Who has the best army in the world?

dowie · 23 Jun 2008 at 20:56

MarcLister said:
So because we don't spend the same amount of our GDP on the armed forces as the Americans do theirs we are underfunded?

the amount european nations are spending is pretty irrelevant as they don't have anywhere near the commitments that the UK and US have

We are suffering casualties in afghanistan as a result of this - we don't have enough transport helecopters and are relying on poor equipment such as snatch land rovers in order to move troops - so yes we are underfunded.

Vanilla · 23 Jun 2008 at 21:26

Orcish-Horde said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Qala-i-Jangi

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eOHgiQP1LM4

This one actually shows the brits:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qDujnyf2jDw&feature=related

MarcLister · 23 Jun 2008 at 21:28

But the US surely has a bigger military than us when compared to population size.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_army says that US has 4.76 active troops per 1000 US citizens. We have 3.09. A difference of 1.67 troops per 1000 citizens. So it could be said that the US has to spend a higher percentage of its GDP on defence because it has a bigger military to maintain.

I can't agree with you that just because we spend less of our GDP on our military means our armed forces are underfunded. Just because the US spends, for example, 4% of its GDP on the military means that if we spend 3.37% of our GDP on our military means ours is underfunded.

dowie · 23 Jun 2008 at 21:45

Well who else would you compare us to in order to make a reasoned statement as to whether we are over or underfunded?

The fact is we lack certain essential equipment and spend less than the only other western nation with at least the levels of commitment we have - we are also overstretched in terms of manpower.

We are underfunded and rely heavily on the US as a result have to rent aircraft & equipment from them & rely on them for satellite imagery, air power etc.... Resorting to using land rovers designed for urban use NI is a disgrace given the IED threat tbh...

Over Clocker · 23 Jun 2008 at 21:53

dowie said:
Well who else would you compare us to in order to make a reasoned statement as to whether we are over or underfunded?

The fact is we lack certain essential equipment and spend less than the only other western nation with at least the levels of commitment we have - we are also overstretched in terms of manpower.

We are underfunded and rely heavily on the US as a result have to rent aircraft & equipment from them & rely on them for satellite imagery, air power etc.... Resorting to using land rovers designed for urban use NI is a disgrace given the IED threat tbh...

Haven't we just bought a load of new vehicles for this exact purpose?

Dark88 · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:06

Over Clocker said:
Haven't we just bought a load of new vehicles for this exact purpose?

we have been buying vehicles to try rectify the problem yes

http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles/Cougar-H-Series-6x6_a000070002.aspx

On 25 July 2006, the UK Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced the procurement of approximately 100 Cougar 6x6 armored vehicles from Force Protection Inc for the British forces deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Deliveries were expected to be done over six months after the contract award date with an initial operational capability of the medium-weight vehicles at the end of 2006. This procurement contract was part of a £527 million Urgent Operational Requirements for Iraq and Afghanistan which also included AF430 and Pinzgauer vehicles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar_(vehicle)

Saytan · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:07

they're not using the landrovers from NI in afghanistan - the NI ones are pretty damn well protected from the IEDs, but not really able to cope with rough terrain too well

Housey · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:10

Olivers or New Model I suspect..

Dark88 · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:10

Saytan said:
they're not using the landrovers from NI in afghanistan - the NI ones are pretty damn well protected from the IEDs, but not really able to cope with rough terrain too well

you mean the snatch landrovers? pretty sure they are out in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Biohazard · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:15

Snatch are crap with IED's!!?

They are out there, but not helping a lot of the time.

old bbc: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5118114.stm

Over Clocker · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:22

To me, it sound like there was a problem, which was identified mid 2006, and just after mid 2006, half a Billion Pounds was spend on an urgent rectification of the problem by quickly purchasing a load of armoured vehicles...

Biohazard · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:22

Over Clocker said:
To me, it sound like there was a problem, which was identified mid 2006, and just after mid 2006, half a Billion Pounds was spend on an urgent rectification of the problem by quickly purchasing a load of armoured vehicles...

Are the new one actually over there yet?

Saytan · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:23

Snatch

Tangi

Biohazard · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:27

Which are they using currently?

Snatch is useless given the IEDs, and that looks pathetic for a speed bump let alone gullies and rocks. Am I wrong? :/

Saytan · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:29

the tangi is a design developed by the RUC for use in northern ireland. it is not an army vehicle.

Over Clocker · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:30

The total number of new protected vehicles MOD is delivering to support operations in Afghanistan and Iraq now stands at almost 600.

Defence Secretary, Des Browne said:

"I am determined to do all that I can to get more armoured vehicles out to our forces on operations – to give Commanders a choice about what vehicles they use. The Mastiffs have saved lives out in theatre and we have ordered the Ridgback because it is a smaller version of the Mastiff – offering our forces first-rate protection with more manoeuvrability."

So, the MoD have already purchased and DELIVERED 600 new armoured vehicles for the Army, in current use.

Biohazard · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:30

Over Clocker said:
So, the MoD have already purchased and DELIVERED 600 new armoured vehicles for the Army, in current use.

Thanks.

But delivered to where?

I am just guessing, but surely we use more than that for the number of troops fighting in two countries?

Over Clocker · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:31

ps, Ridgback = upgraded Cougars. I think the Army fitted additional protection, weaponry, comms and electronic countermeasures.

Over Clocker · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:34

Biohazard said:
Thanks.

But delivered to where?

I am just guessing, but surely we use more than that for the number of troops fighting in two countries?

Delivered to Iraq and Afghanistan. 600 new, plus the countless Vector, Viking, Mastif, Jackal and Panther vehicles already there.....

Biohazard · 23 Jun 2008 at 22:35

Ok I'm convinced.

It must be war news fatigue or lack of attention but i'm sure there are still injuries with IEDs. I think they have started aiming charges at window height from the road side iirc.