I don’t know how thinks work in your army. But in the Greek army(and especially in Cyprus) they have make very clear to us that we are not gonna have a lot of support from artillery or air force. So our action will be support only from our support company-one platoon of 90mm howitzer, one platoon of Milan and one platoon of machines guns and from our support platoon 2 machines guns mg-3, two teams of 80mm anti tank launcher and two teams of 60mm howitzer. In the last golf war the TV showed an operation of the American which in order to take out 4 guys with AK467 and RPG-7 in a house they used: their javelin, Cobra, Abram’s and in the end A-10. To my eyes that didn’t present an army determinate to fight but a bunch of blokes that relied too much in the support that can get. Actually that night I was talking with my brother (he served in the Greeks marines) and were laughing. So my point is: do the American worth something as fighting machines or are a bunch of cowboys?
I always consider british as a better fighting machine
«Όσο υπάρχει ο πρόστυχος ο Έλληνας σ αυτό το κόσμο
δε βγαίνει μα το θεό αυτό το μίσος από μέσα μου.
Σαν στέκομαι και τον κοιτάζω τον σκύλο
δε βγαίνει μα το θεό αυτό το μίσος από μέσα μου,
χιλίων γκιαούρηδων τα κεφάλια δεν σβήνουν ένα μίσος.
Εκδίκηση να πάρω είναι ο μοναδικός μου στόχος
σαν αναμετρηθώ στης μάχης το πεδίο
χιλίων γκιαούρηδων τα κεφάλια να κλαδέψω σε μια μέρα
δε βγαίνει μα το θεό αυτό το μίσος από μέσα μου,
χιλίων γκιαούρηδων τα κεφάλια δεν σβήνουν ένα μίσος.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
You'd be mistaken if you thought the American military only relies on supporting arms. Back in April elements of 3/4 (3rd Battalion, 4th Marines) got into hand-to-hand fighting with non-Iraqi jihadists in marshland near Baghdad. Didn't go well for the jihadis.
The American Marine Division has the highest combat effectiveness in the American armed forces. It seems not enough for our four divisions to surround and annihilate its two regiments.
---Mao Tse Sung to General Song, prior to Chosin Reservoir
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
It's dificult to say but my personal op is terrific to blow everyting within 24 hours but less impressive in the long term. Amos stocks can get rapidely depleted and the basic USN guys seems to lack the anti-guerilla skills they would need now. For which i believe some European corps would be more suited.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is big diffrences between european (especialy french) armies. In my mind, it's du to historical reasons.
US Army :
very powerfull, very high tech., well trained, but needs heavy support (in mean supplies, not air support or something else).
the weakness of US army is the supply chain. Combattant are very specialised and so, very effectives, but if you cut the supply chain, they are lost.
It don't blame them, I think it's a diffrent strategy. US only have wars outside its borders, so US industry may always produce tons of new materials and give supplies to the army.
French army :
French army doctrin is a little bit diffrent. France never forgot it had been invaded, and had to fight without supplies.
Sur, in case of small conflicts in foreign countries, France have good supply chain, but we allso learned :
1st : "try to find friends, so you may get support from local people."
2nd : "allways try local food in first, and then use you combat rations. Its better for your health, and in case of supply chain problems, we may transport ammo instead of food..."
3nd : "a good soldier is not a super heroe, nor a trigger happy, able to shoot a men at 4km...a good soldier is a guy able to shoot with an average skill, a guy with a little bit of medic, mecanics, etc. knowledge. It better to have average skills in everything, than been a superman in just one thing."
Us soldier are certainly the bests as projection forces, but in my mind, european soldiers are better trained to defend a country in case of invasion.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Also, France have about 210 years of experience as occupying country with the Foreign Legion.
Both in the middle east and indochina. I think we knew what would happen in Irak even the "old" werent
too impressed and were expecting what is now happening (this was the main reason for the oposition to invasion). There is little doubt that a western type
Army can defeat an Arab army conventionaly at nearly any time and there was no way the coallition would have loosed that one after the damages caused to Saddam's army by Gal Scwarcoff (can anyone correct this typo, i cant neither pronounce nor write his name properly) but occupying the terrain proved impossible to the very best the legion could throw at them (we're talking mostly extremly experienced ex-Axis/eastern soldier which often had seen stuff as hard as Stalingrad/Ardennes/Berlin). I personally never was anti-US but i rescent their administration for throwing these guys into this mess and then daring to ask fpr help to get him out (expecially after calling us and the Germans cowards).
I hate the idea of some of you guys geting fraged or killed for some political agendas and the wrong reasons.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Rather an apropriate nickname for the guy, the way he conducted the first gulf war deserve all my admiration!!!. On the other topics where is the one on boredoom gone?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I remember,before/during deployment to the Gulf,CNN had their " experts " on almost 24 hours a day.They were saying how the US was in for a " terrific fight " in a land battle against the " battle-hardened,one million man Iraqi Army." They said we'd get a black eye from an " experienced " fighting force.Seems everyone but the military believed it.USMC General Walter Boomer,when asked about Saddams Army said," I'll kick his ass right off the map." The " higher ups " quickly muzzled Boomer after that but the Marines(myself included) loved it! As intel told us after the airstrikes we'd only have to worry about around,150,000 that would have any fight in them(Republican Guard).I remember one CNN " expert " compared the Republican Guard to the Waffen SS Panzer Divisions,in WW2!!! lol..That was a bit " ambitious. ",to say the least!Still,we got a bit un-nerved when reports filtered thruout Saudi about the DOD ordering 10,000 body bags.I don't recall anyone thinking that was funny.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
It really depends on which branch of US forces we are dealing with. From my personal experiences and experiences of colleagues, the US Army is too specialised and not very well rounded; essentially Thx's comments sum it up quite well. For example, a US army artillery crew is trained is just one part of a job; a loader is just that, a loader.
However, US marines are much more well rounded, their doctrine is similar to British and Canadian doctrine; quality, not quantity. This is most likely due to the fact that the USMC is officially part of the US navy and thus it has a much tighter budget than the US army. As a result, the USMC must maximise its resources; they are simultaneously assigned much tougher tasks with fewer resources than the US army.
@Paljoey:
During your time in the military, did you ever conduct joint exercises and/or operations with US army units? If so, how did they fare in your opinion?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
My only experience with US Army soldiers,from a training standpoint was during workups in the Gulf,prior to Desert Storm,and even then frequency of contact was minimum.So in reality no,really no experience with them.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I consider it very strange that USMC and US army troopers be so segregated; they are supposed to be on the same damn team for god's sake! I would also consider it prudent, since it could happen that both USMC and US army units be ordered to assault a target, that they both suffer heavy casualties and then be forced to merge, e.g. a USMC officer having to take over command of a dead US army officer.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I see what you mean,but you have to remember the USMC is its own " self-sufficient " fighting force.I mean we even have our own air force.So there really isn't a real need to have inter-realations with the US Army.I do,however,see your point,and as I can only speak of my experience.There are certain USMC battalions/companies who have inter-changed with the Army,from time to time,but not any of mine.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Current Topic - What u think about american war machine?
