How were new soldiers trained prior to wwi? I don't imagine

What is a militia for $200 Alex?

>>33482986
Depends on the place.
Guns are decently expensive.

>>33482782
A body of soldiers would be raised and enlisted, then set to a safe camp or fortress where they would spend 6 to 12 weeks training and learning to march, handle weapons, basic military discipline, signals, ect.

>>33482986
Milita typically met monthly or so and trained for a day at a time. They were generally considered unreliable, and in the revolutionary war typically managed a single volley before abandoning the field.

>>33482782
There were 'recruit depots' in the Civil War. They'd give you all your shit and give you some basic drills, teach you what orders and insignia meant what, etc. Then they'd ship you off and the rest was on the job training, following the old guys by example.

During the Revolution and before the state militia did all the training.

Modern boot is the result of three centuries of concentrated experience. But no, there was never Russian style 'throw a gun at him and send him to the front' bullshit.

>>33482986
I'm not asking about your local militia I'm asking about regular armies of professional soldiers.

>>33483063
Was this generally what was done for all of the major nations militaries of the time or just the U.S.?

>>33483063
>They were generally considered unreliable, and in the revolutionary war typically managed a single volley before abandoning the field.
Except that's horseshit. They were no substitute for a regular military with artillery and cavalry and logistics and stuff, which was the point of Washington's 'broken staff' comment. Read up a little on what actually happened at Lexington and Concord and Boston -- not the mythology, but the mobilization system and the fights that took place.

Because that was before the Continental Army EXISTED bub. You don't drive Brit regulars before you -- or besiege them in your own town -- by firing one round and pussyfooting away.

>>33483107
You are saying the exact same thing he was.

>>33483106

By the early modern period and the rise of national armies, yes.

You can't just learn to be line infantry on the job. It takes a month or so to get the drill down on how to reload properly in military fashion and how to form a line and march.

Discipline and training were very a powerful force multiplier. The

File: 1487576240587.png (457KB, 680x471px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 680x471px

>>33483081
Hmm. Well maybe you should proof read and articulate your idea before making a shitty post then?

>>33483597
>post picture of continental army recruitment poster
>ask "how were soldiers (note: did not say militiamen) trained prior to wwi"
>takes it upon yourself to start talking about militias anyways

A symptom of autism is insisting on talking about whatever you want to talk about despite the actual conversation going on around you