[mrguyorama]

Every combat soldier requires like 10 support soldiers doing things like logistics. Millions of people during WW2 did nothing but drive trucks.

A lot of military burst capacity is about freeing up soldiers who went through all the training and basic and specialization, but are stuck driving that truck.

The guys and gals who fire bullets are just the sharp point of the spear and all that.

It's also why Russia ballooned their "National Guard" forces even though they cannot be deployed outside Russia; They free up soldiers who can.

One of the most important things for a government in an actual "Oh shit real war" situation that requires significant mobilization is a simple census of "Who has the capability to do what menial job?"

[mothballed]

Light infantry on domestic terrain doesn't need anything like those sorts of ratios. Chechen militia in the first Chechen war defeated the Russians well enough to win independence without any sort of logistics ratio like that on the military side, as did the YPG light infantry that defeated ISIS and held off the Syrian military well enough that they basically truced or better.

Higher ratios might be needed to project power to outside borders, but for defense within the territory they can be combat effective against many possible forces with small ratios of military side logistics.

[potato3732842]

>Higher ratios might be needed to project power to outside borders

Or operate in an domestic environment where you do not have local support.

<cough> Alberta <cough>

[nradov]

That's not how it works in any NATO military. Truck drivers and other logistics troops generally never went through any sort of advanced combat training. They can be retrained for another MOS with sufficient time but not quickly enough for any sort of crisis. And in volunteer forces, the troops driving trucks are generally doing that because they specifically enlisted to do that job.

[cogogo]

The largest volunteer army in the world is the US Army. Please provide evidence that enlistees can specifically be truck drivers if they choose to be.

[nradov]

What a silly question. I don't need to provide you any evidence. Just walk down to your local recruiting office and ask. If you tell them that you want to enlist but will only do so if they guarantee a truck driver MOS on your contact then they'll absolutely take you unless they've already hit their limit for that fiscal year.

HN is so weird sometimes. Like half the users seem to be aggressively ignorant of stuff that's common knowledge in the real world outside the tech industry. Or they expect to be spoon fed information that they could figure out themselves with a little research.

[mrguyorama]

>If you tell them that you want to enlist but will only do so if they guarantee a truck driver MOS on your contact then they'll absolutely take you unless they've already hit their limit for that fiscal year.

(I think this is right, I've heard conflicting info about what recruiters can promise you)

If they are official military, then the truck driver HAS been through Basic and knows the absolute minimum of combat.

You don't have to trust me, this is literally what tons of women did during WW2 in most countries (except germany, who used slavery). Betty White and Bea Arthur both signed up for service as literal truck drivers. In fact, they both worked as truck drivers in different services set up to recruit women to replace men in non-combat roles to free them up for other service. Bea Arthur even went through some form of "Boot camp".

The UK used women heavily, especially in things like running the logistics of the air war. WRNS even did activities like fly transport planes and shuttle fighter aircraft around.

>In December 1941, Parliament passed the National Service Act, which called up unmarried women between 20 and 30 years old to join one of the auxiliary services.... by 1943 about nine out of ten women were taking an active part in the war effort.

The US uses a lot of civilian contractors for logistics, and that is the same idea. However, if the US ever deals with real, serious industrialized warfare again, I would bet on those civilian contractors being consumed by the military.

The US Women's Army Corps alone had 80k women serving, so not exactly millions, but it was a significant effort.

So not only is it the norm for a serious war to often push leadership to free up people doing non-combat duties by replacing them with people "not fit" for combat, it literally went to the extent that in WW2 we pretended to ignore sexism to make it happen and literal women were put in harms way and other "not technically front line combat but in danger of taking fire" roles.

> Like half the users seem to be aggressively ignorant of stuff that's common knowledge in the real world outside the tech industry.

Seriously agree though. That's not a slight, or a "take that", it's a real problem for HN. Tons of people here think they are smarter than average for choosing to browse orange reddit.

[nradov]

Get it in writing and check the fine print. A recruiter might lie but an enlistment contract is exactly that: a legally enforceable agreement. If the contract guarantees a particular MOS and the recruit doesn't get it for whatever reason then they have the option to take a discharge instead of being reclassed.

Even without a written guarantee, in volunteer forces the senior officers will generally get rid of new recruits who decide they don't want to be there instead of forcing them into a different job. Especially for the combat jobs where even training can be deadly. Better to give them discharge papers and GTFO rather than wasting money training someone who's going to be a poor performer with constant morale and discipline problems.

(Of course if there's ever another world war and conscription is reinstated then the rules will go out the window. But that's not what we're discussing here.)

[cogogo]

First time enlistees are absolutely not given the option of whatever job they want ex ante unless they ask/push. Many/most are not negotiating up front. Maybe truck driver was a bad example but there are many jobs that either require many people to fill them so recruiters push or significant screening so they are unrealistic posts for most.

Recruiters are known to have quotas and push hard. You think your average US Army Recruit manages this morass well?

https://www.goarmy.com/careers-and-jobs/browse-jobs?position...

Even weirder that HN expects the average joe to “get it in writing and check the fine print.” A good number of recruits are not US citizens and may not speak english super well. Some 35k+ active duty and 5k+ added a year for the research inclined.

[robotresearcher]

You knowing the answer does not make a question silly.

It's not obvious to me that the Army won't do whatever it wants with you once you've taken the shilling. I was interested so asked Gemini, so subject to the usual LLM caveats, here's the reply:

"It is possible to join the U.S. Army and be guaranteed a position as a truck driver, provided you meet all the qualifications.

This guarantee is part of the enlistment contract. The specific job you're asking about is known as MOS 88M, or Motor Transport Operator.

[...]

What "Guaranteed" Means

When you have 88M in your contract, the Army guarantees you a slot at the Advanced Individual Training (AIT) for that job.

You will first complete Basic Combat Training (BCT), which is about 10 weeks.

After graduating from BCT, you will go to 88M AIT, which is approximately 7 weeks long, located at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

During AIT, you will be trained to operate and maintain the Army's fleet of vehicles, including Humvees, light/medium/heavy trucks, and tractor-trailers.

The guarantee is for the training. You must successfully pass both BCT and 88M AIT to officially become a Motor Transport Operator."