Question:
For how long do you think would a modern day soldier survive in a World War II combat?
SpaceBoy360°
2010-08-13 17:40:04 UTC
For just a moment, imagine that a US Army soldier from the year of 2010 is sent "Back in time" to the very peak of World War II in Europe. That soldier is not allowed to carry on any modern day equipment with him; he will have to use the technology that was available during the World War II. So my question is: For how long do you think he will last?

P.S.

I just want to clarify that by sending that soldier to the past is not like sending him back in time, because while dilating through time to the future is possible, time travel, especially to the past is impossible. That's because the past is the past....it's gone. Therefore if the parallel universe theory is correct, then there're other parallel universes in which the past is the present.

So still,
what do you think about my question?
Six answers:
hamrogers
2010-08-13 19:56:09 UTC
I would think as long as any of the other soldiers. It's not like we have space age weapons today for the average troop. Sure there are GPS, night vision goggles, and encrypted radios, but it's usually the squad leaders who have that kid of stuff, if anyone at all. I've been in the military for 12 years and I've never worn NVGs. The radios are encrypted, but that doesn't make it any easier to receive a signal over a mountain.



Modern day soldiers do not depend on high tech equipment to do the hardest parts of their job. Shoot-move-communicate is the basis of professional soldiering. I'm not sure where you got this idea from. When unloading a truck I use my bare hands and my back. There's no robot there to do it for me. When I counsel a soldier I might use a computer to save the document, but the information is coming out of my mouth, based on my experience, not a program. We still set up tents and eat rations just like soldiers did in WWI and WWII. The only difference is they used to be in metal cans, now they're in plastic bags. I strip and clean my rifle in the same manner a WWII grunt did. Some of them rode around in jeeps, some of out troops ride around in Humvees. They're both the best vehicle available for the time.



I think that some of our modern soldiers would even last longer than their WWII counterparts based on health and nutrition. Many WWII draft soldiers were in poor health. In fact, that was the reason Congress authorized funding for school lunch programs. Too many new recruits were malnurished and frail.
SG
2010-08-13 19:44:16 UTC
A modern soldier would perform about as well as a soldier from that era. The basics of military training are essentially the same. Orienteering using a map and compass, identification of land features, cold and hot weather survival training, small unit tactics, physical training...etc. Probably the biggest difference would be the small arms. Soldiers are now trained with M-4 carbines or the M-16 rifle. It is true that rifles are essentially the same, aim and pull the trigger; but the rifles of the day (M1-Garand, M1-Carbine) load ammo differently and the maintenence takes a little training. If a modern soldier was familiar with those weapons, they would do alright. The basics do not change.
2010-08-13 18:27:33 UTC
You're mistaken if you think that travel to the future is possible, but not to the past.



Politicians and CEO's decide what wars to fight and how long the wars will take. Soldiers these days are just objects, so of course, they would fail given WW2 conditions.
Dr. Catloaf
2010-08-13 17:46:23 UTC
I don't think today's soldiers are all about their modern-day fancy weapons. Our theoretical GI would probably easily learn how to work the weaponry issued to him...and then make improvements to it. Plus, the the mixed martial arts stuff they probably incorporate into hand-to-hand combat would definitely give him an edge in the unarmed part. I think they had infrared stuff back then, but he'd definitely have to adjust to the direction-finding technology of the day.
Greg N
2010-08-13 17:44:03 UTC
Lots of people died in WWII. I think this question is somewhat insensitive to that, not to mention the idea of making a parallel universe argument being a poor explanation at best.
84$3728hsye
2010-08-13 17:46:49 UTC
He would live the same amount of time as any soldier. the soldier of 2010 isnt superhuman. he might even die faster for not having experience with the older weapons.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...