strategic nuclear devices in the 500 kiloton range...will take out whole cities, let alone rump-state armies in the field.....
2006-06-13 10:06:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Its not me Its u 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Their cohesive training and discipline.
They have awesome nuclear weapons (Russia has some even bigger), but they won't use them unless other countries first use theirs. That unimaginable destructive force is a bottled up genie, tucked away--so that isn't the most powerful military weapon.
They have incredibly precise-targeted weapons. The first Gulf war gave the best evidence of that, dropping bombs down air vents and through windows so they could blow up deep inside buildings and do their best damage. The collateral damage done today is peanuts next to the mountains of damage done in previous wars. We used to bomb whole cities in other wars in order to destroy an enemy's weapons capacity. Today we target individual structures and cry when the neighbors got hurt. That is why the current enemies like to work at home, because we give our troops so much grief over the wife and kids that get killed when we take out someone's little livingroom bomb factory.
With all our wonderful weapons, including the stealth aircraft, the turbine-powered ships, the full battle tanks that can outrun my car, the ability, even preference, to fight precisely in the dead of night, the satellites that can hear me on my cell phone and see me walk across a field almost anywhere in the world--all works most impressively, most awesomely, because we have the most well-trained, level-headed, and flexibly-capable soldiers, sailors, and airmen in the world. It isn't the gun or the bomb, it is the one who uses it. They enemy may have an advantage in cruelty and savagery, but our people who weild our weapons are the American military's most powerful weapon.
Case in point is Iraq. Like it or not, WMDs or not, we had a much, much small military force applied to attack Saddam's military and in two or three weeks we had no one left in Iraqi uniform to fight, they all had surrendered, disbanded, and gone home (except the dead in combat). As with the previous Gulf war, we had far, far fewer casualties than they did, something like 200 to 1, and the Iraqis lost almost a quarter-million fighting men. In this war, we'd wipe out a unit of Iraqis so impressively that the units beside them would surrender. We had them lay down their weapons and go home, and they did. Our troops are really impressive.
2006-06-13 04:05:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Rabbit 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would have to say the men and women of the military!
2006-06-13 03:48:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by hoss170 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
The professionalism, dedication, intelligence, creativity, experience and training of American military personnel.
2006-06-13 04:01:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by fhornsr 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
public ignorance & apathy. 'they hate us because we're gree', people actually believe that shlt. if only prewar iran, iraq & afghanistan could be seen. they never hated us till we went to war there against russia. it was carved up after ww2 & we (usa & ussr/china) spent the last 50 years selling arms to & ecouaging the warring lords. terrorism is retaliation. the hate religion teaches is based on ignorance.
2006-06-13 04:01:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
A US Marine
2006-06-13 04:43:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by BettyJetty 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The individual soldier, sailor, airman, or marine.
2006-06-13 03:47:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by J.D. 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
People our mind.
2016-09-21 22:03:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by JOSEPH 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
atomic bomb
2006-06-13 03:48:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by justatrucking2000 1
·
0⤊
0⤋