Best Infantry : The Viet Cong?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

GOP 11/1/2006 6:28:51 PM

Don't ever compare the VC to the Apaches. The Apaches were truly the best light infantry this world has seen, and that is no lie. Do some research into them, they were absolute bad-a**es. They were EXTREMELY ferocious, and the 1800's British had nothing on them. It took a couple of months for our forces to force the British to withdraw...it was several years until our forces eventually overwhelmed them and outnumbered them.

uh when was this you forced the british to withdraw in a couple of months?

Last week. You didn't hear about that?

Seriously, I was think war of 1812, but it was probably more like 2-3 years (I don't know much about that conflict).

Quote Reply

Ehran 11/2/2006 6:01:20 PM

only time that sorta fits into what you were thinking that comes to mind is new orleans right at the tail end of the war. brits pulled out of there quite shortly after their defeat.

interesting what ifs with that battle. i think i would have tried to reduce the forts obstructing my path instead of bypassing them. then when i made my assault on the city i would have had my artillery which would have been quite helpful.

the british commander tried an end run around the forts by marching his army through the swamps where a large number of soldiers and porters were eaten by gators and his arty train bogged hopelessly. it's actually surprising the brits managed to get an attack going at all given the terrain they had to cross to reach new orleans.

Quote Reply

BasinBictory 11/3/2006 5:43:34 AM

The War of 1812 was, for most intents and purposes, a tie. The Treaty of Ghent established that everything would stay the way it was ante-bellum, but it is taught in the United States as an American victory. Most of the history I've read on it focuses on the Battle of New Orleans, but tend to neglect how we got our butts handed to us in the invasion of Canada. The British learned that taking back their American colonies was a no-go (it had been some 30 years after they were kicked off the Continent) particularly as they had bigger things to worry about (that damned Corsican Corporal)

Quote Reply

AlbanyRifles Ehran 11/3/2006 11:10:33 AM

Also, don't forget Plattsburg. Brits got knocked back there as well.

That said, stupid war for both sides. Hard to believe we never fought again.

Quote Reply

DynamicTraveler 11/3/2006 11:24:58 AM

I wold puthem more on th elevel of some native American tribe like the Apache, who preferred to fight on foot.

It was not meant as an insult only has a means of comparison of category not quality levels. Not many people think of the Apache as an Infantry force but because of TV and movies think of them as cavalry. They were tough within their limits and within the proper terrain.

The Comanche managed to drive the Apache out of most of Texas because their horse-mounted tactics on the plains were superior to the foot fighting Apache. On the other hand Comanche and other tribes got their rears handed to them when trying to fight them in the mountains of the Southwest or West Texas.

The being said the Apache and Comanche could be handled if fought using similar tactics like the Texas Rangers did at Plum Creek and Eagle Mountain for example.

I would put he Apache up their in my top 5 Guerilla forces but not among conventional forces.

The Comanche's had effective tactics against the Apache and the Texas Rangers, but they were not the same quality horsemen as the Ogallala Sioux.

Quote Reply

Yimmy 11/3/2006 12:28:08 PM

That said, stupid war for both sides. Hard to believe we never fought again.

Thats like saying, "At least it isn't raining". :)

Quote Reply

Ehran 11/3/2006 4:52:06 PM

thing is the british never seriously tried to reclaim the colonies or they would have done something a wee bit more ambitious than the limited raiding they did on the east coast. the brits were hip deep fighting napoleon at that time and simply didn't have the resources nor really inclinations to "win" that war. if anything they were interested in limiting american westward expansion but even that was pretty half hearted in the effort dept. it's always struck me as funny that a war in which the americans achieved virtually none of their goals is taught as a great victory. the closest thing to a victory condition achieved was getting the british to agree to stop impressing british sailors off american ships. a goal that could have been achieved a whole lot easier diplomatically once napoleon was gone.

Quote Reply

HYPOCENTER No 11/3/2006 6:04:01 PM

The VC were incredibly resilient and their ability to endure hardship was what made them so tough (and capable when you put them into the context of the conflict). But that's all i'd say for them...

I agree with DA, the standard US infantryman or marine is the best infantry ever in the histroy of the world (in every single conceivable way).

Quote Reply

Heorot 11/3/2006 6:24:50 PM

It appears to me that the US INFANTRYMAN doesn’t actually do much fighting other than defensively or against inferior opposition. They actually seem to operate in the role of ‘reconnaissance in force’. In other words, they advance until they meet resistance, and then call down the air force to bomb the sh1t out of the opposition. In my view that’s effective, but it doesn’t demonstrate that they are good infantry.

Quote Reply

GOP 11/3/2006 6:45:41 PM

It appears to me that the US INFANTRYMAN doesn’t
actually do much fighting other than defensively or against inferior opposition.
They actually seem to operate in the role of ‘reconnaissance in force’. In
other words, they advance until they meet resistance, and then call down the
air force to bomb the sh1t out of the opposition. In my view that’s effective,
but it doesn’t demonstrate that they are good infantry.

You foreigners are so jealous of our airpower. What in the f*ck is the point in our infantry fighting other forces without airpower just to prove a point? We like to send our troops home, and give them every chance to survive and win. They are very good infantry, and have done the job many times without airpower. But if airpower availible, then let's kill the enemy and win the battle...the British and whoever else can fight long, protracted infantry battles with the insurgents. As for the US, we'll engage the enemy then bomb them to h3ll and back...and go home in 1/4 the time without a scratch.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT