Who has the best army in the world?

ChrisJSY · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:19

snowdog said:
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.

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.

People keep skipping my good point.
How are you getting 1.4million troops, enough tanks on to the british isles?
Any plane would be shot down and coastal defences would be set up well in advance of them getting to our beaches.

Nukes however, is almost like cheating, both have enough to do serious damage.

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:24

ChrisJSY said:
People keep skipping my good point.
How are you getting 1.4million troops, enough tanks on to the british isles?
Any plane would be shot down and coastal defences would be set up well in advance of them getting to our beaches.

Nukes however, is almost like cheating, both have enough to do serious damage.

Lets say the US starts in Scotland or we start in Canada. Take your pick.

aslco · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:25

Ok we are good enough at defending ourself, but could we do enough damage to stop the war without a nuke? I doubt it. If our defense did hold up i think it would be a slight stalemate war if nukes weren't used, which i think they shouldn't. Ever..

Hitman_Leon · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:27

Orcish-Horde said:
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.

Mech inf against IED's and real terrorists do not do the best job so how would they do it against highly trained special forces, professional terrorists if you like. The fight would be where the special forces chose to their best adavantage and the mech inf would sustain significant casualties in relation to their numbers and the numbers of their enemy the special forces unit. the special forces will when faced with superior odds choose their fight on their terms which would cost the mech inf dearly.

SexyGreyFox · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:35

ChrisJSY said:
People keep skipping my good point.
How are you getting 1.4million troops, enough tanks on to the british isles?
Any plane would be shot down and coastal defences would be set up well in advance of them getting to our beaches.

Nukes however, is almost like cheating, both have enough to do serious damage.

Do you want to play Tic Tac Toe?

(Who will be first to get it?)

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 17:36

Hitman_Leon said:
Mech inf against IED's and real terrorists do not do the best job so how would they do it against highly trained special forces, professional terrorists if you like. The fight would be where the special forces chose to their best adavantage and the mech inf would sustain significant casualties in relation to their numbers and the numbers of their enemy the special forces unit. the special forces will when faced with superior odds choose their fight on their terms which would cost the mech inf dearly.

When did the Infantry commander lose his free will? Were would they put their IED's? Whats to stop the Infantry from hiding themselfs? Whats to stop the infantry from playing them at their own game? Why did Andy McNab & Co run for their lifes?

Hitman_Leon · 22 Jun 2008 at 18:18

Orcish-Horde said:
When did the Infantry commander lose his free will? Were would they put their IED's? Whats to stop the Infantry from hiding themselfs? Whats to stop the infantry from playing them at their own game? Why did Andy McNab & Co run for their lifes?

You said special forces against a mech inf batt, that is the way they would fight, against superior odds they would fight on their terms, they would loose like I said but they would make the mech inf batt pay dearly for the win. What is so hard to understand?, the mech inf would have to first find the SF unit, that being the most dangerous time for the mech inf. Prior to engagement the SF unit would choose places of ambush, place IED's and other anti armour devices. The Sf unit would in all probability be armed to the teeth with every advanced infantry portable weapon they could muster. This in turn would also give them mobile anti armour weapons. The SF unit would be able to have planned escape/disengagement routes and fall-back positions and also would have the element of ambush to their advantage. Mechanised infantry makes a hell of a lot of noise and the numbers of the infantry supporting them would make the SF units tactics of hit and run and ambush work well. So in the end the SF may loose but at greater the expense of the mech inf.

Mik3 · 22 Jun 2008 at 18:35

Orcish-Horde said:
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.

How the hell can they be over rated? Their battle honours says otherwise. I don't claim to know much about the SAS but I believe they have been successful in nearly every operation they have took part in.

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 18:39

I wouldn't waste the energy arguing with him.

Hitman_Leon · 22 Jun 2008 at 18:41

Ork=large overgrown boar, the saying go's, you can't educate pork.

I tried and failed, oh well.

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 18:42

I think he's played too much C&C in his time.. that or Soldier of Fortune mag.

Orcish-Horde said:
Lets say the US starts in Scotland or we start in Canada. Take your pick.

No that wasn't the question.

He didn't ask where they started, he asked how they got here in the first place. 1.4 millions (plus reserve if you like) troops and 7k tanks.

Vanilla · 22 Jun 2008 at 18:44

Personally I would rather take the experienced members of 1 PARA & Pathfinders over the SAS if it were just a head on fight

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:19

Hitman_Leon said:
You said special forces against a mech inf batt, that is the way they would fight, against superior odds they would fight on their terms, they would loose like I said but they would make the mech inf batt pay dearly for the win. What is so hard to understand?, the mech inf would have to first find the SF unit, that being the most dangerous time for the mech inf. Prior to engagement the SF unit would choose places of ambush, place IED's and other anti armour devices. The Sf unit would in all probability be armed to the teeth with every advanced infantry portable weapon they could muster. This in turn would also give them mobile anti armour weapons. The SF unit would be able to have planned escape/disengagement routes and fall-back positions and also would have the element of ambush to their advantage. Mechanised infantry makes a hell of a lot of noise and the numbers of the infantry supporting them would make the SF units tactics of hit and run and ambush work well. So in the end the SF may loose but at greater the expense of the mech inf.

Mechanised infantry makes a hell of a lot of noise and the numbers of the infantry supporting them would make the SF units tactics of hit and run and ambush work well.

Do you understand what Mechanised infantry is? Think about it, how would the SBS or SAS do their tasks(their job) and fight mechanised infantry at the same time? You talk about ambushs and fall back, the only thing the SAS or SBS would do is run and get as much distance between them.

Read this.
http://www.bellum.nu/basics/soldier/mechanizedinfantry.html

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:28

Biohazard said:
I think he's played too much C&C in his time.. that or Soldier of Fortune mag.

Whats with all the insults?

Biohazard said:
No that wasn't the question.

He didn't ask where they started, he asked how they got here in the first place. 1.4 millions (plus reserve if you like) troops and 7k tanks.

The US navy sinks our 50 boats then the USAF grounds the RAF. Its a what if after all, so why not have them start any place.

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:28

Orcish-Horde said:
Do you understand what Mechanised infantry is? Think about it, how would the SBS or SAS do their tasks(their job) and fight mechanised infantry at the same time? You talk about ambushs and fall back, the only thing the SAS or SBS would do is run and get as much distance between them.

Read this.
http://www.bellum.nu/basics/soldier/mechanizedinfantry.html

Surely that would depend on what they had been tasked with.

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:29

Orcish-Horde said:
Whats with all the insults?

The US navy sinks our 50 boats then the USAF grounds the RAF. Its a what if after all, so why not have them start any place.

That easy huh? What maybe half an hour, over lunch?

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:42

Mik3 said:
How the hell can they be over rated? Their battle honours says otherwise. I don't claim to know much about the SAS but I believe they have been successful in nearly every operation they have took part in.

They have a load of honours and are very good at their operational role. This leads people to believe they are something they are not, people have an image of then being some killing machine which they are not. They have very specialist roles, one time tasks that normaly would be unsuited to normal forces. Normal forces don't have access to the gear needed to do them tasks or the training.

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:43

Biohazard said:
Surely that would depend on what they had been tasked with.

If they don't have a task they would not be in the field, and it would never be to take on infantry in any of its forms

Orcish-Horde · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:45

Biohazard said:
That easy huh? What maybe half an hour, over lunch?

You know they could do it with ease.

Biohazard · 22 Jun 2008 at 19:50

Orcish-Horde said:
If they don't have a task they would not be in the field, and it would never be to take on infantry in any of its forms

I never said they didn't have a task, I just said it depends on what they had been landed with. READ!!!

I'm not sure why you are saying that, that is what they were tasked with in Falklands (and ended up shooting some SBS guy).. as well as being quite handy with the stingers.