Turn on thread page Beta

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

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    US soldiers probably get medals for being first in the dinner queue. One SAS bloke could slaughter five Delta Force guys without even having to move. :proud:
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    I cant beleive how stupid some of these replies sound. For people who seem to think the size of a military is a reflection of how well trained they are please do your research. Almost universally amongst security and military analysts it is accepted that the British Armed Forces are the most highly trained combat troops in the world. The US armed forces, despite having good morale and the best hardware in the world, probably dont even get into the top ten in terms of professionalism and training. During NATO excercises, countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands routinely beat the Americans when in equal numbers (unless US air power is let lose). This again is the truth, ask any NATO soldier, these are facts available through many military websites. The US military is without a doubt the most powerful in the world. However, take into account the strategic nessesaties of a nations military and things look a bit different. The United States has tens of thousands of miles of coastline and airspace to defend. If the US military was 4 times the size it is today, they would have major difficulties defending against an invasions launched by a force aproximately a quarter its size. Its just too big to defend against. Luckily the only two armies that could mount such an invasion are the British and French. And before people carry on about how small the UK's military is to be classed as a major force please remember the following. These are facts recognised by US and UK strategists alike:

    The British Army is the worlds most hard hitting aggressive force for its size in the world. All 107,000 soldiers of the British Army can go anywhere in the world at no notice. Compare this to the Chinese Army, with nearly 3 million soldiers However, it could barely send a planeload of soldiers to invade a country out of it sphere of influence, its troops are poorly equipped with bad training and almost all of its soldiers are concripts with no combat experience.

    To get back to the point, the size of a nations forces, although a factor in a militaries strength, are less important than factors such as equipment, training, morale, humility and air lift capabilities when it comes to determining 'power projection'. Even when size is taken into account, the UK armed forces are the second most powerful forces in the world. The British army 10 years ago, although much bigger, would struggle to cope as well as our much smaller army is doing today with the wars in Iraq and Afganistan. Above all, what the British have mastered that makes them special is their attitude. They know that blowing everything up in front of them might kill todays enemy but make tomorows stronger. However they have achieved the perfect balance. The British squaddie is still feared by the enemy (reports from the taliban confirm this). In the last 4 months in Afganistan, the British have lost 26 soldiers in combat (40 in total if included all causes of death) and have killed 1,500 taliban. With all due respect to America, this is why we lose less soldiers per 1,000 troops than them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    Oh and that consititutes "winning" does it? People senselessly killing each other?
    Apparently, yes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The best part is RobertPires is probably some 13 year old who looked up socrates on wikipedia. Judging by the anime in his sig, he's probably a **** too.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by superman19)
    The best part is RobertPires is probably some 13 year old who looked up socrates on wikipedia. Judging by the anime in his sig, he's probably a **** too.
    Unfortuneatly for you I'm a 21 year old who studied Philosophy for 2 years. I can't see how my liking of anime affects the validity of my opinion...
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    One could argue (and I would) that I was actually discussing an aspect of the topic, for if one poses a question, then apsects of the question are up for debate, for me to decide who wins, we need to define victory, and if I indeed don't believe that it is possible for anyone to win, then my answer of nobody was satisfactory.

    I'm a philosopher, you can't turn that off, philosophy is never off topic!
    Except that the question was phrased in a way so that it was obvious what winning was defined as, and was obviously not up for debate since nobody else had any trouble understanding what winning was... so... :P

    Also one of the the only useable definitions of "winning" is beating one's opponent... what else would it be?

    Thank god you only would argue that and actually didn't or I'd have to open up a can of buttwhoop here :yep:
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by superman19)
    The best part is RobertPires is probably some 13 year old who looked up socrates on wikipedia. Judging by the anime in his sig, he's probably a **** too.
    That's pretty harsh... as if liking anime says anything for sure about your intelligence or age :rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Why exactly is it that when the British talk about how they have the most elite and well-trained combat forces in the world it's okay, but if Americans think so it's ignorant nationalism?



    (Original post by dzeh)
    The US armed forces, despite having good morale and the best hardware in the world, probably dont even get into the top ten in terms of professionalism and training. During NATO excercises, countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands routinely beat the Americans when in equal numbers (unless US air power is let lose).
    Source on that one? (My quoting you has nothing to do with my above statement, just so you know)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    Why exactly is it that when the British talk about how they have the most elite and well-trained combat forces in the world it's okay, but if Americans think so it's ignorant nationalism?
    Because most reinforce their claims with some objective evidence; whereas, you make bold, impertinent statements as if your word is gospel, whilst attacking the arguments of anyone who has the audacity to even consider that British troops may be better-trained than American troops.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diamond Diva)
    Because most reinforce their claims with some objective evidence; whereas, you make bold, impertinent statements as if your word is gospel, whilst attacking the arguments of anyone who has the audacity to even consider that British troops may be better-trained than American troops.
    Oh hey, it's you again!

    Did you happen to stumble upon my post about friendly fire?

    Anywaaaay, the statements I've heard about British forces have all been about the same. All I've really heard is "training lasts longer," or in your case, "Americans have more friendly fire."
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    x
    Why do you feel the need to jump to the defense of your country at every hurdle? Any thread which remotely questions the validity or superiority of America will be bombarded with your arguments.

    That doesn't mean I dislike you for it, just your methods. In fact, I would prefer it if more Britons were like you!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diamond Diva)
    Why do you feel the need to jump to the defense of your country at every hurdle? Any thread which remotely questions the validity or superiority of America will be bombarded with your arguments.

    That doesn't mean I dislike you for it, just your methods. In fact, I would prefer it if more Britons were like you!
    I do it because I'm nationalistic, obvs.

    Or I do it because I get irritated by people belittling me because I'm American? I tend to get it a lot on this forum.

    And besides, I don't argue about our superiority, because I don't see us as being superior to anyone. I defend against accusations of inferiority.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    And besides, I don't argue about our superiority, because I don't see us as being superior to anyone. I defend against accusations of inferiority.
    lol
    "i dont think we are better, but we dont come second to anyone! ":p:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1721)
    lol
    "i dont think we are better, but we dont come second to anyone! ":p:
    How about equality? That exists, doesn't it?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bateman)
    I am sure they have already thought about that and planned for it.

    If America is going to attack the UK, it would use its base in the UK as well as near by bases like the one in Germany which houses 50,000 soldiers. So your argument doesn't work.
    My posts were with reference to your claim that the US would have a chance in a global US vs world WW3. That base would be seized by EU forces.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Jesus this thread is still happening?

    It's like a massive dickwaving contest made even worse by the multitudes of fellow Brits scrabbling at every opportunity to try to justify their own inferiority complex by ignoring facts and simply making stuff up.

    This thread makes me feel bad about being British. Sorry Usafa, we don't all have an inferiority complex like this.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Georgecopter)
    Jesus this thread is still happening?

    It's like a massive dickwaving contest made even worse by the multitudes of fellow Brits scrabbling at every opportunity to try to justify their own inferiority complex by ignoring facts and simply making stuff up.

    This thread makes me feel bad about being British. Sorry Usafa, we don't all have an inferiority complex like this.
    oh please, England>rest of the world
    and I mean that, i mean England not the UK, because we're mega hardcore! we are so ******* brilliant at everything!

    :awesome:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ewan)
    My posts were with reference to your claim that the US would have a chance in a global US vs world WW3. That base would be seized by EU forces.


    Sigh. I know what you are saying, and i have responded to you twice.

    The US would not allow its bases to be seized.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    That's not true. There are generally higher standards in British forces. They have to cope with smaller numbers and improvise, and generally aren't as reliant on air support.
    The US army generally has a different strategy and tactics. It doesn't have as much of a focus on individual soldier training. What's the point in that, when they can use larger numbers combined with air power and all sorts of technology?
    US troops are generally very well-trained to handle alot of situations and better than many nations, but the average US squad comes second to a British one, in terms of technique and mindset.

    The US is more capable of fighting a large-scale war than the UK, but in terms of infantry vs infantry, British troops are more likely to win.
    Blind nationalism is not good for anyone. British soldiers are not the best trained soldiers in the world and i would argue that they don't come into the top 5.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    All of your points about British soldiers being better trained than American ones don't even matter anyway. America has more Marines than you have soldiers.

    Now i am waiting for someone to say that regular soldiers in the British army are better trained than the US Marines :rofl:
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,956

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
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.