Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Most feared modern army
smudge    4/18/2004 10:46:27 AM
What army would be the most feared not in terms of size and equipment but in terms of tactics,history, and over all profesionalism? the mongol army israel defence force
 
Quote    Reply

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 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45   NEXT
Heorot    RE:Tigerassault   9/19/2004 4:58:18 PM
What a load of bollocks. Where do you get this tripe from?
 
Quote    Reply

Ad    RE:Tiggerassault   9/20/2004 7:37:52 PM
“In the Kosovo war, After NATO had done pounding the Serbs for more than a month, it was left to forces from a few European nations to send in troops to take over the transfer of power. The Brits went in, in style! Inspite of the fact that the Serbs in Kosovo had been devastated, had all but surrendered and were pulling out very rapidly, The British Army moved in crouching and cringing behind their cannon fodder Gurkha units. The gurkhas were sent in for risky building securing raids, the Gurkhas were told to go in when some local armed resistance was detected, and whenever the situation appeared to be anything worse than a sunday afternoon stroll, the British units would flee, and the Gurkha units would move in. Any other candidates” You Tigerassault, are what we call here in Britain a wanker of the highest order. You don’t deserve my time to inform you of the realities, so shut yer’ grid kid.
 
Quote    Reply

machete charger    RE:Tigerassault   9/24/2004 1:51:56 AM
don't underestimate the british. They hacked Napoleon to pieces in the war of 1812 and would've ripped the U.S. too hadn't Napoleon distracted them. also they fought bravely WWII and I. (granted in II they just had a few lucky strikes). IF they have one weakness is that when organization falls apart so do they.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear    RE:Tigerassault   9/24/2004 2:42:22 AM
What nationality are you??
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:Tigerassault   9/24/2004 7:59:44 AM
You are quite wrong here. The British army pus a strong emphasis on small unit leadership and improvisation. When things go wrong, British troops will make do. Back in the 80’s I remembers seeing some stuff about NATO exercises in Europe. The US troops were considered to be well equipped but became paralysed if their communications/logistics were disrupted while the British troops usually completed their objectives. I believe part of this was due to the levels of briefing. The British then were giving details down to quite a low point in the organisation so everyone knew what was required of them whereas the US troops needed guidance from above. Of course, the US was mostly conscript then so things SHOULD be much better now.
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:Tigerassault- machete charger    9/24/2004 8:00:39 AM
Sorry, that last post was addressed to machete charger
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    RE:American Infantry Thru History-Timon Phocas   9/24/2004 9:06:09 AM
You know, I am REALLY getting fed up with people who don't know history but believe the propaganda put out about the American Infantry in World War II. 1. Waiting for artillery fire. Attacking when you have supporting fires available and not using them is not aggressive, it is criminal. 2. US Army doctrine in World War II was to sue the holding attack. That workded from platoon through division. One-third of the element maneuvered to find the enemy...when the enemy was found he was pounded by artillery fire and then another third of the force maneuvered to outflank the enemy with the remaining third in reserve. 3. The airborne divisions made great headlines, but did not win that war. (And I am a life member of the 101st Airborne Division Association, so don't think a don't admire and respect those guys). As great as what the 82 ABN & 101 ABN did in Normandy, look at what the 29th Infantry Division did...in their first combat that where ordered to take the right flank of Omaha beach...and they did. Look at what the 26th Division and the 90th Division did in horrendous weather on the 3rd Army attack towards Bastogne. Look at the divisons of the 7th Army coming up through the Vosges against superior numbers and winning...or taking Metz. 4. The Marines fought in the Central Pacific against a tough and determined enemy....but tise were limited land campaigns which did not display large scale aggressive attacks...it was battalion to regimental size attacks except in a couple of instances (Saipan, Okinawa). And because it was amphibious assaults, it was by nature straight ahead, vicious, which often implied greater aggressiveness...this is often cited as proof that Marines were more aggressive than Army. The truth is, they had no other choice. Oh and BTW, the USMC had 6 divisions which fought in World War II...all very good. The US Army had 21 Divisions fighting in the Pacific theater alone.
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:Tigerassault   9/24/2004 4:09:36 PM
What nationality are you? it's not really a fair question Dropbear. whatever he answers, assuming he does, simply tars another nationality with his particular foolishness.
 
Quote    Reply

machete charger    RE:Most feared modern army   9/26/2004 1:19:41 AM
To answer the original post: Germany: WWII and WWI they were great, except for diplomatic affairs, and the leaders that held the real power were mind-numbingly stupid. However they still showed a great display of field tactics, practicing the blitzkrieg, the best offensive tactic ever made(personal opinnion). It also showed the best trained troops in both WWs, and had Erwin Rommel, the best of the military strategists in WWII.
 
Quote    Reply

PuckaMan    Erwin Rommel   9/26/2004 10:46:44 AM
..... was not a great strategist, he was a masterful tactician, and any student of military history knows this all-important decision. Rommel was a fine general, but his Strategic oveview was limited by his servility to Hitler. On a strategic level, Manstien and Guderian were far better. Pucka
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics