"Modern Tactical Training" vs. "Basic Military Training"

A controversial question exists, “modern tactical training” vs. “basic Army training”…is one better than the other?..if so, why?

Navy Seals exempt of course, neither come close in comparison, nothing basic about the Seals


Are we talking civilian vs. military training?


Not necessarily, ex military included, but yes for the most part…whether it’s youtube training, or civilian tactical courses, or personal instructor lessons.

keep in mind some of these videos, courses, and lessons are from former military. that are now instructors, who may have added their own tactics and/or tips born from experiences learned after their initial basic military training. It’s common to see a “vet” criticize a “tactiguy” for training tactics that conflict with their own military training…and vice versa


sorry for the edits…my internet seems upset today and keeps freezing

1 Like

Are you asking if you are going to be as good as an average Marine after taking a few tactical classes?
Is the question whether an average Marine understands aspects of a self-defense incident as well as someone who took those classes?
I think the answer to both is No.


If I understand your question correctly you are talking apples and oranges.

Military training is taught based on the rules of WAR.
Self defense training is taught on the rules of LAW.

Now the crossover courses that teach “tactical” training to civilians who fall under the rule of LAW are still subject to that law. Being able to run and gun, shoot move and communicate are excellent skills to posses as (IMHO) they will give you clarity of mind in a high stress situation and will induce certain muscle memory of action in a confrontational situation.

Since it was brought up by the OP and for general knowledge, SEAL’s, Delta, SOCOM, 3 letter clubs, etc. attend the same courses that you as a civilian can attend. There are some institutes that will only train DOD but I would say most also teach civilians. When you get to a certain level of proficiency attending these courses keep the edge sharp and there is always the search for that “one tidbit” of information or technique that will make the difference. The high end schools market to those people in search of those tidbits be they military, civilian, contractor or LEO. The above is for pistol, rifle & carbine, I’m not talking about breaching doors and such but you can also get that training if you really want it and have the $$$$.




Good answers so far. One of the big differences I see are the weapons platforms. I got to train on Mk19, M60, M249, M16, M16A2, M4, M14, M203, M 72 LAW, M67 Grenades and M17 Claymores. Oh, M9 and 1911. Libs don’t have a clue about “Weapons of War.” Rules of Engagement (ROE) changed for about every deployment. Mostly who got to shoot first. We got to RJFA with our weapons and take them on very scenic hikes. Plenty of group activities in “V” formations, street crossings, and maintaining 360 deg perimeters during movements in Leather Personnel Carriers (LPCs). How to set up limiting stakes in your Defensive Fighting Position (DFP) with range maps, zones to cover in convoys, etc. I also got to learn, the hard way, to load link ammo with links facing up. Blew a night ambush exercise at Fort Dix over that one. Another reason to lock and load before leaving the wire. Test fire would also have been nice. Most of my training was a team activity. Coolest thing ever was shooting down a Hind Helicopter (MILES Equipped) at Fort Polk. Got to cuff and stuff the Red Force helicopter pilot personally :slight_smile:


Of course there would be no comparison when referring to “heavy artillery” or even advanced training… America’s Military is undeniably second to none.


@Ben_Blanc Brother, I didn’t feel very advanced. Just tired after humping an M-60 for 20 miles. Most of our troops get fam training in multiple platforms. I was a Machinist Mate in the Navy (M14, 1911), then Security Forces in the Air Force. Those guys everyone makes fun of picking their noses at the gate shack… Army, Marines and Coast Guard get some descent “Basic” Training, also. Most military get in-depth hands-on cleaning instructions, marksmanship training, RETs training to 500 yds. Simulator Training with multiple engagement scenarios and weapons fam on multiple platforms.

p.s. I did start my DoD Civil Service career as a Ground Combat Skills Instructor, Air Reserve Technician with the GCRC in Texas.


There will always be different opinions on this question. But they are most different in their basic reasoning. Tactical training is foremost involved in limiting or protecting the one being trained and "then’ dealing with the threat. Military training still is concerned with protecting the individual but the whole reason for the training is to eliminate the threat. Military training will increase force and violence till the threat is neutralized or eliminated. Civilian Tactical training will reach a point where force cannot be increased due to legal limitations.


Depends on what you are training for. But keep in mind, tactical is a general term. Basic Army Training was limited at best…this is a gun and this is for fun! The two have nothing to do with the other.

The differences of the two types of training can be summed up with the idea of assault v. defense.

1 Like