Originally by: ISD Valorem

---

The Devs have stated multiple times that they are looking at the Amarr issues.

---

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h

---

EDIT: Seems the Brits have done this too --
- British Royal Marine Christopher Maddison killed when his river patrol boat was hit by missiles after being wrongly identified as an enemy vessel approaching a Royal Engineers checkpoint on the Al-Faw Peninsula, Iraq.

- British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight, blowing off the turret and killing two crew members, Corporal Stephen John Allbutt and Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke

---

Originally by: Yarrick

---

Edited by: Yarrick on 27/11/2007 01:46:04

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h

---

EDIT: Seems the Brits have done this too --
- British Royal Marine Christopher Maddison killed when his river patrol boat was hit by missiles after being wrongly identified as an enemy vessel approaching a Royal Engineers checkpoint on the Al-Faw Peninsula, Iraq.

- British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight, blowing off the turret and killing two crew members, Corporal Stephen John Allbutt and Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke

---

ffs guys, can we please not use the names of dead soldiers too prove an e-peen argument on an internet spaceships forum.
F-ucking disgraceful!!!

---

Originally by: Yarrick

---

Edited by: Yarrick on 27/11/2007 01:46:04

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h

---

EDIT: Seems the Brits have done this too --
- British Royal Marine Christopher Maddison killed when his river patrol boat was hit by missiles after being wrongly identified as an enemy vessel approaching a Royal Engineers checkpoint on the Al-Faw Peninsula, Iraq.

- British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight, blowing off the turret and killing two crew members, Corporal Stephen John Allbutt and Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke

---

ffs guys, can we please not use the names of dead soldiers too prove an e-peen argument on an internet spaceships forum.
F-ucking disgraceful!!!

---

Originally by: Derovius Vaden

---

Originally by: Yarrick

---

Edited by: Yarrick on 27/11/2007 01:46:04

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h

---

EDIT: Seems the Brits have done this too --
- British Royal Marine Christopher Maddison killed when his river patrol boat was hit by missiles after being wrongly identified as an enemy vessel approaching a Royal Engineers checkpoint on the Al-Faw Peninsula, Iraq.

- British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight, blowing off the turret and killing two crew members, Corporal Stephen John Allbutt and Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke

---

ffs guys, can we please not use the names of dead soldiers too prove an e-peen argument on an internet spaceships forum.
F-ucking disgraceful!!!

---

Using their names shows more respect for them than the baldfaced number that many people would otherwise consider for a discussion like this. Many of the individuals in here seem completely oblivious to the notion that all those casualties were men, same as you, me or that guy down the street, who died for someone elses politics.

---

Originally by: ISD Valorem

---

The Devs have stated multiple times that they are looking at the Amarr issues.

---

Originally by: Gladiator Jonny

---

Ill openly admit that america have the best army in the world.
But being british, I dont mean it.


Granted, they would have an amazing army, nicely trained, well equiped and good technology.
Now where in all the training, equpiment and technology is the little thingy that stops you shooting your fkin friends?

my views alone.

---

Originally by: Derovius Vaden

---

The plain and simple fact of things is that the US armed forces has not taken on a "modern" army since the Korean War. Afghanistan and Iraq were fielding equipment that the soviets were in the first Afghan war, with limited modifications.

Every armed conflict the US has participated in where the opposing force was sufficiently up to date in its ability to make war has often ended very poorly in terms of performance

....

All these F35 and B2 planes good for surgical strikes, but how specialized is the fuel that these aircraft use? Are its munitions standard, or do they have to be custom mounted before being usable? It doesn't matter how fancy you make a weapon, you can still just as easily kill someone with a goddamn stick if you have enough sticks and enough men.

---

Originally by: Derovius Vaden

---

Using their names shows more respect for them than the baldfaced number that many people would otherwise consider for a discussion like this. Many of the individuals in here seem completely oblivious to the notion that all those casualties were men, same as you, me or that guy down the street, who died for someone elses politics.

---

Originally by: Valan

---

We need to ditch the SA80 and buy an American assault rile.

---

Originally by: Mudkest

---

Originally by: pwnedgato

---

Simply put the US military is the most powerful. Why? because of all the militaries in the world we are the only country in the world that has the capability to move our forces where they need to go.

---

meanwhile, you are shipping reservists! to iraq and afghanistan cause you dont have enough troops otherwise.

and how many wars have you actualy won in the past 100 years? WWI? nope, you werent in it(merely sold supplies to the highest bidder, wich wasnt germany) WWII? it were the Russians that beat ******, not the US army. How about Korea? longest cease-fire ever.. The pig bay?(well I suppose that wasnt the US military though) Afghanistan? still going on. Iraq? dunno, what's that war about so how can you say you win or loose it?

You are confusing most expensive with best...

---

Originally by: ISD Valorem

---

The Devs have stated multiple times that they are looking at the Amarr issues.

---

Originally by: Ademaro Imre

---

Originally by: Derovius Vaden

---

The plain and simple fact of things is that the US armed forces has not taken on a "modern" army since the Korean War. Afghanistan and Iraq were fielding equipment that the soviets were in the first Afghan war, with limited modifications.

Every armed conflict the US has participated in where the opposing force was sufficiently up to date in its ability to make war has often ended very poorly in terms of performance

....

All these F35 and B2 planes good for surgical strikes, but how specialized is the fuel that these aircraft use? Are its munitions standard, or do they have to be custom mounted before being usable? It doesn't matter how fancy you make a weapon, you can still just as easily kill someone with a goddamn stick if you have enough sticks and enough men.

---

Every armed conflict? You always make me laugh. The first Armed conflicts that the Americans were in, even as colonies and fighting to get away from the colonies went very well, and so did the rest.

You should look up the stats of the Korean War, and the Vietnam war, especially the air wars.
You also need to acquaint yourself with the roles of the B2 bomber and other stealth assets. It really won't matter how many soldiers you have, or what weapons they have, if they have no idea where to go or what to do and have no logistics support.

---

Originally by: Thorliaron

---

yeah in Korea you lost 95% of the country then took back 95% of the country to then only end up with half the country - sounds like a total victory to me. Oh and Vietnam wa a real victory aswell right?. Air wars?..what your planes vs rust buckets and thin air?

---

Originally by: ISD Valorem

---

The Devs have stated multiple times that they are looking at the Amarr issues.

---

Quote:

---

Oh and Vietnam wa a real victory aswell right?.

---

Originally by: Thorliaron

---

yeah in Korea you lost 95% of the country then took back 95% of the country to then only end up with half the country - sounds like a total victory to me. Oh and Vietnam wa a real victory aswell right?. Air wars?..what your planes vs rust buckets and thin air?

---

Originally by: James Swindle

---

Edited by: James Swindle on 26/11/2007 19:17:49
I would post a nice and long informed post, but i just really can't be bothered at the moment. However, anyone who thinks the USA has the best millitary is just wrong. I mean they can't even shoot the right people half the time. There has been several occasions in the Irag war alone (without mentioning other) when British service men and women have been shot by their US allies. Just goes to show how good their training must be.

---

Originally by: Ademaro Imre

---

Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 27/11/2007 08:01:09

Originally by: Mudkest

---

Originally by: pwnedgato

---

Simply put the US military is the most powerful. Why? because of all the militaries in the world we are the only country in the world that has the capability to move our forces where they need to go.

---

meanwhile, you are shipping reservists! to iraq and afghanistan cause you dont have enough troops otherwise.

and how many wars have you actualy won in the past 100 years? WWI? nope, you werent in it(merely sold supplies to the highest bidder, wich wasnt germany) WWII? it were the Russians that beat ******, not the US army. How about Korea? longest cease-fire ever.. The pig bay?(well I suppose that wasnt the US military though) Afghanistan? still going on. Iraq? dunno, what's that war about so how can you say you win or loose it?

You are confusing most expensive with best...

---

You lack basic knowledge uf the US Military. So that the US does not need to maintain a large standing Army, it does rely on reservists. War's in the last 100 years? In battle terms, World War One, World War Two, Korea (not counting the the ceasefire, the US would have went to the Chinese border and threatened nukes is the Chinese sent too many troops), Vietnam War, Grenada, Bosnia (that little place was too much for even NATO to take care of without the US), Gulf War I. (Seriously, Iraqi defenders were not worried about Egyptian tanks like they were M1's) And Al Qaeda has basically retreated out of Baghdad and into the country of Iraq and Afganistan. And the Cold War. There is a reason that there are still US military bases in Germany still. Who was the backbone of NATO during the cold war? British interceptors escorting Bears back to Russia?

As for World War One, the US was not in it? Denying that the US was not involved in WWI is like denying the Holocaust. The US had at least 2 million troops in the field and manned more miles of front than any other allied nation at the war's conclusion. The Russians barely beat H itler. For example, Russia only managed to build 900 some locomotives for their entire war effort. While fighting two war fronts, supplying England, the US built 2,000 locomotives for Russia, and then sailed them to Russia. That's just a sample of the logistics that the US supplied Russia with in addition to weapons, food, planes, tanks, and ammunition. And the US still supplied England with twice as much supplies than she did Russia.

---

Originally by: Paulo Damarr

---

That is a most Excellent Drake fitting, you are lucky to have survived.

---

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h

---

In the end in all these conflicts on paper the US did better. MUCH more enemy dead. More planes shot down and so on than what we lost. This clearly fails when the leaders of the enemy do not care for their soldiers or the civilians and only care to maintain power no matter the cost. In short to beat them you need to embark on a course of genocide as nothing short of that will stop those leaders. They'll sacrifice the last of their citizens in such cases. If you are unwilling to embark on genocide not sure how you could ever expect to win against them.

---