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

I don not know what the training is now but when i went through Basic in 76 we were taught on M-16 and how to break it down clean and reassemble. and then went to the firing range to shot, granted alot of us did not know what hell they were doing but i did as i had gun training and used guns as a teenager so I enjoyed the chance to use the gun. By the way i went into Aircraft Maintenance and worked C-141's my whole 8 years and went all over the world flying on them but did not have to carry any weapons. But i do know that if the situation had come up i would have looked for and used any weapon i could get my hands on.

I retired from POL in 2011, but qualified every two years. Every time I deployed to the AOR, I deployed with a M-16. I understand the mindset of office workers not expecting to ever use a rifle, but wished we could have spent more range time, myself. I personally believe that everyone in the services should have to qualify at least annually. Too many younger Airmen saw their service as a job with great benefits, but didn't see the real purpose. Even though I only worked fuels, I deployed enough and saw enough rockets, mortars, and small arms fire coming toward me to understand our roll as members of the military. I shudder to think what the mindset is these days... I truly worry about the military's capabilities these days. If we look at it historically, Airmen were armed AND using their rifles in many of the past conflicts, regardless of career field. How many times were FOBs in Vietnam and Korea under attack by ground forces? If things escalate beyond Ukraine, we will get the call. This newer generation of Airman are not ready.

For the most part, I agree with the other branches calling it the Chair Force. Even a lot of Security Forces is not ready for the reality of pulling the trigger. I hope I'm wrong...

It’s based on exposure to hostile fire. Security Forces a lot of combat skills training and CE gets regular marksmanship training but some other AFSCs get less. I was in CE.

That is down right stupid. I know what their thinking is but its stupid. ALL branches of the military should take the Marine Approach. EVERYONE is 1st and foremost a ground troop. THEN ur MOS. Simple reason is u never know if ur protection is going to breakdown. And if it does and Airforce then has a lot of preventable deaths on their hands.

The Air Force is basicly Boy Scouts that fly.

Most of the Air Force is "in the rear with gear" with exceptions for CCTs/PJ, and affiliated AFSC's attached to Army units, Air Ground Ops, etc. In the blue to green scenarios, the units filling those were spun up with US Army training on camps/posts/Forts doing USA small unit training and drills to do just that when they had to fulfill such missions. I would expect that to occur in future op's. There is only so much time one can take to "prepare" all personnel for their anticipated roles in the combat theaters, and this is indeed dynamic, always subject to change. We all see the view from our own tree stand, but most typically the USAF personnel who spend the greatest amount of time over enemy territory are the pilots...but their weapons are different than the grunts, unless they are shot down. As for larger crews...about the best they can do is to throw their flight lunches at the enemy.

I worked with another ground radio operator and we both received PCS orders at the same time. I went to the Middle East to a radio station at a site. We had our own weapon and we had to count and verify 120 rounds at the start of each shift (actually there were 126).
My co-worker went to Vietnam and was assigned to South Koreans on the ground as their radio operator. Long story short, he was wounded twice, saved the South Koreans and was decorated by the South Korean government and received the Air Force Cross.

I think you are in error

You're in the military

What a maroon!!!