Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] [13]:: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sobach
Gallente Fourth Circle Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 14:25:00 -
[361]
Originally by: Derovius Vaden Hows about you start killing other Americans and I tell you when to stop?
only if I get to start with you first.
and I'm not even an american
|
lofty29
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 14:25:00 -
[362]
How isn't this locked yet? ---
Latest Video : FAT- Camp |
Jago Kain
Amarr Ramm's RDI
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 15:08:00 -
[363]
Originally by: lofty29 How isn't this locked yet?
The CIA, MI6, Mossad, DGSE, BND, MFI etc., in conjunction with the Gnomes Of Zurich, the Knights Templar and the Illuminati (a CCP breakaway sect) are monitoring this thread and using it to compile a database of dissenters and potential security risks.
As soon as Jim McGregor's attention is drawn, and they can implicate him too, the vans with blacked-out windows will be mobilised and we'll all be nothing more than memories and pictures on the side of milk cartons.
See you at gitmo, or wherever it is they hide vanished dissidents these days.
___________________________________________________ The game will never be over, because we're keeping the meme alive. |
Kyanzes
Utopian Research I.E.L. Hedonistic Imperative
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 15:34:00 -
[364]
Edited by: Kyanzes on 19/12/2007 15:35:27 Here you can see them in action:
Linkage
The best military, you ask? Well, the US surely has an army based on advanced technology. Israel then again is basically in a state of war since its foundation. Obviously, the alertness of even individual soldiers has to be incredibly high. Soldiers who fight continously for decades? How serious is that? They are also advanced since they get everything from the US and the EU. Then there's China who, in the last ten years, started to massively build up their army. Everything is new, shiny and based on cost/value effective technology.
Still, the most important factor is probably the nuclear striking ability. You can have the technologically most advanced army in the world, against a nuclear power it's virtually nullified. If you don't really want to invade other countries, which would require large mobile forces, you essentially don't really need a huge and advanced army. Except of course for the technology required to deliver the payload
Look what happened to the US in Vietnam. The US lost the war. Why? Not very easy to answer it in two sentences, but basically:
- USSR supported North Vietnam - Vietnamese are not easy to subjugate - The US tried to use an ARMY against guerillas, I mean how ridiculous is that? - Napalm and chemicals that make the leaves of the trees fall down isn't the real solution :)
We can agree that at the time of the Vietnam War the US had the most advanced military in the World.
How did you like the video?
|
Reacz
Caldari Empirius Enigmus Navy Insurgency
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 15:41:00 -
[365]
I was gonna say North Koreas army but man, I been killing these dudes left and right in Crysis.
Poor show guys, poor show. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24000 bytes -Valorem ([email protected]) |
Benny Hill
Caldari Deceased Inc
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 19:28:00 -
[366]
Originally by: Kyanzes
Look what happened to the US in Vietnam. The US lost the war. Why? Not very easy to answer it in two sentences, but basically:
- USSR supported North Vietnam (hence no you can't go nuclear) - Vietnamese are not easy to subjugate - The US tried to use an ARMY against guerillas, I mean how ridiculous is that? - Napalm and chemicals that make the leaves of the trees fall down isn't the real solution :)
We can agree that at the time of the Vietnam War the US had the most advanced military in the World.
None of the above. The NVA generals have already explained why they won the political war, and that was the US congress and presidents limited the US's strategic bombing campaigns, hamstringing target selection and places to attack, in particular after the Tet offensive. North Vietnam won the hearts and minds of the US press which gave them more resolve.
There is nothing special about the Vietnam people, or the act of guerrilla warfare that makes them winners. Vietnam was occupied by Japan and quite easily in the early 40's. and Giap in his memoir (as opposed to the urban myths about his memoirs) states they could easily lose 10 men for every American (when they lost even more than that ratio). That is not a good guerrilla warfare. In fact, its really bad. Guerrilla warfare was not really a tactic of North Vietnam, but a part of Three-Phases of communist war that originated in the revolution in China, propaganda, guerrilla, conventional army, and that is evident regarding the many forces in Vietnam such as the Viet Cong, and the North Vietamese Army, and their unmitigated success in the press - that got all intermingled. And - that strategy was one of the failure of the Tet Offensive, the communists expected a large civilian uprising which never occurred. The Tet offensive also wiped our the guerrilla forces. The Viet Cong only managed on by replacements from the North Vietamese Army. Their tactics destroyed themselves.
Its also hard to say the US lost the war even in a political sense. After the Tet offensive and the devastating losses the North Vietnam suffered, the US began to steadily reduce its forces. Just like today with the Democratic congress in the US right now, the Democratic congress in the 1970's sought political war on Nixon and cut out the funding for South Vietnam military aid for their own defense, and withdrew all remaining US forces.
Without the political will of the US to make strategic bombing an everyday occurrence, there were problems from the beginning.
|
Father Weebles
|
Posted - 2007.12.20 05:08:00 -
[367]
Originally by: Aram Thracius clearly Switzerland; if nuclear war breaks out, they'll go "what was that noise?"
-Robin Williams (sort of)
lol
"You leave anything for us?" "Just bodies." |
Keorythe
Caldari Terra Rosa Militia Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2007.12.20 06:20:00 -
[368]
Edited by: Keorythe on 20/12/2007 06:20:50 I'm still trying to figure out how the hell South Korea ended up at the bottom of the pack below South Africa and Pakistan. Heck I still can't understand how they are below most of the EU countries listed. South Koreans are on a constant state of alert and have been training hardcore for well over a decade now. Even the US military gives mad props to those little guys. They're like the US ally version of Ghurkhas. Mean bastards!
South Africa? What the hell? Why are they even on that list?
The UK vs. US ****ing content will continue on with one or the other coming up top due to the poster's nationality.
|
Gealbhan
Caldari The SAS The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2007.12.20 14:32:00 -
[369]
Originally by: GhostXile Just wondering what country everyone thinks has the best military/armed forces all around, in the world. When it's all said and done, who would still be standing? But there is a catch, it can only be conventional warfare!! What do you think?
A purely conventional war? China. Sheer manpower alone will result in victory for China in the absence of nuclear weaponry from the battle field. They would win by attrition.
"Concentrate all your fire on one target, when it is destroyed, move on to the next. That is how you secure victory". - Tactica Imperium. |
Ortu Konsinni
KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.20 15:40:00 -
[370]
As a Swiss citizen myself, I can't believe some people suggested the Swiss army. The Swiss army is an elaborate and very expensive joke, and the blind fanaticism that a lot of Swiss people have toward their army remains a mystery to me.
The vast majority of its soldiers have no real combat experience whatsoever and never will have any, and peacekeeping missions in Kosovo don't count here. They know how to shoot their guns, fly their planes, drive their tanks, but beyond that, come on...
On the other hand, they'd surely give a hard time to someone invading Switzerland because of all the fortifications, underground fortresses (especially in the alps), highways that convert to emergency plane runways, air bases hidden inside mountains, etc., so they're probably well adapted to defensive warfare, but they're still highly inexperienced no matter how you look at it.
I'll bet ***** bin Laden's army of cavemen is more dangerous if you put Switzerland's hardware and terrain in their hands. --- High quality pics of most EVE ships! |
|
Tarquin Tarquinius
Gallente Escorts of Eve
|
Posted - 2007.12.20 16:59:00 -
[371]
Originally by: Keorythe South Africa? What the hell? Why are they even on that list?
My inclusion of South Africa was mainly based on the fact that in the mid-90s a couple hundred South African mercenaries from Executive Outcomes managed to force the RUF in Sierra Leone into a cease fire....a job that 6,000 UN troops couldn't do. They did similar things in Angola and New Guinea
...but admittidly the current South African army isn't the same as the one they had during the border wars and late apartheid era. ------ Any factual errors or mistakes in spelling and grammar should be attributed solely to me and not my nation of origin. |
Anya Sardukar
|
Posted - 2007.12.22 09:06:00 -
[372]
I don't know who's funnier in this thread: the morons or the trolls.
|
Sylus Grymme
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
|
Posted - 2007.12.27 14:22:00 -
[373]
Edited by: Sylus Grymme on 27/12/2007 14:26:55 I apologize to whoever started this thread for bringing up Clinton and sort of hijacking it. God help us if Ms Clinton getĘs in. Can you say America Foreign Legion?!?!?!
Damn, I just did it againą Disregard the above statement about an American Foreign Legion.
Originally by: Shirazz Brits have the best spec ops: SAS ftw!
I'd say Israelis/Brits are 1/1a followed by the Americans.
Respectfully Submitted, Sylus Grymme, LtJG Caldari Independent Navy Reserve |
Sniper Wolf18
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 00:05:00 -
[374]
God this is pathetic.....but mildly entertaining
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 02:49:00 -
[375]
Originally by: Ortu Konsinni As a Swiss citizen myself, I can't believe some people suggested the Swiss army. The Swiss army is an elaborate and very expensive joke, and the blind fanaticism that a lot of Swiss people have toward their army remains a mystery to me.
<snip>
On the other hand, they'd surely give a hard time to someone invading Switzerland because of all the fortifications, underground fortresses (especially in the alps), highways that convert to emergency plane runways, air bases hidden inside mountains, etc., so they're probably well adapted to defensive warfare, but they're still highly inexperienced no matter how you look at it.
I think you answered yourself. My understanding was that the Swiss probably could not stop a serious invasion but they would make the invader pay an unacceptably high price for what they get (so they just leave the Swiss alone). Sounds like a good plan to me.
The Swiss may lack experience but they know their mountains and have prepared defenses in advance (IIRC they still keep horses too which almost no army does these days but horses are great in mountains where Jeeps and such cannot go).
|
Xauxau
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 04:43:00 -
[376]
Originally by: Gealbhan A purely conventional war? China. Sheer manpower alone will result in victory for China in the absence of nuclear weaponry from the battle field. They would win by attrition.
Discounting the invasion of Tibet, which had no army, The Peoples Army has fought three serious wars against foreign powers since the Communist Party came to power in 1949, all with overwhelming local manpower advantages on the Chinese side. One in Korea against the US & its allies. One with India along the India-Tibet border. One in Vietnam against the NVA alone. All three resulted in spectacular loss of life for the Chinese, with little political or territorial gain to compensate.
Its true that China has spent a great deal of money modernizing its armed forces over the past 10 years. But so have its neighbors (excepting Russia) and all its other potential foes.
And attrition is a bad strategy against the USA in particular, which inflicted kill ratios of over 500 to 1 in its last high intensity war, and somewhere between 25 and 50 to 1 in its current low intensity conflict in Iraq. China's got massive manpower reserves...but not THAT massive.
Fortunately for the Chinese, its leaders seem to have finally realized that, frankly, they (the leadership) stink at waging war. Commerce & trade are better instruments by which to exercise power. Now if America leaders would just remember that.
|
Ademaro Imre
Caldari Eye of God
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 04:54:00 -
[377]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ortu Konsinni As a Swiss citizen myself, I can't believe some people suggested the Swiss army. The Swiss army is an elaborate and very expensive joke, and the blind fanaticism that a lot of Swiss people have toward their army remains a mystery to me.
<snip>
On the other hand, they'd surely give a hard time to someone invading Switzerland because of all the fortifications, underground fortresses (especially in the alps), highways that convert to emergency plane runways, air bases hidden inside mountains, etc., so they're probably well adapted to defensive warfare, but they're still highly inexperienced no matter how you look at it.
I think you answered yourself. My understanding was that the Swiss probably could not stop a serious invasion but they would make the invader pay an unacceptably high price for what they get (so they just leave the Swiss alone). Sounds like a good plan to me.
The Swiss may lack experience but they know their mountains and have prepared defenses in advance (IIRC they still keep horses too which almost no army does these days but horses are great in mountains where Jeeps and such cannot go).
I may be wrong, but didn't H itler consider invading Switzerland, but decided against for the above reasons, they were staying neutral and it just was not worth the effort, manpower and resources, even though the Germans could have done it. |
Horza Otho
Cosmic Fusion
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:04:00 -
[378]
The us, only because of the money spent. 1 trillion dollars spent on the military. 1 trillion.
Really does make you think. In the middle east a hundreds of thousands of people died because of the measles i think it was. The Vaccine for that costs 50 cents.
But who cares about that?
WTA 30mSP Char |
Dimitry Kalashnikov
The Black Fleet The Cosa Nostra
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 12:53:00 -
[379]
Now I know people are gonna laugh but I think Canada. They have like under 100,000 troops but they are well armed and very well trained due to the many environments they can train within in Canada, caves, snow, heat, mountains, plains etc.
And I'm not native to Canada. ============================================== The thousand ships of the Black Fleet Corporation descent upon you! Our Void L will blot out the sun! |
Dimitry Kalashnikov
The Black Fleet The Cosa Nostra
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 12:56:00 -
[380]
Also a good military should not be a source of pride. The fact that we need them doesn't say much for humanity. ============================================== The thousand ships of the Black Fleet Corporation descent upon you! Our Void L will blot out the sun! |
|
Liu Kaskakka
PAK
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 13:03:00 -
[381]
Originally by: Horza Otho The us, only because of the money spent. 1 trillion dollars spent on the military. 1 trillion.
Really does make you think. In the middle east a hundreds of thousands of people died because of the measles i think it was. The Vaccine for that costs 50 cents.
But who cares about that?
But if there were hundreds of thousands more middle eastern ppl to kill, the US military expenditure would collapse the world economy for decades.
King Liu is RIGHT!!
|
Tarquin Tarquinius
Gallente Escorts of Eve
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 15:49:00 -
[382]
Originally by: Dimitry Kalashnikov Also a good military should not be a source of pride. The fact that we need them doesn't say much for humanity.
Iceland and Ireland should both be very proud of their militaries then. ------ Any factual errors or mistakes in spelling and grammar should be attributed solely to me and not my nation of origin. |
Ademaro Imre
Caldari Eye of God
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 18:26:00 -
[383]
Originally by: Horza Otho The us, only because of the money spent. 1 trillion dollars spent on the military. 1 trillion.
Really does make you think. In the middle east a hundreds of thousands of people died because of the measles i think it was. The Vaccine for that costs 50 cents.
But who cares about that?
Are you trying to sum up a 2-3 year moving average? |
Captain FletcherMiles
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 18:36:00 -
[384]
Originally by: northwesten USA for best tech weapons
UK for best trained and most professional forces in the World.
Yes.
|
Dimitry Kalashnikov
The Black Fleet The Cosa Nostra
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 20:40:00 -
[385]
Greatest Military on Earth. An utter wave of death and destruction. ============================================== The thousand ships of the Black Fleet Corporation descent upon you! Our Void L will blot out the sun! |
Wu Xiang
Prospero Incorperated
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 20:49:00 -
[386]
Wow, can of worms...
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] [13]:: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |