The American army today, second palce going to the British army in the British empire, due to the fact that the British empire ruled a 1/4 of the worlds people and commanded the largest empire on earth.
The Ottomons are pale in comparison to the British empire. And this is not a bias slant, it is a factual statment.
The American army today, second palce going to the British army in the British empire, due to the fact that the British empire ruled a 1/4 of the worlds people and commanded the largest empire on earth.
The Ottomons are pale in comparison to the British empire. And this is not a bias slant, it is a factual statment.
nope, the op says regardless of tech, america without tech and nukes are nothing... the monguls will eat them for breakfast.
I disagree, however I cannot have a serious discussion with someone that is stupid enough to claim that swords and bow & arrows etc. are not a form of technology "because they need human strength opposed to pressing a button"
I disagree, however I cannot have a serious discussion with someone that is stupid enough to claim that swords and bow & arrows etc. are not a form of technology "because they need human strength opposed to pressing a button"
You're an idiot, now bye bye
Kk. Fool, your trying to act like some smart turd comparing mongals swords to american nukes. Now go get drunk you turd.
I actually find this subject really interesting(not a lover of war/violence, I'm just really into history), too bad the majority of the posts here will be as accurate/serious as a wiki entry
These, along with all the personal accounts of near misses that I have heard from personnel, are honestly quite shocking. One story I heard was of an A-10 almost blowing up a british convoy because they thought they were iraqis, even though they were wearing nato markings.
It never ceases to amaze me how hard many British people will try to think of reasons not to like America, but god damn this has to be one of the dumbest.
I'll try and break it down for you. In war, forces on the same side will, due to confusion or accident or the fog of war, sometimes harm each other instead of the enemy. Britain and America are on the same side in a war, so naturally there will be occurrences of friendly fire, however regrettable that may be.
Also let me let you in on a little secret: American forces accidentally kill Americans too. Crazy, I know! It must mean that American's hate themselves and are doing everything they can to undermine their country. Despicable!
I find it hilarious that you simply ignored the points I made, which encompass the effects of America on the entirety of British politics, economics, and society and instead focus on a few isolated incidences which, by your own admission, were mistakes rather than official policy.
I actually find this subject really interesting(not a lover of war/violence, I'm just really into history), too bad the majority of the posts here will be as accurate/serious as a wiki entry
Well it is kinda difficult to pin point who had the "best army in history" simply because of the fact each army were different (Conventional or unconventional? Infantry heavy or balanced? Small Elite troops or mass conscripts? Swords or Guns? Females or no females?) plus history is quite a large time scale so the obvious choice would be to pick a more recent army since it will be technologically superior than any historic army. Seriously spartans vs US armed forces... who would win...
But who cares, this thread is fun and interesting to see who picks who (personally I pick Romans) even if it is as accurate/serious as a wiki entry. So, in your own opinion, who do you think is the best army in history if I may ask.
Well it is kinda difficult to pin point who had the "best army in history" simply because of the fact each army were different (Conventional or unconventional? Infantry heavy or balanced? Small Elite troops or mass conscripts? Swords or Guns? Females or no females?) plus history is quite a large time scale so the obvious choice would be to pick a more recent army since it will be technologically superior than any historic army. Seriously spartans vs US armed forces... who would win...
But who cares, this thread is fun and interesting to see who picks who (personally I pick Romans) even if it is as accurate/serious as a wiki entry. So, in your own opinion, who do you think is the best army in history if I may ask.
I have no idea which is why I'm avoiding reading through this thread. I can't distinguish between what's real and what's made up by the lovely TSRers but what you said makes a lot of sense.
I disagree, however I cannot have a serious discussion with someone that is stupid enough to claim that swords and bow & arrows etc. are not a form of technology "because they need human strength opposed to pressing a button"
You are both wrong because swords, arrows etc even someone picking up a animal bone for the first time and clubbing you over the head is 'tech' of sort.
The British defeated much of the known globe mainly due to superior tech - in advanced weapons, transport and troop supply and deployment. Fighting zulus armed with spears with long range rifles was only going to endup in one result.
If you eliminate the use of technology in warfare completly - you are bringing it down simly to hand to hand combat. then you have to give it to the buddhists and the developemnt of early martial arts which all modern armies now train in.