Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where?

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 NEXT

S.C.P RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? 3/2/2005 3:39:52 PM

Russias forces, despite their size would crumble at the hands of the British and a few other European countries simply becuase Russia's troops are poorly trained and poorly equiped with old weapons. Its well known that AK's are useless unless used at close quaters,what main Tank are the using these days? the T80 ? no match for Challenger2's,M1's or even a german Lepord. The state of the russian Navy:poor the Airforce:poor but its still not possible to underestimate their MIG's. The problem with Russia is they try to make everything big and not size effective;e.g; compare those giant Russian submarines to the small British Subs both equal in firepower, Britains having the edge, but which is the biggest and easiest target? same with their surface fleet too..

Quote Reply

USN-MID RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? 3/2/2005 5:08:34 PM

High Seas-USN...sorry couldn't resist. Desert-I'm sorry but I've never heard any complaints about US armor before, so i don't think there's any doubts that they're definitely tops. I've heard lots of other nations pick apart and criticize US INFANTRY, NEVER heard criticism of US armor before. Not to mention the US Marine armor in piss-old M60A3s still tore through the Iraqis in DSI. In fact, i don't think ANYBODY except maybe the Israelis, have the same real-simulation desert training facilities the US Army does.

Quote Reply

EW3 RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? 3/2/2005 5:38:13 PM

Just as in any type of battle it's not just tank on tank, or man on man. It's the folks that can destroy the enemy first. When the US fights in the desert there are aircraft overhead ready to join the fray. look at Afghanistan. A veritable handful of SOFs were able to direct deadly air power against the enemy. Just last night I saw a show on PBS which reported an incident in GWII where a column of 30 Iraqi tanks were moving up against a small number of Abrahms. Wisely the US commander called up the B-52 loitering overhead and within seconds a CBU-97(by description not name) hit the front half of the column destroy about 15 tanks, the rest of the tanks turned tail and headed home. It's who can bring the best combined arms in a given environment that matters. Fallujah was another excellent example of airpower, airtillary, armor and men. Granted the enemy behaved stupidly, but precision airpower and artillary made them even more stupid.

Quote Reply

HedLessHelmet Nature vs. Nurture 3/2/2005 6:31:34 PM

Except in the most extreme and artificial environments, nature vs. nurture can play a big role in fighting capabilities.... in the human angle that is: Desert - U.S. Army --- How about certain Turks, Bedouins and Rajputs who spend all their lives in deserts and some devote lives for war? Mountain - Gurkhas --- OTOH Royal Marine Commandos have been trained by Sherpas themselves, so training comes into play. Jungle - Australian Army --- Again pitted aginst Dominican Republic Army or Dyaks? ---------- Of course in extreme and artificial environments te debate disappears Arctic - British Royal Marines Urban - U.S. Marines (Falluja was a big town by most standards ;-)) Desert Seiges, High-Altitude, Off-Track Jungles and real metropolises are much better for analyzing non-native, but specialized soldiers.

Quote Reply

Herc the Merc RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? 3/2/2005 6:34:24 PM

Me in the Bar

Quote Reply

southern cross RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? 3/3/2005 2:42:51 AM

Beach-US marines Jungle-Australian Army Artic- I dont know, there a few contenders Desert-US Army/Marines

Quote Reply

Aussiegunner1 RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? - Ehran 3/3/2005 5:00:28 AM

You have to remember that all the best Gurkas are probably in the British and Indian army's, with only the ones that failed to get in or who have retired being back home in Nepal. Might be another explanation for their apparent lack of success against the Maoists.

Quote Reply

Aussiegunner1 RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? 3/3/2005 5:03:36 AM

"Beach-US marines" Happy to agree that the US Marines are the best amphibious operaters in the world.

Quote Reply

IsoT s.c.p. Well known? 3/3/2005 6:39:40 AM

Where is it "well known" that Russian infantryweaposn are obsolete?!?!?! AK whatever still kills you pretty dead in all engagement ranges under 150m. I know the new bodyarmor is supposed to stop m43 bullet, but still. AK 74 then is a bit different story, suberrb wound ballistics in all ranges, but lacks the penetration of 7,62x39. Taking into account service histories of AW-85 and Ak-74 I'd be more worried about "bad weapons" on british hands.

Quote Reply

F22 RE:Terrain Warfare: Who Fights Best Where? 3/3/2005 10:13:51 PM

Excellent discussion. Just what I was looking for. A few additional thoughts on my choices: Desert - Desert warfare is armored warfare, and the biggest tank fights since WW2 have been won by Israel and the US. Man for man, and tank for tank, the Israelis are probably the equal to Americans, but I give the US the edge because of factors such as logistics, C4I, CAS, and material quantity. I don't mention the U.S. Marines because they are a lighter outfit. Excellent desert warriors, as OIF demonstrated, but they don't field the heavy formations that the Army does. Mountain - Frankly, I drew a blank on this one. I threw the Gurkhas out there because they come from Nepal and you can't lose with Gurkhas on your side. Jungle - Diggers handed the Japanese a number of defeats---jungle warfare experts themselves---during WW2, and have gotten better ever since. Arctic - I know of the Royal Marines by reputation. I don't know much about the arctic capabilities of the Scandinavian countries, but it stands to reason they ought to be good, especially the Finns. Urban - Look at the Marines combat record: Hue 1968 and Fallujah 2004, for starters. It has been said the Marines took heavy casualties fighting an inferior enemy. For comparison, consider the Russian attempts to capture Grozny from the Chechens. link

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT