> A was watching a report a few weeks ago on the effectiveness of the military "grunts" during various wars. Apparently something like 80% of people in one of the World Wars (sorry, I can't remember which) were deliberately not shooting at the enemy. Some would aim up slightly so as to miss, and others would simply mime the whole thing, loading the gun and taking aim then reloading and missing the important bit. That number fell to something like 50% during Vietnam, as the Americans started a new method of reaction training. That is, the recruits were trained in the "shoot first" style as seen in gun-based video games. My point is that even with this strict training, a hell of a lot of people who were drafted were simply ineffective on the field, acting only as human shields. Sounds like a good basis for an army, then.


That is totally inaccurate. Do you think that we would have won every single war he ever fought(except Vietnam) If all our troops pointed above the enemys' head? Or eighty percent of them? That report is inaccurate.

-Gort "Future Grunt" Man64