Turn on thread page Beta

Ground troop warfare between the US and UK - Who wins? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Changing the scenario on the other thread, say each country was only allowed to use ground troops and nothing else. The terrain is that of Afghanistan.

    Bonus round: Afghanistan vs. USA/UK on their own soil, ground troops only. Who'd win?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Roughly equal training, but we have a numerical advantage, so probably us.

    But it depends a lot on who's attacking and who's defending. Could you clarify?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    Roughly equal training, but we have a numerical advantage, so probably us.

    But it depends a lot on who's attacking and who's defending. Could you clarify?
    I can't tell who'd attack and who'd defend it'd depend on what you'd expect each country to do but let's assume both are attacking here.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Nobody... How on earth does anyone "win" in this scenario?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    Nobody... How on earth does anyone "win" in this scenario?
    They kill each other and until one country has no more troops left.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oh and that consititutes "winning" does it? People senselessly killing each other?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    I can't tell who'd attack and who'd defend it'd depend on what you'd expect each country to do but let's assume both are attacking here.
    Well, I guess the U.S. simply because of numbers. The only other factors are tactics and training, which are the same for both sides.

    So this isn't any kind of conquest? Just two teams going at each other in a massive slaughterfest?


    For the bonus round, Afghanis win.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    UK troops are arguably better trained. This can be objectively measured with the number of UK friendly fire incidents compared with US friendly fire incidents.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i'd like to thank robert pires for ************** and posting his useless views about war here, quite like this post.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    what is the actual size difference with US and UK's army?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    Oh and that consititutes "winning" does it? People senselessly killing each other?
    In a war? Kinda yeah... wtf are you smoking that's what this hypothetical scenario is about :lolwut:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BumperBo)
    In a war? Kinda yeah... wtf are you smoking that's what this hypothetical scenario is about :lolwut:
    I don't think anybody ever wins in war (apart from certain corporations which don't even need naming anymore).

    I obviously missed the part where war became something that one debated so trivially and as hypothetically as say Ali vs. Tyson or Pele vs. Cruyff.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    I don't think anybody ever wins in war (apart from certain corporations which don't even need naming anymore).
    Right... you don't see how, when two armies clash, the army that DOESN'T lose therefore wins? They defeated the opponent; that's basically what winning is!

    I obviously missed the part where war became something that one debated so trivially and as hypothetically as say Ali vs. Tyson or Pele vs. Cruyff.
    Well you weren't alive yet when it first became like that so you can hardly be blamed...

    But jeez are you being serious about this or just playing dumb? It's obvious what "winning" is defined as in the OP why bother bringing up a philosophical debate on war and its purpose? 9.9
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by londonboym)
    what is the actual size difference with US and UK's army?
    The U.S. army has 1,090,000 troops, the U.S. Marines have 201,000 troops, and the British army has 147,000 troops.

    So yeah, that's pretty imbalanced.

    (Original post by Diamond Diva)
    UK troops are arguably better trained. This can be objectively measured with the number of UK friendly fire incidents compared with US friendly fire incidents.
    We have more people to accidentally shoot, so I'm not sure how that could possibly be an accurate way to measure it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    We have more people to accidentally shoot, so I'm not sure how that could possibly be an accurate way to measure it.
    Like how you accidentally shot British military personnel?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    The U.S. army has 1,090,000 troops, the U.S. Marines have 201,000 troops, and the British army has 147,000 troops.

    So yeah, that's pretty imbalanced.


    We have more people to accidentally shoot, so I'm not sure how that could possibly be an accurate way to measure it.
    nearly 10 to 1. i like those odds :cool:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    Oh and that consititutes "winning" does it? People senselessly killing each other?
    er, yes. that's war, isn't it?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    US marines are ***** compared to Royal Marines, however.

    [/patriotism]
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diamond Diva)
    Like how you accidentally shot British military personnel?
    Like when our pilots accidentally fire on British forces? Well I don't know. You can judge that when the RAF starts providing air support for American ground troops. Until that day, you can't use that as an example either.

    Also,

    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.p.../article/3774/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BumperBo)
    But jeez are you being serious about this or just playing dumb? It's obvious what "winning" is defined as in the OP why bother bringing up a philosophical debate on war and its purpose? 9.9
    I don't see how raising a point about whether one can actually win a war is "playing dumb", I'm merely making a point. I obviously understand what is generally accepted as "winning" a war, perhaps I'm just a bit too Socratean for TSR...
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,365

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.