> My intuition is that no, soldiering involves a lot of learning-by-doing, you need hours of practice stripping and reassembling your Kalashnikov,
I think you could, to a degree. The US Army has a bunch of training manuals online, for instance. But it would definitely have to be coupled with some kind of war-game type practice where you actually try to implement what's in them and fill in the gaps.
But it's also obviously limited to the kinds of tools you'll have access to. So rifleman-type stuff, not anti-tank missiles like this.
> and amateurs will quickly get killed by professionals.
I think that's mainly a function of practice and preparation. No way an amateur will have the kind of practice and experience of a professional.
I think this entertaining video of 2 Ex British army soldiers playing against 50 Airsoft players nicely supports your intuition:
"Everyone Has a Plan Until They Get Punched in the Mouth"
This was very apparent when I did martial arts. Many people with colorful belts from limited contact (for example karate) schools crumpled after receiving a couple painful hits/kicks.
So discipline is needed. High-intensity training under less than ideal circumstances can build that discipline. You can’t sweat the small things and need to focus on accomplishing the mission, absent ego and while being highly adaptable. Most military training focuses around building and reinforcing those kinds of skills.
G3 took max an hour or to to learn to the point where I could do it blindfolded I think.
> and amateurs will quickly get killed by professionals.
Extremely true I think.
Would it be theoretically possible to learn war from the internet, the same way you can learn programming? Watch some Youtube videos? Practice with your mates?
My intuition is that no, soldiering involves a lot of learning-by-doing, you need hours of practice stripping and reassembling your Kalashnikov, and amateurs will quickly get killed by professionals.