Why don't all members of the Air Force have to be fully qualified to be a rifleman in case of hostile events?

I am retired USAF, but from an Army family. I find the idea that anyone in the Air Force is trained to Infantry level Combat skilla is silly, with and exception for special ops types. Most peole even in the Army are not trained to that level. Since traini b g and maintaining that level of skill is a n full time job who is going to maintain the equipment?

I retired from the Air Force in 1993. When I entered the Air Force, I got the job as a Security Policeman. That was the job I picked and I got it. During my career as a Security Policeman, I got the training on many weapons. I went thru AZR, which is combat training for those Security Policemen who have orders to Vietnam and Korea. My suggestion for those who want to learn about weapons that the Security Forces use, contact their Operations Superintendent.

It has been several years since I was in the Air Force and I do not know if the standards have changed, but when I went through basic training in 1984 you were just required to shoot the M-16 you did not have to qualify and you only had to do M-16 training once every four years unless you were security police or law enforcement and then you had to qualify every six months. I was an Inventory Management Specialist. On my second assignment I was in a combat rated unit and then I had to qualify on the M-16 every year. Our unit deployed all over the world in hostile environments and we were one of the first units on the ground to set up communications during Desert Storm and Desert Shield and we all knew how to use our weapons. So it was based on your MOS or the unit you were assigned to. Many MOS's in the Air Force will never see combat or a hostile theater of operations.

This mindset may likely put people into body bags. It's the 20th anniversary of the Khobar Towers bombing. I arrived a week after the event. While there I asked, "what would happen if several hundred radicals attacked the installation, are ther enough weapons for everyone to help defend?' The answer was a strait NO. There were only enough weopons for the SF people assigned.

So here we are in the 21st Century, where 4th generation, asymmetric, non-linear warfare is the rule versus the exeption. During training exercises, years after the 91 Gulf War, we were still practicing for SCUD attacks while ignoring the ever growing likelihood that a small unit could wreck havoc and shut down the flying operation. While we're hunkered down in our simulated bunkers a team could easily blast the door open, toss in a few grenades, then walk through gunning everyone down.

The problem revolves around the unrealistic training and certification requirements along with little grasp of common sense. For example; during a PACAF IG evaluation exercise, a team manning a machine gun (M-60) was given an exercise input "weapon fails to fire." The crew quickly evaluates the weapon when the IG team gives another input, "Fireing pin is broken." The crew grab another Fireing pin, replace it, then function check the weapon. The IG failed these guys for not using Tech Data. It's supposed to be a combat situation for goodness sakes!

It's my opinion that Air Force leadership are Hopliphobes. They don't trust their Airmen with weapons for personal protection, but trust those same Airmen to keep their multi-million dollar weapons systems flying.

When I deployed to Bagram I saw the same thing when I was visiting a friend who was a crew chief, others were having a hard time taking the m-4 apart and putting it back together. My friend told me a lot of the others didn't even know how to shoot it. To make matters worse when we were checking are ammo out we pulled them out of the ammo box and they were all rusted, we had to take them all apart and put new links on. Who knows how long they were like that.... So heads up.

During Desert Storm, I saw a young Airman with an obviously new M16 in the chow hall. He was in some AFSC other than 811XO. After hearing him talk to his fellows about getting the weapon, I can't remember much about the conversation now, but it was obvious he'd never had much training. I asked him if I could check the weapon, it still had that frosted look they get after deep storage. The little cardboard tube was still in the barrel they put in there before they heat seal them. He was going somewhere downrange and they at least gave him a weapon and ammo, but obviously little training. Had he fired it with the tube in the barrel, he would have hurt himself far worse than his target.

When I went through the Security Specialist Tech School (before it was the "Academy") in 1973, they told us about the Korean war, where some airbase in Korea was guarded by the Army, until the General in charge decided to pull the infantry off to take another hill or some such shit, and the base was overrun. I was told, in the USAF school, that they found the Air Police (good for breaking up fights at the club) hanging from meathooks in hangers with surveillance photos pinned to them showing them trying to use .30 carbine mags in .30 M1 Garands, which use the 30.06 round and not the much smaller .30 Carbine. So they made the Security Police during VietNam. Still haven't got it right. Probably never will because there are too many idiots with no grasp of objective reality who are in positions of authority.

During Desert Storm (I accept this is a sorry example, we simply murdered them, a great war) about 250 security forces were guarding a major war wing of about 7,000 people. One idiot, who happened to be an E9 in the Security Police, actually wanted to set up an ARMORY and have everyone off-duty (what? there is an "off-duty" in a war??) from the security force turn in their weapons. He was shot down by our Colonel, but if he'd been able, he would have cut the already undermanned armed force in half. Munitions people had M16's but there was much dithering about that, including from their bosses who didn't trust their own people. What? You'd rather have an ND or two because it COSTS MONEY to train people and rather risk getting overrun?

During the same war, i had an E8 on my base in the UK tell me I couldn't take a suppressor to Desert Storm because it was "illegal"--again, what?? We have nukes, we have napalm, machine-guns R'us are you kidding me? I had to get an opinion from the base legal office before he would 'approve" of that. Of course, he might have been miffed at being left behind....many assholes were.

The Belgians got it right. I inspected Kliene Brogel (sp) as a NATO Active Defense inspector once, and a fuel truck driver impressed me with the quality of his weapon (something in a 5.56 by FN) and the depth of his knowledge, not the textbook answer of what the range was, but what MOA he personally could do at what range.

Sir Winston Churchill said of the RAF during WWII, to the effect that every airfield should be a hive of armed airmen defending the aircraft. That isn't a quote, he probably didn't say "hive", but that's what he meant. I have to agree with the greatest military leader of the 20th century in this.

Will there ever BE a time when all we have to fight are our enemy, and not retards barely able to feed themselves who are continually waffling on about things they have no clue about?

YES, it's the AIR Force. Of COURSE, the flying things are the primary weapons, BUT:

A fucking SPACESHIP isn't much good if it's burning on the ground or the pilot is dead.

There is no excuse for sending our children to fight for us and not at least arming and training them.

If It sounds like I'm passionate about this, I am. This raked over many old coals for me. I no longer have to listen to idiots pontificate simply because they have more rank than me. Gonna do any good? Nope. At least the USAF isn't still being run like a cheap Japanese car factory. I hope.

I can't believe that I'm seeing people defend the AF'S lack of training and proficiency. Warfare is asymmetrical, if it gets bad everyone fights, everyone needs to be proficient. The I'll rely on somebody else mentality is exactly how an entire unit gets wiped out or a base gets over run. The strength of the US military is in part because everyone should be cross training knowing not only your job but the person above you, and in this case below if that's how you view the grunts (at your own peril).

Exactly...said that for years. And then at Al Jaber I wasn't allowed to arm up as I went to the airport in the middle of the night. I started out in the Marine Corps and couldn't believe the short sightedness.

It doesn't interest them. They think "it's not my job" and that's a fail. I always taught the Airmen and NCOs to look beyond and think outside of the box. When I was EET, that was the biggest write-up.

I think the Airmen have this rationale that they are in corporate environment ergo, we don't carry weapons because our Security Force, the Army or Marines will defend us. As pointed out by SSG Christ, there is going come a moment, when a terrorist cell or if the base is overseas, enemy troops will breach the wire and wreak havoc, while some Airman is fumbling around with his/her weapon. It's a great way to utilize those metal caskets, kept in storage at the mortuary affairs unit. They should emphasize more weapons training at USAF basic training because, ready or not, the frontline is everywhere in this never-ending war on terrorism.