Who has the best army in the world?

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:09

wannabedamned said:
Strategy.

10,000 vs 1,000

The 1,000 could win if the strategy was there.

Yes but if they both use good strategy which most armed forces of any use today would do, there would only be one out come.

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:10

Orcish-Horde said:
Spend some time in the armed forces then come back and talk. The US armed forces would over run the British armed forces if they were ever to go head to head.

Hhaaha quality retort. Why do I need to be in the forces? 5 members of my family not enough?

You clearly messed up last time when you were talking about nato etc in SC, so I don't see what difference that makes. You have shown yourself to undermine your own arguments before I see little difference here.

Quite often British forces, in Iraq at the moment for example, have been up against odds like that for months, and still walk away at the end of it. Other than those RMP boys that got caught with little ammo and comms. (rip)

JBuk · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:15

Orcish-Horde said:
Spend some time in the armed forces then come back and talk. The US armed forces would over run the British armed forces if they were ever to go head to head.

very unlikely

if were talking of a real war and not battlefield 2 then the UK v USA would probably be a long drawn out war , theres no way the UK would just be over run

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:15

^ don't listen to him, he talks nonsense.

JBuk · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:17

Biohazard said:
^ don't listen to him, he talks nonsense.

huh?

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:18

lol not you silly billy

KNiVES · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:19

He's talking about Orcish (who really is so wrong it's not funny)

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:19

KNiVES said:
He's talking about Orcish (who really is so wrong it's not funny)

Exactly.

snowdog · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:20

USA ! USA !

No but really they have the most advanced armies, if they would resort to cowards tactics like the rebels in the middle east do, they'd wipe out the whole population of a country faster than any other army.

if were talking of a real war and not battlefield 2 then the UK v USA would probably be a long drawn out war , theres no way the UK would just be over run

Sorry but the UK has no chance vs the US:

Soldiers: US : 1.4 million, UK 165k
Reserve troops: US: 1.4 million UK : 233k
US's defense budget is 10x as high as UK's.
US has +- 7k tanks, the uk only 1k
The US navy is nearly 5 times as big if not bigger.
US has 2600 air units, the UK only 504
And the US has a 46 times bigger nuclear arsenal.

cotton_flex · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:23

mossad, with its influence and connections with all these other bodies.

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:26

Biohazard said:
Hhaaha quality retort. Why do I need to be in the forces? 5 members of my family not enough?

You clearly messed up last time when you were talking about nato etc in SC, so I don't see what difference that makes. You have shown yourself to undermine your own arguments before I see little difference here.

Quite often British forces, in Iraq at the moment for example, have been up against odds like that for months, and still walk away at the end of it. Other than those RMP boys that got caught with little ammo and comms. (rip)

Haha you are full of it, Iraq was a walk over and still is its not even a case of two armys facing of against each other. All we are doing there now is guarding an airport with a few trips into Basra. It could hardly be considered a war.

How long could we last if it was the US we were fighting?

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:27

JBuk said:
very unlikely

if were talking of a real war and not battlefield 2 then the UK v USA would probably be a long drawn out war , theres no way the UK would just be over run

France 1940.

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:30

KNiVES said:
He's talking about Orcish (who really is so wrong it's not funny)

Prove me wrong.

dannyjo22 · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:35

JBuk said:
very unlikely

if were talking of a real war and not battlefield 2 then the UK v USA would probably be a long drawn out war , theres no way the UK would just be over run

The yanks would own the air in a few days. Once that was over we would get pounded until one of us pushed the nuke button. Once they owned the air they would be free to decimate us until the decided to land.

Not that it matters it won't ever happen.

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:41

Biohazard said:
Hhaaha quality retort. Why do I need to be in the forces? 5 members of my family not enough?

You would then get an understanding of what we can do, what we can't, our short comings and weaknesses. You would also come into contect with other Nato armed forces and see how they work and see their abilitys. Ever seen a US mech battle group working in the desert? Ever seen a battalion of T72 pound a target?

I have and it makes for sobber sight.

Hitman_Leon · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:45

bigredshark said:
Neutrality did them no harm, it was just reasonable self interest.

And they do have a decent army, principally because virtually every able bodied male in the country is a reservist and reasonably well trained and equipped. Maybe they aren't going to invade anywhere but I doubt anybody would find invading them easy.

Same goes for plenty of european countries, the swedes have a very high tech army with lots of decent kit, maybe they won't look too sharp in the desert but you wouldn't want to try and take them on in Arctic conditions.

Switzerland would be a total **** to invade, every bridge and pass and tunnel is ready to be blown up, you might have air power but you can't win by air power alone. the swiss might loose eventually but anyone who invaded would be decimated fighting the swiss on their own ground before they could find room for building a good bridgehead to counter the swiss tactics.

Hitman_Leon · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:49

Orcish-Horde said:
They would not stand a chance against a mechanized infantry battalion. That goes for all special forces they are not a fighting group but rather used for special tasks.

IMO the US army is the best not because of its soldiers(they are not bad) but the scale of its equipment. Their equipment is good, they have a lot of it and their soldiers can put it to good use.

Put it this way I would not hold out hope of the SBS winning that but if they knew what was coming and had the time and enviroment and gear to defend, expect your battalion to take very heavy losses. fighting special forces with conventional infantry is like fighting the highest trained terrorists, it would be hit and run and IED's and every weapon you can think of being used to its best effect.

aslco · 22 Jun 2008 at 16:53

Im sorry guys but if it were Uk vs USA then ireally do think they would beat us. However, it would never ever happen, even if it did due to some wacky government getting in power, then they would still be cautious of killing people they half view as their own.

Chasser · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:03

Adamakin said:
I have heard the best trained are actually the French Foreign Legion.

Tefal said:
yep they can run 150 miles non stop each carrying a 20ft flag pole baring a 10 square meter white flag.

I'm not sure you can compare the Foreign Legion to regular French forces, especially when joking about being surrender monkeys.

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:03

Hitman_Leon said:
Put it this way I would not hold out hope of the SBS winning that but if they knew what was coming and had the time and enviroment and gear to defend, expect your battalion to take very heavy losses. fighting special forces with conventional infantry is like fighting the highest trained terrorists, it would be hit and run and IED's and every weapon you can think of being used to its best effect.

They are good but highly over rated. Once they are out doing that they do if their cover is lost the only thing they can do is run. Mech infantry would just overwhelm them, the infantrys mortar fire alone would be enough.