.
2.) No one wears a shirt that says that they beat their a POS that shouldn't be in the military. Otherwise, me and Blue Badge would be out of a job.
3.) Every branch now has their own utility uniform design.
4.) Just using what I know of course, a Marine would have to undergo another 2 months of further training in order to cover Marine Corps history, customs and curtesies (?), Marine Corps Martial Arts, "branch specific" information such as ranks structure and things of the sort, and field operations. that's all before MOS school. So, if you have a 3 month school (which is about average), that puts someone at around 7 months of trainging before even getting to their first duty station. By the time all of this is done, they still have to learn how their individual command operates.

So, by the time all is said and done, your Marine of the future will have almost a year in before ever really knowing their job. While at the same time, people are still getting out. It just doesn't work.

[Unregistered]

Still, from talking to many people downrange in the deployed environment, I'd say Navy is easiest, followed by Army - with AF being slightly harder than Army.

Nope, I'm Navy with prior service in the National Guard. Army is harder than Navy. I'm stationed in San Antonio now, and live 10 minutes from Lackland - from what I see, Air Force is probably the same as Navy.

[JD2780]

Nope, I'm Navy with prior service in the National Guard. Army is harder than Navy. I'm stationed in San Antonio now, and live 10 minutes from Lackland - from what I see, Air Force is probably the same as Navy.

I agree air force was a joke when I went through, and from what I'm seeing daily is its still a joke.

[Unregistered]

I think the idea is definately worth a look. No matter what branch we're in our business is warfare and the protection of the US. I also think it would help weed out those who are slipping through an ever widening crack (weight, attitude, etc.). Why not give it a try? I don't see how it could backfire.

[MADAMESINCERE]

Dude, first off, our BMT is as long as the Army's---so, not sure what you mean there. Secondly, based on talking do some boot-a$$ Soldiers from the 101st in Afghanistan, ours is much more rigorous and disciplined.

Still, Chair Camp aside....

We could all learn the basics together and it would benefit all. Right now, the Army, Air Force and Navy only to BMT for <9 weeks, not enough. All should go for longer and learn more.

As far as the me being around other branches, you are barking up the wrong tree devil dog - I earned mine!

___________________________
Army basic is 10 weeks long, unless a Soldier (i.e. infantry) goes through OSUT where the training is longer

[MADAMESINCERE]

The best way to save money on training, start more joint training for those cross-dept. jobs. Security, medical, supply, those joint fighters/cargo planes etc. We all go to school for that, why not combine those schools? Then when we go "IA" or GWOT then we would all know what level of training we had. One force, One fight.

_____________________________-
I'm not sure how the AF and Navy works, but I know that the Army and USMC do what you suggested above. For example, all Marine MPs go through the Army MP school, and for some advanced intel training some Marines go to the Army intel school. It is a good idea like you suggested to combine more of the schools though...

[sammyd]

I don't think it would be a good idea.
Too many diffrerences that need to be ironed out and that would lead to one big service instead of 4.
Part of the basic military training is becoming part of the force you selected to join. Having to learn a bunch of stuff here then relearn more stuff at a later school makes no sense. doesn't save any money and will cause nothing but confusion. You're going to fly everyone to an east coast or west coast BMT school then you're going to have to ship them to the current services BMT school for final training in that particular service anyway.
Sure interservice schools are a good idea and even in the bad old 80's there was some of that going on. Jet wrenches could have a common school, seabees and engineers the same etc.
But part of what makes you a sailor, airman, marine, or soldier comes at basic training, getting that uniform, being immersed in total navy airforce marine army life, becoming one with your chosen service.

[ringjamesa]

Ok, I had been avoiding this thread as much as possible and initally thought the idea was the stupidest thing ever. However, I would like to clear some things up. First and foremost, to those who are talking about how bad the interservice rivalry is-when were you in? I agree that in the past it was pretty bad but in the current joint force environment, it has gotten a lot better. Each branch has earned some respect from their brothers in arms by working together for a common goal. Yeah we whine and complain about working with the Army, the Guard, etc.. but at the end of the day, when you work with them day in and day out and see that yeah they work just as hard and sometimes harder, you walk away with more respect for them then you had when you went in. I am not saying we all hold hands and sing Kumbya but as someone that works alongside other services day in and day out, I have more respect for them than I did 10 years ago.
Second. The only way the joint training would work would be without a graduation and if everyone went back to BDUs or to a common uniform again. If the training was say 5/'6 weeks of standardized training then you went to your service indoctrination-service specific training and graduated from there, it could work. It would be a logistical nightmare but it could work.

[Unregistered]

I think the idea is definately worth a look. No matter what branch we're in our business is warfare and the protection of the US. I also think it would help weed out those who are slipping through an ever widening crack (weight, attitude, etc.). Why not give it a try? I don't see how it could backfire.

You say slipping through the cracks? With all the combined mess, i think slipping through the cracks would happen more.

[Unregistered]

>>It seems the DoD could save a ton of money and bring all components together for future Joint Operations by putting all DoD enlisted on the same sheet of music from day 1

Probably not true. I suspect it would end up costing more in travel than the little (if any) that you would save. You'd still need the same number of DI's for the "joint" course as you would at the service-specific sites. You'd probably even have to add a week to the service course to cover a second in-processing and let the DI's get to know the troops.

Plus what about the Air Force? I had an Air Force guy tell me to my face "If I wanted to be in the Military I'd have joined the Army".

[Good to GO]

I think it would be a great step. If you have seen anything lately then you know that the Airman coming into the Active Air force are lacking a lot of the customs and courtesies that were drilled into the older guard. Maybe it’s the new kinder Air Force, but I swear one more Airman calls me dude or man or says yeah to me, there will be hell to pay. So two more months of customs and courtesies Ii think would be great, plus it would lead to a better understanding of the sister forces. Go for it.

[JCH08]

You guys are nigh! If this happened it would all get watered down to the lowest level. Marines enjoy the benefit of being small, which means we can make the standards high. No way would this work.

[Blue Badge]

OldJoke, but Highly applicable:

Secure the Building

If you tell a Marine officer to “secure the building,” but give him no more instruction, he will plan an assault. His troops will come in from two perpendicular directions, preceded by mortar and artillery fire, with F-18s flying close air support overhead. They will rain destruction on the structure, and then under the concealment of smoke, move into the building with two platoons, clearing each room of the building with grenades and bursts of small arms fire. When every room has been cleared they will go to the roof and raise a flag. Then the Marine officer will return and declare that the building has been secured.

If you tell an Army officer to “secure the building,” he will lead his men to the building, they will enter it and start knocking out the windows. Filling each opening with sandbags, they will surround the structure with barbed wire and claymores (these are directional command detonated mines). He will personally emplace his machineguns in the best locations to cover the “likely avenues of enemy approach,” and after 24 hours the structure will be fit to hold off an attack from a force three times the size of the Army unit inside. He will then report that the building has been secured.

If you tell a Navy officer to “secure the building,” he shuts down the computers, spins the dial on the lock of the file cabinet, turns off the lights and locks the front door.

If you tell an Air Force officer to “secure the building,” he looks it up on Google Maps, gets his contracting agent, and heads down to the local real estate agent where he takes out a 20 year lease with an option to buy.

[Unregistered]

I think it woul dbe plausible IF we could agree on the basics. As was pointed out previously, we don't march at the same gait, and something as simple as open/close ranks can't be performed by a flight made up of both airmen and soldiers as those maneuvers are performed differently as well. Uniform 'standards' aren't standard across teh seervices... I'm thinking that first course would be VERY short, maybe 2 weeks and concentrate on breaking the individuals and building a team.

[Yggdrasil]

It would be a waste. Everything that you "learned" in joint BMT would go out the window as soon as you got to your respective service's BMT.

[Blue Badge]

I think it woul dbe plausible IF we could agree on the basics. As was pointed out previously, we don't march at the same gait, and something as simple as open/close ranks can't be performed by a flight made up of both airmen and soldiers as those maneuvers are performed differently as well. Uniform 'standards' aren't standard across teh seervices... I'm thinking that first course would be VERY short, maybe 2 weeks and concentrate on breaking the individuals and building a team.

2 Weeks... Shave EVERYONE's head (Male and Female)... Pack up their civilian crap and mail it home... Issue Some kind of pre-basic uniform (BDU's maybe!)... PT (ensure standards can be met to progress to Service basic)... Common classes: LOAC, MEO, Suicide Awareness, Sexual Harassment, UCMJ, etc... All those time wasting things that consume large chucks of Basic that are the same, no matter which service.

That kind of idea might work...

[RM2SWUSNRET]

This idea is totally stupid. I know for one thing the corps which my son is in will never go for it. they have there own unique ways of training. the army there's. if the sailors wanted to be on the ground which they are they would have joined the marines or army. but to have all the boot camps in one. no way this would work. each service has it's own History and traditions. so leave it alone. anyway the IA'a from the navy are being trained by the army Drill Sgt's at fort jackson. soon here in san antonio at fort sam houston with in the next year and a half the navy corpsman instructors and then by the end of 2010 the first sailors from great lakes will be arriving for the corpsman/combat medic school to begin in early 2011. so this is being combined. the barracks are going up real quick on ft sam houston. but as far as boot camps NO WAY!

[Yggdrasil]

2 Weeks... Shave EVERYONE's head (Male and Female)... Pack up their civilian crap and mail it home... Issue Some kind of pre-basic uniform (BDU's maybe!)... PT (ensure standards can be met to progress to Service basic)... Common classes: LOAC, MEO, Suicide Awareness, Sexual Harassment, UCMJ, etc... All those time wasting things that consume large chucks of Basic that are the same, no matter which service.

That kind of idea might work...

This is an example of the kind of thinking that I can't stand, yet all the big wigs seem to have - if something, just by its very concept, just doesn't work; then just keep pouring money and resources into it to make it work. Unfortunately, by the time you get it to work, it wasn't worth anywhere near the amount of money and resources put into it. They have a word for this in the civilian world - "Escalation of Commitment".

[jond1993]

Yes. A single joint all service basic training is a good idea. Basic training for countries military forces makes sense. A solid new defined military core skill foundation to build different military technical skills or specialties. DOD paying way too much for pleasure of separate service unique duplicate or triplicate training just to save traditions or bragging rights.
I recommend DOD start at the top with one service academy or single ROTC organization first, to produce one joint minded new breed of officer corps that then branch off to Army, Air Force, Navy, USMC, Coast Guard, or Merchant Marine.
Why have a ABU, ACU, a USAF, a Marine Corps Air Force, a Navy Air Force, a Army artillery, a USMC artillery you see where I am going……….

So basically you are saying everyone should just become the Army? This is what will happen if we have one joint bootcamp/ OCS program. They are the biggest out of all of teh branches so they will have the most pull and everyone will conform to their low standards.
Traditions is what make Marines what they are. Without them eventually we would become just like the Army. Each branch has a specific mission and should have their own Basic Training to indoctrinate their recruits into what that mission is.

[Unregistered]

It is an interesting idea and from a logistics standpoint it makes sense but....

it wouldn't be advisable. While the whole "get the crap all the services have to know" would save time and money, it would probably decrease effectiveness overall. Even the 2 week plan blue badge suggested wouldn't work. Paris Island begins the moment your feet hit the yellow footprints. Lackland starts the minute you get off the bus (etc for the other services). There's fundamental differences that begin the moment you hit basic that are different for each service. And there is a purpose for the difference.

[ZACHC3506]

This would be a great idea actually! Hell why not include the weapons, hand to hand, pugil sticks, swimming? Include it all! It is there you could then set a baseline and begin to weed out the wheat from the chaff. In addition to something like this how about vocation specific testing to see where peoples natural ability is. Tweak the ASVAB thing a bit and make it user friendly on a grand scale and partition out the recruits based on their ability.

So what the BMT course would be 3-4 months long? Everyone would learn the same crap and be familiar in the history and traditions of all the services instead of just one. That in my opinion might make the services bonded together and better able to inter operate in the joint environment. Everyone cut their teeth the same way!

From the ASVAB and technical testing you then filter people to various jobs in various services. You might even solve some recruiting issues? Perhaps you can specify a preference for which branch you want to be in when you sign up but its dependant on your testing meeting the criteria for that service.

There would no doubt be that rivalry about who has higher standards but we already know different standards exist. If you spent 2 years going to school to work on computers you would score higher in the computer portions of the testing and be sent to sonar operator school or guided missle training (for example). If your a bit rednecky like me and have a knack for firearms, during the rifle qualifications you would stand out and get a job as maybe a gunner or 18B.

Train to one standard! No variations! Once you get into a given branch your shipped off to your tech school to begin your career. At some point down the road maybe you have gone to college and you can retake some of the qual tests and if you meet the criteria you can just step across service boundaries and become something else. No going through BMT again, no losing a stripe, just walk across to another branch and begin training to do something different???

Could save a crap ton of money and send retention through the ceiling!

This actually is a very good idea. I know having gone through Navy boot camp about 4 yrs ago, it was not very hard. Most average people could get through it. Those who can't...obviously need to find a civilian job. But, learning what we like, and being put in a field where we would be an asset and not a burden would definitely boost morale. This in turn would raise retention rates, as would be needed by the higher Basic training attrition rate.

I'm all for it.

[AWH1234]

It may not be a bad idea in itself. Why not have all newbies learn ranks of all branches, standardize marching, drill, and ceremony, combat skills, etc.? This is "basic" training and could give all new E-1 through E-3s a better perspective of working with sister services while they are still being groomed in the military. I know that many NCO/SNCO PME academies as well as officer PME allow members of different branches to attend their specific courses. Though the numbers are scarce, individuals who attend these training academies have a better view of the way their sister service operates, and could bring a better/broader scope back to their workplace. This also prepares all of our Airmen, Soldiers, Sailors & Marines for the JET/ILO missions that they are bound to be a part of during their career.

[KEMayo111]

I retired 15 years ago and I sent a detailed plan to the President, JCS and several newspapers but guess what? Never heard a word about it. In that plan, I suggested a consolided BMT but I also suggested the DoD transform into three branches of service: The Air Division, Sea Division and Land Division.

For the life of me I just don't understand why we need 11 different uniforms and combinations for our three branches. Civil Engineering school should be the same. MP/SP/SF should also be the same. I understand we have different aircraft for different needs but then why does the Marines have aircraft when the Air Force is called the Air Force?

Before you begin to have me drawn and quartered, I believe in history, tradition but to a point. If the DoD would modernize and force the branches to work together, then we would not have some of the problems. I am retired Air Force but I think the Air Force is the very first one to get overhauled. Why is there 1 officer for every 4 enlisted? The Army is 1 for 16 so are you telling me that the enlisted in the Air Force just can't do the job of an officer? There's a waste of money right there paying for more officers than enlisted people. I heard a similar excuse they used back in World War II that Blacks are not good fighters because they can't see in the dark!

Quit trying segregate the branches and do what is really needed to modernize this force. We are all soldiers, sailors and Airman but we are to protect and defend the Constitution, against all enemies first and foremost. Suck it up Air Force and learn to carry a weapon. Same goes for the Navy. Yo, Army and Marines, use your brains and realize that not everything needs to be destroyed.

[Unregistered]

Not a good idea at all. Leave some traditions alone! How about the importance of a Sailor feeling proud of his service?

Its ideas like this that really piss me off. Please don't let this kind of hairbrained idea get in front of today's decision makers. They might just be dumb enough to do it.

_Retired Navy CPO, and proud of my service and it's traditions.

[East Side]

Not only no, but hell no! I say this because I have served both in the Marine Corps and the National Guard. Comparing my MC MOS training to the same MOS training for the Army, (which for me was Avionics), all I have to say is that the Naval Aviation Maintenance course was far superior to the Army's version. This isn't a bash the Army thing at all. There Avionics MOS school is about 3 months long. And when talking to National Guardsman and comparing the two, it was apparent that the Army's version falls way short. Also, there where different levels of proficiency expected by the two branches. During my time in the Guard I knew many soldiers who where rated in 2, 3 or 4 MOS's! How can you be proficient in all four? You can't plain and simple. So, in overall comparison, any combination of the service branches would be a disaster. We train differently and operate differently.

[joenavy]

I think that one BMT for all branches is a great. I am in Afghanistan right now stationed with the Army and I went through Combat Training with the Army. The one BMT for all branches will help out the other branches to know and understand other branches ranks. As a Navy Petty Officer wearing Army ACU's all day, when I got to diffenert base here in Afghanistan I get saulted all the time by the Air Force and Army Junior Enlisted, b/c of my Crow on my Cover. I have to tell them that I am an E-5 and not a COL. This will be the best time for the Military b/c we have every branch of service here in Afghanistan and in Iraq. As a Comms people it would also be nice to have all the Comms people going through the same training. Going to combat training with the Army and learning the Army way for Comms is a little different then the way we do it in the Navy. This is my second Joint command, and i say that working with the other branches is the best but when youi work with people that understand what your rank is or know what to call you it is not, b/c you have to tell them everyday what you are. So I just tell them to call me Sergs.

[CplH5811]

Well, I don't think that the government would go for it. Frankly because the Marines are America's pit bull. They keep us angry and let us kill some people every few years to keep us from "biting the hand that feeds" in a way. Marine Corps boot camp is the way it is for a reason. From the first day, we're being trained to be killers. Well, at least when I went through we were. I can't speak for today's recruits. But that is a topic for another thread. The fact is that if you expect a single basic training for all of the branches, it's gonna have to hold up to the Marine Corps level. Otherwise, it won't happen. And, what's the use in starting an airman out at a level 10 of aggression only to bring him down to a 4 when he gets to his basic training? As great as it would be to consolidate everything, it just can't work.

[MexDoc]

Marine and Army officers go through the same school right? Army, Navy, and Airforce medics are about to start going to the same medic school in FT Sam Houston...I was deployed to a afghan line unit with an Airforce PA, AF Med Tech,Army 68w and I am a Navy Corpsman... think Joint is the way we are going..I think someday it is going to be one bootcamp for everyone. I think I heard Canadians do it that way :confused:

[Kyoowashugi]

I think I heard Canadians do it that way :confused:

Sort of. They combine the two - a basic military qualifications course, and then they each move on to the indoc of their selected services.

[Hairy_Donut]

Just go join the marines and save the USAF all this ass pain

[Unregistered]

Marine and Army officers go through the same school right? Army, Navy, and Airforce medics are about to start going to the same medic school in FT Sam Houston...I was deployed to a afghan line unit with an Airforce PA, AF Med Tech,Army 68w and I am a Navy Corpsman... think Joint is the way we are going..I think someday it is going to be one bootcamp for everyone. I think I heard Canadians do it that way :confused:

Heck no. All Marines go to Quantico for OCS then TBS. Army guys go to their own school.

There's some overlap for MOS schools (Marines go to Ft. Knox for armor and Kansas for Artillery) but not much, infantry is still at Quantico as are most other MOS schools.

And the differences are as big as those between MCRD's and Army Basic.

end of Army OCS 10 mile hike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBgzcCYNMz4
end of Marine OCS hike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lubXF_THv8&feature=related

[Unregistered]

NO - it's a stupid idea. Now lets move on.

[ATFP]

Why attack BMT? It's not taking out any operational assets. It's a soft target, but not particularly attractive or strategically important. The mission would go on without those recruits.

Are you serious? Since when would it be considered a soft target?! Lets think about it for a minute...and I will make it simple for you - The AF has a single place to train new recruits. A terrorist attack strikes Lackland - no more recruit training. No new recruits, no one to replace the troops killed in action or discharged. So strategically unimportant... think again.

[Unregistered]

It's not far enough. We should eliminate the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines, and instead have the US Dept of Defense. The pariochalism in each components acquisition programs is rediculous and "waste, fraud, and abuse". The longer we are involved in the current conflicts it is becoming more apparent that our specialization is the problem. All members should be able to bring the fight to the enemy either on foot with an M-4 or F-22. Let's stop wasting money and buying the same capability with a different vendor just so we can call it a "Army, Navy, Marine, or Air Force" weapon system or member.

[Unregistered]

This is a good Idea but all DoD Branches already work together. Im Army Special Forces and I have worked side by side with Marsoc my past three rotations in Afghanistan. However I do beleave that the Navy And Air Force Could train a little bit better on certain combat drill cause i have worked with them also and on the combat side they are not as combat savey as the Army or Marines.

[TKR]

NO!!! That would probaly be the worst idea the DoD chould ever do!

all the services have their own image and have their own rolls to up hold

by merging the training you would firest of all be making the total basic training for all the services much longer and thats a longer time before you chould ger bodies where you need them

it would also take away from each services core values. each service dose their job just fine but if you do this it would totally change the way each service would have to go about training

it works fine the way it dose right now

we have the best and strongest fighting force the world has ever seen. why mess that up with a new system that will probaly not work at all.


altho i did read about combineing like Marine Corps and Army training and then Navy and Air Force training
just for the very bacics that is already being done some what with joint training AI
MP school Tanks Flight school and ext...

why mess up the system that has given us the strongest fighing force in the world?

[BUSAMASTER]

Once again, I said Basic - the Corps and Army would learn ground combat-specific training after BMT was complete and they reported to their individual basics.

I am talking about drill, ceremony, customs, courtesies, PT, grooming standards ---- basically, I am talking about breaking down the bad habits of the average 17 or 18 year old and building up a Joint Warrior out of all of them for 8 weeks - then, as I said, they'd report to their individual service-related training.

Its about the basics and, honestly, joint basics.


You obviously don't have a clue about how drill, ceremony, customs, courtesies, PT and grooming standards differ among the branches. NONE of it is the same.

[MexDoc]

Heck no. All Marines go to Quantico for OCS then TBS. Army guys go to their own school.

There's some overlap for MOS schools (Marines go to Ft. Knox for armor and Kansas for Artillery) but not much, infantry is still at Quantico as are most other MOS schools.

And the differences are as big as those between MCRD's and Army Basic.

end of Army OCS 10 mile hike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBgzcCYNMz4
end of Marine OCS hike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lubXF_THv8&feature=related

Sorry I was talking about Army and Marines go to the same Captains course. But Even SF and Seal Corpsman go through the same 18D course..I think if everyone put their pride aside and started thinking as one team it would work. I'll tell you yes, I did do more serving as a Corpsman with the marines in 5 months compared the year I did with the Army but just because the OPTEMPO was diferent I will say the Army Staff Sergeant I served with had more knowledge then most of the SSGT I have served with in the Marines. It's all different but everyone has different skill sets and It gets confusing. Besides I think more marines should get to go to Ranger school..as an HM i would've loved to have that option...only Marines that get to go right now are the POGS because they have the time since they aren't deploying as much as infantry units.

[Unregistered]

Undeniably a noble idea yet misguided at its core. It is true that since the implementation of Goldwater-Nichols the military no longer works as individual units but strives to function as a seamless conglomerate. Joint BMT is neither applicable nor relevant to achieving the intent of "jointness." “Jointness” is achieved at the operational level via "joint planning," the integration of service component capabilities to achieving a common goal. Although, combining all boot camps into one would at first seem to be a money saver it would be in fact a cost multiplier and water down the very important sprit of the corps" that is attained via the individual service basic training programs. Moreover, I seriously doubt that a soldier or airman would require basic shipboard DC to be part of their BMT curricula. Once again, the cost multiplier takes effect in placing the follow-up "basic training" burden on either newly created peripheral commands or on the final duty station. Military courtesy is universal as it is, but customs, history and uniform regs are distinct and should remain distinct so as to not only avoid confusion but also re-enforce the sense of service identity.
All services have their on training paths. Although, these paths are not perfect they do serve a greater purpose. Does a sailor need to know the details of rifle drilling? I think not, but he should know that fire and flooding are bad onboard a ship. Does a soldier need to know how to dress lines? Uhh… probably not, but he/she should know the effective firing range of an M-16.
In closing, joint BMT neither fulfills nor advances service jointness since jointness is not defined in the terms that you proposed. Combining BMT may at first seem as a cost saver but in fact is a cost multiplier that is measured beyond immediate $ saved by closing down 3 or 4 training centers. The true cost will be shouldered down the road by the individual services.

[MexDoc]

Undeniably a noble idea yet misguided at its core. It is true that since the implementation of Goldwater-Nichols the military no longer works as individual units but strives to function as a seamless conglomerate. Joint BMT is neither applicable nor relevant to achieving the intent of "jointness." “Jointness” is achieved at the operational level via "joint planning," the integration of service component capabilities to achieving a common goal. Although, combining all boot camps into one would at first seem to be a money saver it would be in fact a cost multiplier and water down the very important sprit of the corps" that is attained via the individual service basic training programs. Moreover, I seriously doubt that a soldier or airman would require basic shipboard DC to be part of their BMT curricula. Once again, the cost multiplier takes effect in placing the follow-up "basic training" burden on either newly created peripheral commands or on the final duty station. Military courtesy is universal as it is, but customs, history and uniform regs are distinct and should remain distinct so as to not only avoid confusion but also re-enforce the sense of service identity.
All services have their on training paths. Although, these paths are not perfect they do serve a greater purpose. Does a sailor need to know the details of rifle drilling? I think not, but he should know that fire and flooding are bad onboard a ship. Does a soldier need to know how to dress lines? Uhh… probably not, but he/she should know the effective firing range of an M-16.
In closing, joint BMT neither fulfills nor advances service jointness since jointness is not defined in the terms that you proposed. Combining BMT may at first seem as a cost saver but in fact is a cost multiplier that is measured beyond immediate $ saved by closing down 3 or 4 training centers. The true cost will be shouldered down the road by the individual services.
I learned very little about being on a ship during bootcamp and I haven't been on a ship. Ok I am a Fleet Marine Force Corpsman and I will never see a ship but HM's are probably the 2nd largest group in the Navy. Seabees also do not spend time on a ship..many others are admin..if you think about it there arent many ships around the world so most of the Navy doesnt do ships. No for subs you still have to do a sub course after bootcamp. If you didnt know There are US ARMY Boats ran by army! there is one here in port in hawaii. I can honestly say besides learning the ranks and lingo the bootcamp did not prepare me for much. I learned most of what I have been doing in my Corpman Med school and Fleet Marine Force School. I probably would have benefited a lot by going to a joint school. and maybe ill stop getting saluted by army soldiers thinking my crow is a soul chicken. I think we should learn everyones ranks.

[Unregistered]

Interesting point you have so keenly exposed. I find it a little troubling that you take a couple examples so literal. You and the people you have mentioned only but represent less 15% of the service (hard fact). In keeping with your point, the logic would suggest that knowing the rank structure of other services is more important than knowing your own, a task I hardly find merits formal schooling but rather the simple effort of looking at one of those ubiquitous rank / pay grade charts. If you are going to operate with other services it is your responsibility to learn them. I congratulate you for never serving on a ship, but that fact does make grounds for arguing that some of the basic Navy training that takes place at BMT should be jettisoned. Perhaps you were not aware of the fact that the US ARMY has either the 3rd of 4th largest Navy, but this is all taken in context. Is it a blue or littoral Navy? The answer is No. Almost all of the sea going ARMY vessels are contractor-dod operated. Yes, some service jobs are not sea going ratings and not everyone in McDonald’s flips burgers. These ratings are support ratings; every service "needs" them and has them. The fact remains that despite your rating, MOS or whatever, when talking about the service you are a Sailor, Marine, Airman or Soldier.
As in any career or specialty, learning takes place outside the school. School just builds a foundation.
Now going back to the original topic, the ability to discern among other service ranks is not a requirement of "jointness," which is what the War correspondent is basing his argument on.

[MexDoc]

represent less 15% of the service (hard fact).

I'm not trying to seem like I'm arguing, just pointing out that whats fact on paper is usually not the case which is a huge problem in the military. I.E. During the deployment visits who does the SECDEF/President/SECNAV/Marine Commandant ask what can be done better out in Iraq and Afghanistan? They only go to TQ,Victory or in Afghnanistan to Bagram/KAF/JBAD and who is there? Support guys only. Might hurt some feeling but those guys are effin clueless. The only time I got to meet the SECNAV was when I was in a support group and I knew nothing about what it was like to be in the infantry(The Guys who are doing the real job next to their Iraqi/Afghan counterparts). After I went with the grunts overseas I saw it was a whole different beast we were dealing with but I never had the chance to see any of the VIP visitors since we were out all of the time. When my Embeded training team was getting our asses handed to us to IED's (12of19WIA due to IEDs) Kandahar HQ had NO reports about what was going on with us. we sent it up but someone, noone knows who wasn't passing it along. It took an SF Colonel to come to see what was going on. So just because it wasn't on paper doesn't mean it isn't going on. On paper HM's aren't supposed to mess with anything but a pistol to defend ourselfs and our patient, now we get M4's are trained and qualed on .50cals,240,249,mk19...not true in paper but true in real life. I can keep going off about how documentation is wrong so I will not believe anything or any stats people tell me they got from some where. Sorry it just bugs me when people go off paper.

[Unregistered]

You guys have to be kidding me.

This is not some class project in the MBA school somewhere, where reorgs, and out of the box thinking is your key to job security.

Previous points: Uniforms...that means the rest of the military would actually need to take pride in their appearance or convince Marines that pride is unnecessary.

Marines and Army have two seperate missions where tradition and basic training create the foundation to support those missions. Unit structure sizes and doctrine is different for a purpose. Marines are lighter, faster and quicker to respond, not occupiers regardless of the role we are playing at the moment.

Air Force fights from the sky, and Naval keeps the waters safe and transports marines, like a roaming SWAT team.

If we are going to consolidate basic just to go into a branch specific "basic school" and MOS school scenario, where do we actually save? Wouldnt it just make more sense to implement more DOD/NATO unified training in the basics that are operational today that have established best practices and a proven method of developing the most superior military force in the world?

Just my two cents, but I am just a dumb enlisted Marine who works for a living.

[Beeman123]

I like being in the Chair Force and all. I like how most higher up in this here Chair Force are living in a fantasy. Reason being, most our exercises consist of MOP2 - Mop4. When faced with the reality of the current war we see IEDs, EFPs, VBIED, and what ever else the enemy has. The chemical warfare half of this war is we've seen some Chlorine Gas in Iraq which we all should know that are gas masks don't work with that stuff.

What does this stuff have to do with anything?

Well, I've come to realize that as far as the Air Force is concerned, the training that the Army can give is better and prepares you more that what we have been doing. I believe there was a saying that went like " prepare for worst and hope for the best". I'm just not seeing us prepare for the worst that’s currently out there. Even our Combat Skills training is a joke, even though they want us to take it before going to 2 months of Army combat skills Training.

I've just seen a lot of stupid stuff happen in the Air Force for the sake of having a good image. I think its time that Airmen Humble themselves and go back to our Air Force Heritage "The Army Air Corp". I know most of you that read this are probably in denial by the fact that I used Army along with Air Corp.

Lets get real, The Air Force is currently trying to make the Basic Training more military, for the war fighting experience and whether you like it or not its probably going to look just like what the Army has in the end

As far as the Marine boot camp goes I'd have to say that they are in a completely different level than the rest of us. For the sake of money I'd have to agree with unifying the Navy, Army, and Air Force basic training.

[Yggdrasil]

I learned very little about being on a ship during bootcamp and I haven't been on a ship..

This is pretty self-contradictory. How can you say that you haven't learned much about shipboard life in boot camp, when you haven't been on a ship to see that for yourself? Trust me, you've learned alot more about being on a ship than you think.



Ok I am a Fleet Marine Force Corpsman and I will never see a ship but HM's are probably the 2nd largest group in the Navy.

Not true. MOST shipboard IDC's have been FMF Corpsmen at some point in their careers.


Seabees also do not spend time on a ship..many others are admin..if you think about it there arent many ships around the world so most of the Navy doesnt do ships.

Far from the truth. In fact, at any given time, 2/3 of all Navy personnel are assigned to sea duty. HM is the largest rating in the Navy, BUT, HM is not a warfare community; FMF is. The Surface Warfare community is the largets, followed by the Aviation Warfare community (the majority of which are carrier or amphib-based), then the Submarine Warfare Community, then the Seabee Community, and FMF and EXW are the two smallest. Go to RTC or any NRD - which are the perfect microcosms for the Navy - and you'll find that about 75% of the people at these commands are ESWS qualified - and this is mostly because the majority of the Aviation guys also have their ESWS pins.

[MexDoc]

Ok if you considere living in a small space and folding clothes over and over and stenciling your name by making dots. Not to take anything away from the Navy but compared to the training I've recieved from the Marines and Army..the Navy training has been a joke. Unless you have been attached to any other branches, I wouldn't expect you to understand.

[Yggdrasil]

Ok if you considere living in a small space and folding clothes over and over and stenciling your name by making dots. Not to take anything away from the Navy but compared to the training I've recieved from the Marines and Army..the Navy training has been a joke. Unless you have been attached to any other branches, I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Answer this again: Have you ever put your Navy training to use in a NAVY situation? Did you not learn damage control and force protection in boot camp? These are things that we train on every day out in the fleet. Unless you've actually been in the Army or Marine Corps, you haven't been to their boot camps - you do whatever day-to-day training with them; and we do ours out in the fleet. So far, it looks to me like the only Navy training you've ever had was boot camp.

[GUNNY JAKCSON]

This Is Not A Bright Idea I've Been In 15 Years In The Corps And I Dont Think Any Other Branch Can Handle What Marines Do, We Are All Known For Our Individual Strenghts , Marines Nd Soldiers Are Warriors , Sailors Are Squids And The Airmen Support The Army , Marines Have A Lotttt Of Different Standards Than Other Branches

[Unregistered]

Curious, wasn't the Air Force created from the Army Air Corps because of its different purpose from the rest of the Army and the other branches of service? If that's true, why would I want to blend the Air Force with the other branches then have to take more time to separate the troops from the other branches when they get to their tech school? The idea of saving money by combining BMT is a good one, but we end up spending more money and time by having to teach them branch specific things in the long run. Seems like it'd be easier just to keep it the way it is.

[Unregistered]

This is about the most stupid idea I have heard lately. It was obviously made by someone with no real military experience. The use of the term "whatnot" when describing specialized military skills training is indicative of your rather sophomoric understanding of military service. You apparently have little idea of the seriousness of military duty - as in "you bet your life... your real life, and other peoples lives, not some TV show make-believe stuff" The different branches of our military have significantly different roles, different physical and mental requirements/demands which would not benefit from a "group grope" precursor. You may feel free to take your ideas and whatnot somwhere else!

[Unregistered]

This is an unqualified statement, this is your opinion, not fact. Just having everyone performing the "simple" things in a simliar fashion does not make it better for the DoD. Nor does lumping everyone together for a short period of time.

The biggest problem here is adding a step in the training process that requires a whole new set of logistics. Without considering the change cost, the idea of adding one more stop in the training pipeline makes this process longer, more complex, and by design more expensive.

Each service has specific needs in terms of skill sets. Some of the basic skill sets are interchangeable, that may be true. But training is more than what is taught, it is also how it is taught and to what end. If you want to make a Marine. You teach them what it means to be a Marine. If you want a solider, etc., etc. What you are suggesting is that all the services have homogenous values and goals. Which is a gross misunderstanding of what it means to be a member of a particular service.

[J.A. Alvarez]

Could Marines handle our obstacle course? I can't see making it easier just because of them.

You must be out of your mind. I joint bootcamp? i dont think the soldiers could deal with the stress and the training that Marines go through in Parris Island, and I know for a fact the Commandant nor the SgtMaj of the Marine Corps would accept this nonsense, this would mean having weaker Marines, because we would have to adjust our training so we wouldnt have to drop so many soldiers, this is a matter of QUALITY, the average Marine cannot be compared to the average soldier period.
I hope this discussion never reaches the DoD, because I would refuse to do recruiting duty or DI duty to a bunch of weak bodies.
Close this stupid blog, Start a new blog with something that matters, such as a COLA for Southern California, or whether Marines think that nowadays there are too many E-4s and not Corporals in our ranks.

[Unregistered]

I disagree with this idea! even though you stated basic military training; all branches have there way or doctrine to instill in the new recruits. I'm a vet of 14 plus years 11 plus in the Marine Corps and 3 plus in the Air National Guard. My reason for disagreeing is in boot camp i've leardned things i still do and remember now. like holding my glass top and bottom so i can ensure i don't drop it. You can't teach that to Airman or Sailors, they would be like why r we doing this again.Sailor do things other branches don't do or focus on. Ship life can be hell sometimes try doing a med float and you'll find youself saying dam you guys work just about everyday. Where as air force personnel work hard and play harder. Going to tech with young airmen a few years ago made it clear to me. when we are told to charge that hill or take that lz or beach head or man that fighting hole Marines and Solidier don't question it. It is instilled in us from T-1 and counting.. Many times i had to put many airmen in check. for questioning WHY. See sir u have Techical training that is taught and Physical training. all branches have their way of doing things to carry the new recruits thru the hard times ahead. I too bring my Marine Training with me everytime I have drill or any military duty. Sailor i love you all and respect all you do, my wife is a army vet and so is her brother and we agree......
Thanks and may God bless all my fellow servicemen and women...
PS. holding the glass was the required way and grasp for handling a live gernade!

[Unregistered]

This Is Not A Bright Idea I've Been In 15 Years In The Corps And I Dont Think Any Other Branch Can Handle What Marines Do, We Are All Known For Our Individual Strenghts , Marines Nd Soldiers Are Warriors , Sailors Are Squids And The Airmen Support The Army , Marines Have A Lotttt Of Different Standards Than Other Branches

Gunny,
This is the exact type of thinking that keeps our services seperated and at odds with each other. In case you haven't noticed, the military is purple, it is no longer Army vs Navy vs Marines vs Air Force. Your Warrior comment really shows me that you really need to step outside your little box and take a look around. To show you what I am talking about, there are many Airmen and "Squids" serving right next to your "Warriors" fighting wars. We are all warriors, we all serve together to obtain a common goal. Maybe you should take your blinders off and realize what is really going on in the world. Look in the middle east....Sailors and Airmen ARE handling what you Marines are doing. Do I remind you of the many MILITARY members who have paid the ultimate sacrifice while being a Warrior? They were not all Marines or Army Soldiers.......
While you are correct in saying that the Marines have different standards, that does not mean that they are any better or worse than any other services standards....just different.

[Yggdrasil]

i dont think the soldiers could deal with the stress and the training that Marines go through in Parris Island.

Ah yes, all these soldiers who have done multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan... and you think they can't handle your obstacle courses and your "stress" on Parris Island.

And this isn't me trying to downplay the things you are proud of... I just want to deflate a few big heads.

[Unregistered]

Ah yes, all these soldiers who have done multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan... and you think they can't handle your obstacle courses and your "stress" on Parris Island.

And this isn't me trying to downplay the things you are proud of... I just want to deflate a few big heads.

Reading these post make me wonder why this is up for discussion anyways! First off Yggdrasil I'm proud of the Corps which is my first and I'm proud of the Air Force as well for two different reasons though. But Basic training is just that Training you with the basic understanding and mindset. I became a Marine 1990 i never was allowed off base, made one phone call home, didn't touch another female until i got back home. So the focus and training was there know distraction and all that stuff. Now for what my airmen are saying bootcamp was a joke some had cellphones, off base passes, visits from girl friend or family early in the training phase. Now this might be now and not from the pass years. But if we loss that focus with the mother of america crap and not train these new warriors we older NCO's and SNCO's will have our hands full trying to retrain these recruits. This is a joint battle field the last time i check all battles was joint but not the training....Go head hit back until you see both side of the fence don't say any negative. Oh! yeah Brass I figured you would be a "O"

SergeantofMarines&StaffSergeantofAirmen!

[MexDoc]

A-aren't
R-really
M-marines
Y-yet

M-muscles
A-are
R-required
I-intelligence
N-not
E-essential

N-never
A-again
V-volunteer
Y-yourself
Airforce=chair Force

Gunny Jackson Sounds Like A Marine Pog. He Should Stick To Supply Or Whatever B Billet He Is At. Only Marine Pogs That Havent Been To The Infantry Will Talk Like That. Most Pog Marines Couldnt Cut It In The Marine Corps Infantry..i See It Everyday When I Get A Whiny Lcpl Or Even Gunny Come Into Sickcall For An Ankle Sprain. Do You Think Navy Divers Have It Easy? 60% Of Marines Will Not Jump Off A Diving Board For A Qual..i Always Get Hey Doc Can You Motivate This Guy And I Push Him In. I Know Lots Of Air Force Guys That Volunteered For Really Dangerous On Patrols. No Service Is Better Or More Important Then The Other...trust Me Lots Of Army And Marines Feel Safer When There Is Air Force Cas/unmammed Planes Making Sure Noone Is Planting Roadbombs Ahead Or When Navy Eod Comes Out To Destroy One. It Is One, Team One Fight...if You Want To Really Feel Hard Go Join Delta Force Or Some Type Of Sf. I Saw No Difference In The Toughness Between Marine Cold Weather And Army Cold Weather Training...they Are Both Hard..sorry Marines But Germany And Ft Drumm Is Alot Colder Then Bridgeport Ca.....so........ Your Face!!!!BTW I WAS ON AN ETT THAT WORKED WITH USAF/USA/USMC AND IM NAVY AND WE ALL DID THE SAME JOB AND HAD TO KNOW THE SAME CRAP..

[ELINT6]

I'm all for it -- as long as the the US Marine Corps has the mission.

I think it'd be good for the Army, Navy, and Air Force to learn their combat skills from the Corps.

[Recovering SandSquid]

Looks like I'm coming in on this a little late, but........

I think you have the right idea, but the wrong way of going about it. Homogenizing BMT runs the risk of lowering standards in key areas of existing training to create a level playing field. The argument of teaching basic knowledge before farming recruits out to service specific schools won't save money. As it's been said before, Army personnel don't need to learn shipboard firefighting, flight deck ops and awareness, embark, survival at sea or a whole host of other Navy-specific skills. The inverse is true for the other services. After your joint BMT, you still have to arrange travel for each recruit to PCS to their "BMT part 2" evolution so they can learn their own branches mission parameters and skills, THEN they go to MOS/NEC training. That's a lot of money and log movement that's best saved for something more critical than teaching everyone to march the same way.

Now if you want to save the DoD a lot of money, look at each MOS/NEC to see if joint training commands can be created there. The medical enlisted and the combat engineer communities do this already with their combined primary and/or secondary training systems already unified under one curriculum, such as Physical Therapy Technician school in Fort Sam Houston(all three branches attend). The SpecOps programs also have eliminated overlap by utilizing the same schools, jump school at Benning being the prime example.

A lot of support MOS/NEC's currently operate separate training programs in various locations around the country. Reviewing and homogenizing some of those would likely save a lot more money on real estate, facilities maintenance, and logistics than your proposed BMT merger. To say nothing of the reduction in required support staff like pay, personnel, medical, religious support, social and family services, PX/BX, commissary......you get the idea.

[Unregistered]

could the Marines handle your obstacle course? Are you serious? I am currently in Iraq we have some guys caled the SLICKERS and one of them looks like the good ole boy off Varisty Blues. They released a stat of the branches of services and the Marine Corps we stat wise the most in shape and the least over weight. Dont be a bunch of haters Dough Boyz

[unregistered]

I have to agree with you Alvarez and everyone else who is against this idea. If you want to meet the standards of the Marine Corps, then become a Marine. Do your time and then you can make a sound judgement on what you think about it. This is never going to happen, and it's just an opinion- and your right this blog needs to be stopped. Talk about things that matter and stop wasting all our time with this load of BS!!

[Unregistered]

I have to agree with you Alvarez and everyone else who is against this idea. If you want to meet the standards of the Marine Corps, then become a Marine. Do your time and then you can make a sound judgement on what you think about it. This is never going to happen, and it's just an opinion- and your right this blog needs to be stopped. Talk about things that matter and stop wasting all our time with this load of BS!!

Funny thing about all you people who are complaining it is a waste of time. Why did you CHOOSE to "waste your time" by reading it??? From the very first post, you knew what it was about, yet you still took the time to post and state that it was a waste of time. How about this....if it is a waste of your time, don't read it. Or how about this one.....start a post about something YOU think is relevant. Just some thoughts, but then again, it is YOUR CHOICE whether or not to read this.

[Unregistered]

Oh I don't know, ask Jason Cunningham or Mark Chapman why we might need to.... oh you can't. They're dead.

But Timothy Wilkinson is still around. You can go ask him why this might be a good idea.


This is something I've thought of a lot and written a lot about, and in addition to forcing every branch of the service to know the basic function of the military: How to effectively destroy the enemy on the ground, it would probably save the DoD a TON of money in the long term. I'm also for combining training for jobs that are for all intensive purposes, identical. They already do this for many jobs (example: medical, k-9 handlers, fire fighters.... all branches of the service get the same training in many of these duties), but why not MP/MA/Security Forces all doing the same training? Why not the Army and Marine infantry getting the same training? Etc. etc. etc. Then you get the best everyone has to offer, there are things the other branches of service are thinking about that we are not, and things we are thinking about that they are not. This is one of those things that I think is hotly debated behind closed doors, but everyone's so afraid they'll somehow lose their branch independence and identity they stay away from it and cover it up with beauracracy.

Ok, ok...First off, they DO combine at least some technical training. The only military Weather Tech School is at Keesler, and the class i was in was half AF half Navy. Others had Marines as well. That part i can definitely agree on, because nine times out of ten, the jobs are all done the same anyway. A little over half way through the AF school, the Marines and Navy split to their branch-specific classes.

As for the BMT portion...I can see where it would make sense, IF all the branches had more in common. A few have already said it, there are too many small differences between the branches that we'd have to all conform to one standard way of doing business in order to have one initial BMT. And I agree, that would put us all in the "Army" category. But even if we did have more universal standards, there are still a lot of faults. Where would this "universal" BMT be located? What base could handle them all? If you split them up into east/west or any other regional, how would we go about ensuring they're all equally tough? Not to mention the AF is already having issues recruiting MTI's, how could we have extra to send up to the universal BMT? Also, i think it's more cost effective to have separate BMT's...The military pays to fly you from your home town to San Antionio, then from there to your tech school. If there was a universal school, that would be an added travel expense. And who would pay it? Each branch has their own budget. And....what uniform would everyone wear?

I do agree with joint training on some parts...but in the over all, we each have our unique identifying processes we go through. There's no need to muddle it up.

[Yggdrasil]

I do agree with joint training on some parts...but in the over all, we each have our unique identifying processes we go through. There's no need to muddle it up.

Exactly. Too many people here trying to fix somethin' that ain't broke.

[ringjamesa]

Ok, ok...First off, they DO combine at least some technical training. The only military Weather Tech School is at Keesler, and the class i was in was half AF half Navy. Others had Marines as well. That part i can definitely agree on, because nine times out of ten, the jobs are all done the same anyway. A little over half way through the AF school, the Marines and Navy split to their branch-specific classes.
As for the BMT portion...I can see where it would make sense, IF all the branches had more in common. A few have already said it, there are too many small differences between the branches that we'd have to all conform to one standard way of doing business in order to have one initial BMT. And I agree, that would put us all in the "Army" category. But even if we did have more universal standards, there are still a lot of faults. Where would this "universal" BMT be located? What base could handle them all? If you split them up into east/west or any other regional, how would we go about ensuring they're all equally tough? Not to mention the AF is already having issues recruiting MTI's, how could we have extra to send up to the universal BMT? Also, i think it's more cost effective to have separate BMT's...The military pays to fly you from your home town to San Antionio, then from there to your tech school. If there was a universal school, that would be an added travel expense. And who would pay it? Each branch has their own budget. And....what uniform would everyone wear?
I do agree with joint training on some parts...but in the over all, we each have our unique identifying processes we go through. There's no need to muddle it up.

When it comes to technical training, a LOT are combined. More every day. The AF FF school now has all branches. The SeaBee school has all (except possibly Marines) though not all branches go to all portions, Intel has combined training, EOD, the list goes on and on and on. It makes sense in this purple environment. However, that makes one (well me at least) lean away from the idea of a combined BMT. Why not keep them separate for BMT and let them get imersed in their chosen service and THEN go to combined technical training? It doesn't make much sense to me to have them go to a purple Basic, service specific indoc, then purple technical training (if applicable-some training will never and should never be combined). Seems to me that by the time they complete Technical Training all you will have is a recruit that can't remember what the heck they joined anymore. Just my opinion...

[Semper Kill]

lmao...there is no way in hell that should EVER happen!!!..for one a squid does not do the same job a Marine does..they and almost every other branch is all about themselves..Semper I F**K the other guy...its not right...As a Marine we have certain customs and courtesies that other branch's dont enforce....i.e. saluting the blue DOD sticker...the discipline that is enstilled by drill..actual personal standards like weight...and pride...dont get me wrong there are some from every branch that are above the rest...but with me being a Marine Grunt we do force on force training with army rangers and other special forces..and yet we have no specialized training except for SOI or a few tours in the box and thats it..and we give them a run for their money..Marine Bootcamp is 13 weeks of hell...plain and simple..then u go to SOI which is 8 weeks if ur a grunt and 3 for a pog and then its off to their MOS school...forget that...if the Marine Corps started doing that the Corps. would be just like the army...fat, nasty, and lazy....Semper Fidelis....

[MexDoc]

lmao...there is no way in hell that should EVER happen!!!..for one a squid does not do the same job a Marine does..they and almost every other branch is all about themselves..Semper I F**K the other guy...its not right...As a Marine we have certain customs and courtesies that other branch's dont enforce....i.e. saluting the blue DOD sticker...the discipline that is enstilled by drill..actual personal standards like weight...and pride...dont get me wrong there are some from every branch that are above the rest...but with me being a Marine Grunt we do force on force training with army rangers and other special forces..and yet we have no specialized training except for SOI or a few tours in the box and thats it..and we give them a run for their money..Marine Bootcamp is 13 weeks of hell...plain and simple..then u go to SOI which is 8 weeks if ur a grunt and 3 for a pog and then its off to their MOS school...forget that...if the Marine Corps started doing that the Corps. would be just like the army...fat, nasty, and lazy....Semper Fidelis....
I'm a Navy FMF Corpsman who served with 1/3 in afghanistan and the Army in Afghanistan and I will tell you the Marines are not Army rangers..Marines fail out of Ranger school all the time....IT IS a hard school...Marines Are not SF either..do you spend 2 weeks just learning muscle memory to aim?NO!!!..believe me when I tell you that! yes I worked with SF while overseas with the Marines and I also lived with SF while I was with the Army...Marines aren't any more special then the Army. Only difference is the esprit de corps and pride you have for your service. When I talk to the Army they say the same abuot Marines...how MP's left 2 marines behind after a patrol and they had to put them in their striker..or how 3rd ID had to come back to help Marines because the Marines were getting Owned...Marines say they had to come back because the Army was getting owned...it's just talk trust me...Army did things in Iraq the Marines couldnt and Marines did things the Army couldn't..Big Deal...Cant we all just get along!

[Yggdrasil]

Army did things in Iraq the Marines couldnt...

Like keep things under control at Fallujah. I don't think the world will ever forget that.

Also, let us not forget the First Battle of Bull Run, where the Union Marines were defeated by the Confederate Army... they were getting their asses handed to them, and they ran away.

[Trissy18]

If they could make this work, I think it'd be freaking AWESOME! I think it would build the gap between the services and build a sense of camaraderie.

I'm shocked, I normally think these ideas and statements are dumb and try to deflate them.......this seems like the first smart idea.

[Unregistered]

there is no way to combine the needed training to a typical recruit for the life in the marine corps. a soldier will never understand the heart needeed to be a marine.

[exArmy]

When was in, there were already joint school I think that Postal Training was held in Fort Benjamin Harrison, IN. So there is at least one precedent for joint training.

So far so good...

But where is the savings in having a joint Boot Camp? The number of DI's required, as well as the number of training facilities needed, is a function of the number of recruits to be trained. As such, the number of DI's wouldn't change and there would be no savings at that level.

As far as facilities are concerned, the same basically applies.

I can see, however, where such a move would result in greater costs.

New manuals would have to be researched and printed, new training methods would have to be developed and new standards defined - just getting there can cost millions.

I know that we have entered a new era - with the current administration ushering in socialism - but leave the military out of it.

I don't really that a joint BMT would result in any savings. But it would deprive each service of 2 months to builld on service specific traditions.

Not a good or workable idea. Sorry.

[Unregistered]

This Is Not A Bright Idea I've Been In 15 Years In The Corps And I Dont Think Any Other Branch Can Handle What Marines Do, We Are All Known For Our Individual Strenghts , Marines Nd Soldiers Are Warriors , Sailors Are Squids And The Airmen Support The Army , Marines Have A Lotttt Of Different Standards Than Other Branches

12 years AF, and the marines I've served beside didn't seem to have much discipline.

[BHIO]

[QUOTE=Combat correspondent;182003]I always thought the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard could all attend one BMT where they all learn the Basics of Military Training. The training would be about 2 months long and would be taught by a Joint Cadre of DIs.

After graduating the BMT, each service would then go to their own respective training to learn component specific jargon, customs, riflemanship and whatnot.

It seems the DoD could save a ton of money and bring all components together for future Joint Operations by putting all DoD enlisted on the same sheet of music from day 1 ---- for the Basics, that is.

This is just something I've thought about since day 1.

What are your thoughts on this.... I'll elaborate on more of my thoughts concerning this thread once others chime in.[/QUOTE

You have a point but all the other can't be Marines!

[Unregistered]

That, I believe, is a terrible idea. What makes each branch specific is the way they are trained form day one. Each of the serveice branches has their own military standards. They do not drill the same, they do not have the same customs, their uniforms are not the same, their missions are not the same. The only thing that they all have in common is the attempt to instill honor and discipline into their recruits. So to stick them together for any length of time would only prove to be a waste of time.

That being said I do believe that after their initial training there should be more joint operational oriented training. Working out issues before deploying overseas is a good idea. But then again lets be serious for a moment, the Marine Corps is the only branch with the discipline, honor, integrity, and pure drive that is needed to wage war. All other branches should just stay out of the way.

[ticojoe]

My answer to that would have to be and emphatic NO.

To clarify: Are all the services going to have their basic training sites in the same place?

Will all these individuals be sent to their respective basic trainig base? Consider the cost of moving the facilities together and the if you don't converge all services in one site, the cost of moving individuals to their respective bases. Also, consider the size of such a site containing 4 or 5 services and their respective schools. No! I'm afraid the cost of such a consolidation alone would be, or at least should be economically illogical.

[LAR Grunt]

I give it a hell no. No offense, but Marine Corps Basic Training is what makes a Marine a Marine. To change that tradition of what Recruit Training is all about, would make our Devil Dogs lose their identity. In case you didn't notice, even if you enlisted into the Army, Air Force, Navy or Coast Guard, and have a change of heart to go Marine, you get to go all the way through all Boot Camp, Infantry School, and MOS school, and take a bite in rank back down to PFC.

There is a reason for that. Every Marine goes through the same thing, and faces those steely eyed DI's. If you were to combine all that just to teach some kids to make racks and brush teeth, there is really no point. Leave things the way they are.

Now, if you were to have a Basic Training Course in only one or two areas, instead of 20 based on where you live (Marines only go to one of two area for Basic, PI or MCRD San Diego) that would save money. All the Navy here, the Army there, etc. But each service needs to keep to themselves.

Even if you did combine us all, Marines would still have to go through the 13 weeks of hell.....so add another 2 motnhs on top of that? I think not.

[Unregistered]

Um... Who the hell thought this was a good idea? I've not been in long but I have been around the block a time or two and had to work with the Marines and Air Force on a day to day basis. There is a whole different mind set in each branch... and for a damn good reason. Being Army I dont need to same mind set as an Airmen or sailor. My two best friends over the last 15 years are Airmen and the way they do things including D and C are different there SOP of life is night and day to ours there is just no one thing any of the branches need to be co-trained on that were not already ex. Airbourne school, S.E.R.E, all that High speed Hooah stuff, why because no matter what uniform your in an Airbourne op is an Airbourne op. Being a soldier is not being an Airmen or Marine or sailor. There is no point, You dont take a Medic send him to Infantry school and exspect him keep his Medic roots. Do you really want to have a hardcore combat feed Navy or Airforce...no and thats why you dont have them now lets keep it that way. The last thing I want is a highspeed Airmen in Finace thinking he can keep up with the Rangers Cause someone tought him how to dig a Fox hole. No disrespect to any branch I love all my brothers an sisters no matter what uniform your in but where different for a reason.

[anstrpnr]

So, you'd rather stretch the military thinner than it already is by adding more billets for RDC's/DI's? Surely they'd also have to build a new facility (costing more money), and make recruits go through even longer training prior to reaching the field/fleet. This is not a practical idea for anyone.

[Godsairman]

I can't see where the savings would be. With the recruits going through training at one given time, how many bases would you need? Only the Air Force and Navy have their basic at one base. The Marines use two and God and the Army only know how many bases they have. Having gone though both Army and Air Force basic this idea doesn't make a lot of sense. The jargon and other specific branch training is given over the course of basic, PT is every moring. So you would only have maybe a week of common classes such as Law of Armed Confict, the UCMJ and Chem Warfare. The military has already combined classes in common career feilds such as maintanence and the chaplain service (Armay and Air Force). We're still seperate branches with seperate missions. I don't this this idea would work but it can lead to where all branches can use common training facilities where it would work, such as predeployment training for those going outside the wire and those staying inside the wire.

[Trissy18]

I'm all for it -- as long as the the US Marine Corps has the mission.

I think it'd be good for the Army, Navy, and Air Force to learn their combat skills from the Corps.

I agree.......I'm in the AF, and I believe that we could learn a lot when it comes to combat skills from the Marines. I know that if I were deployed (again) and put in a do or die situation, I would most likely die. I would do my damndest to live, but your best is only good when your best can save your life. If that makes any sense. I can do my job quite well, I can score well on the fitness exam....but without hand to hand combat, nuh uh.

Granted, they do training now at Ft Benning with the Army.....but I'd rather learn from a Marine. No offense Army folks, I swear.

[MexDoc]

I agree.......I'm in the AF, and I believe that we could learn a lot when it comes to combat skills from the Marines. I know that if I were deployed (again) and put in a do or die situation, I would most likely die. I would do my damndest to live, but your best is only good when your best can save your life. If that makes any sense. I can do my job quite well, I can score well on the fitness exam....but without hand to hand combat, nuh uh.

Granted, they do training now at Ft Benning with the Army.....but I'd rather learn from a Marine. No offense Army folks, I swear.

NO AGAIN! THE MARINES ARE NOT BETTER TRAINED THEN THE ARMY. I have served with both and I is just Diff training. With out giving opsec before i deployed to afghan with 3rd marines I did a mountain warfare course in bridgeport which all it was, was land nav practice and a lot of humping and freezing your nutts off..and we practiced air assault. then we went off to do Mout training where we cleared a huge city in southern cali....Army focused on learning Dari, Meetings with the elders, convoy ops,comms,MCP(mounted Combat Patrols),DCP and learned a lot about the cultures of the people of afghanistan. I know a lot of marines would have benefited from the blue force training i got from the army...I strongly believe that the 2 trainings would be ultimate but it will never happen..as far as discipline goes..sad to say but there is a reason the air force in okinawa doesnt allow marines or Navy greenside HM's into their E club and now we pretty much have been protested to guam. i do not see a problem with the army in germany..atleast not so public like it has been with the OOSMEC...I will say this...i deployed twice without a prob with the Corps..deployed once with the Army and got blown up...I still enjoyed the fact i served my country

[Dfendr]

Each service has it's own capabilities and each service does it's own mission. Being in one service is nothing like being in another. To train everyone to the same standard does a great disservice to the country by producing sub-par service member's. Each service should remain seperate and continue to train it's members fir it's specific capabilities.

As far as combining specialties, again each service has it's distinctive capabilities and has it's own way of accomplioshing them. Although portions of specialties overlap at times from service to service that does not mean the enitre specialty is the same. Speaking from experience, security in the Air Force does things differently then each other service and is charged with duties not done by other service's. The same thing goes for secuirty in the other service's also. To combine them would expand the scope of responsibility so far you would lose the expertise in each area. Eventually, the security of DoD assets would be jeopardized.

[Dfendr]

I agree.......I'm in the AF, and I believe that we could learn a lot when it comes to combat skills from the Marines. I know that if I were deployed (again) and put in a do or die situation, I would most likely die. I would do my damndest to live, but your best is only good when your best can save your life. If that makes any sense. I can do my job quite well, I can score well on the fitness exam....but without hand to hand combat, nuh uh.

Granted, they do training now at Ft Benning with the Army.....but I'd rather learn from a Marine. No offense Army folks, I swear.


Right, because so many of our Airmen are doing amphibious assaults and whatever else the Marines do. I know some Airmen are doing great things with the Marines however, they are properly trained before doing so. Our MPS and FSS personnel do not need to complete the crucible in order to process USAF paperwork or hand out towels.

[Unregistered]

Hell No. I hate this idea. Keep 'em seperate.

[Run and Gun]

Its not about cost its about Military Heritage!!! Look into it!

[Yggdrasil]

Like I said, too much "Marine Envy" - everyone here seems to want the training of a Marine without having to BE one. If it were possible to go to Marine Corps boot camp, but be in the Air Force afterwards, we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now.

[Unregistered]

It is amazing to always hear the non-sense everyone whinns about. I don't need this I don't have to do that, I didn't join the military to do this, all I want is my money for college. Well let me say something: What ever service you join there is a history behind that service and sending eveyone to do the same training is pointless. The point of Boot Camp is to learn your history, traditions, customs and courtesy. Grow the HECK UP, serve your country proudly and move on.

[Unregistered]

When was the last terrorist attack on a basic training base?


When was the last attack on the pentagon before 9/11... oh wait

[Unregistered]

And this whole idea would be a waste of money when it comes to Marines. A Marine starts forming once they step on those yellow foot prints, and not a second sooner. Sending potential recruits to a universal BMT for two months before Parris Island or San Diego would be a complete waste of time and resources....

That being said, are you going bypass all Marines and just let them keep doing what theyve been doing so GodDamn well for the past 233 years?

Now we're at a double standard, and other services will want to go to specialized training. Coast Guard and Navy will want boats, and Air force, well, yeah. We'll just go back to the same thing over and over again.

There is a reason why WE have the best military in the world. Why WE produce Marines. Why go and try and F\/CK it up?

[LandLocked]

It is amazing to always hear the non-sense everyone whinns about. I don't need this I don't have to do that, I didn't join the military to do this, all I want is my money for college. Well let me say something: What ever service you join there is a history behind that service and sending eveyone to do the same training is pointless. The point of Boot Camp is to learn your history, traditions, customs and courtesy. Grow the HECK UP, serve your country proudly and move on.

AMEN!!! Totally agree...if you don't like the military, do the time you promised to do, then go home. If you love what you do, continue to do it and do it well. Thank you to EVERYONE who is serving, has served, and will serve.

[Unregistered]

I'm so happy I've been through basic already!!!!!

[Terrible T]

I don't think that having one BMT for all services would work.
The Army has lowered their standards so any one could join. Even with the increase of personnel that all services need now, the other services have not lowered their standards and if an individual can cut it, their out. The Army issues "TIME OUT" cards if it gets too rough. I guess if it gets too rough in combat, they can hold up their "TIME OUT" cards. They don't have the leadership that the other services have. They need to keep looking over their shoulder of each other to make sure they are doing it right. They microgromanangentment their people.
The Air Force is more like a civilian join in uniform.
The Navy has the hardship of being deployed on ships for long periods of time.
The Marine Corps has pride in what they do. Where a young PFC be told to do something and not have to worry about someone always looking over their shoulder. Even with their need for more personnel, the Marine Corps still weed out personnel that can't cut it.

[yodoc]

I have always thought that there should be one, unified Basic Military Training course for all DOD components. Moreover, the basic course should apply to ALL recruits, whether they are enlisted or officers. Of course, the enlisted and officer would be trained separately, as they are now, but that training would be standard induction training for all branches.

During the joint BMT the customs, courtesies and traditions of ALL the services can be touched on, to give each trainee a background which would serve them in future joint-service assignments. Joint BMT could also lead to uniform Physical Fitness standards, which, of course, individual services could exceed if they deemed that necessary, as would be in the case of the Marines, Army, and other units serving in combat infantry or special forces roles which are more physically demanding. However, even inside-the-wire support troops must serve under often austere and stressful conditions, so greater physical fitness all around is more important now than ever.

I think this is a great idea and I don't see how it could fail.

[Yggdrasil]

Here's an idea - make every service's BMT 13 weeks long, separate the genders, make every service's PT standards the same as the Marine Corps, and make Drill Sergeants, MTI's, RDC's, and CC's as cruel as Marine Corps DI's. Maybe then, you all would stop having this inferiority complex.

[ringjamesa]

Here's an idea - make every service's BMT 13 weeks long, separate the genders, make every service's PT standards the same as the Marine Corps, and make Drill Sergeants, MTI's, RDC's, and CC's as cruel as Marine Corps DI's. Maybe then, you all would stop having this inferiority complex.

While you have some good points in some of your previous posts...I have the feeling your words are falling on deaf ears. I don't think any of these people bothered to read any of the posts except the first one. You are just spitting into the wind. Though some of them are pretty funny-like the terrible grammar of "terrible T."

[Unregistered]

I don't think it's a good idea... there are other ways to save money and i don't believe this is one of them....

[Yggdrasil]

I don't think it's a good idea... there are other ways to save money and i don't believe this is one of them....

You know... planes still take off, ships still get underway, and we still kick the enemy's ass. Like I said, too many people trying to fix something that isn't broken.

[AlpineTactical]

I think it is high time that the DOD did exactly this. Glad some other folks like the idea as well. Sure saves trying to train a bus driver how to be an infantryman when he gets to the desert!

Nate

[Combat correspondent]

I am glad to see so many of you agree. I know this would never come to be, but it would make a great deal of sense.

To those who posted, thanks!