American soldiers versus British or Australian soldiers. Which do you prefer?

Question

Everybody knows that despite their justifications of invading Iraq and apparant "best intentions" for the Iraqi people, soldiers from America are doing a terrible job overall. Have you noticed that not only has the UK liberated the most territory in Iraq, but new governmental systems established by them are much less corrupt and more efficient? While American troops charge around towns shooting civilians and becoming despised by the Iraqi people, British and Australian troops are actually maintaining order, and are revered by the citizens. I don't know how the American citizens can just sit there and do nothing about the ill efficiency of their soldiers, their protecters. I don't mean to praise the POHMs for anything nor dis Americans, but come on!

Answer 1

Questioner, you are wrong on the following counts:

(1) The British did not liberate the most territory in that push beginning March 2003. They had just about all they could handle with Basra - an important objective, but certainly not the whole country. I didn't see a single British soldier after Kuwait, from all the way in the south to north in Mosul. Since you obviously weren't there for any of the fighting, you should read a firsthand account, of which there are many published.

(2) The British sector in Iraq is run more or less by the Badr Corps, and that area has plenty of problems. Where you get "much less corrupt and efficient" is worth more than a few laughs, as I have been all over Iraq and the picture is more or less the same everywhere, with few changes. As for British troops being revered, I can point to any number of incidents where that is not the case. If you really, really don't want to believe that, goto Camp Buerhling, Kuwait. There some British army personnel will show you a nice video montage of what one of their outposts went through in a year. The locals weren't throwing roses, that's for sure.

(3) I respect and admire British, Australian, and NATO military personnel immensely as fellow professionals. In many respects, they give the American military a run for the money (and some of their units are better, hands down, than comparative units in the American military). This does not invite stupid comparisons of "who sucks more" by total noncombatants whose closest encounter with arms during their lifetime will come from being on the receiving end of a mugging.

So when I hear some crap out of anyone's mouth that smacks of fantasy and invites attacks on military professionals regardless of nationality or combat branch, it makes me look askance at who could be so stupid as to think anyone should believe their codswallop.

You are a disgrace to to honesty, and every true fighting man around the world. It's a good thing you have no uniform to shame. Not only do you insult the American military, you invite retaliation from those idiots within the American public who don't know any better about our European and other allies to come out and display their ignorance as a counterpoint to yours. Shame on you.

Answer 2

The American soldiers are in the most volatile region of Iraq. Baghdad. To control Iraq, you have to have control of Baghdad. The most advanced and strongest military might is in Baghdad.

"Everybdy knows that the American soldiers are doing a terrible job overall?" Who's everyone? What you are saying makes no sense.

I am not sure what you are looking for but you don't know what you are talking about. And... if you think this will cause a petty disagreement between most Americans you are sorely mistaken. Even the most liberal of liberals and the most conservatives of conservatives will bring you to task for this post.

Personnally, I highly doubt that the UK soldiers or the Australian soldiers would even agree with you. Not that the Americans are any better than the Aussies or the British, but they are certainly no worse.

To answer your question... The Americans, hands down, the Americans.

"I don't mean to praise the POHMs for anything nor dis Americans, but come on!"

Sure you do, you just did.

Answer 3

I can't believe you've lowered yourself to try to pit the US soldiers against British or Aussie's. We're all in this together. We're working together. There is NO better force between the 3. We're all comrades in arms and trying to rid the world of terrorism. That should be the ONLY issue and not who's better. We've all lost enough in this war. Quit stirring the pot and let ALL the soldiers do their job so they can stabilize that country and hopefully come home soon.

Answer 4

And you received your information from first hand experience or are you another arm chair critic that’s sits there and talks s h i t but doesn’t know what the f u c k he is talking about? Hmm I am thinking arm chair critic that doesn’t know s h i t lol. What a dumb azz. If you have spent a single day in the middle east you would know that all 3 Armies bring a lot to the table. And how did the British liberate most of the territory in iraq when they only have 15% of what the U.S. has in country when it comes to soldier on the ground. lol.

Answer 5

I know what you mean, I think the Americans have a more gun-ho way of doing things, shoot first and ask questions later which is why they probably get no order, if you were from Iraq and some troops killed all your family in an air strike/shooting i think you'd start to side with terrorists to get revenge/peace. (I don’t agree with what terrorist do at all) British troops don’t have the supply’s and resource the American army has so they go round things differently and theirs a lot more rules of engagement etc. plus it’s the best army in the world!

Answer 6

Well Aussie, Obviously you know nothing about any of them. They are all excellent at what they do. They have to make decisions in a split second about things you've never even thought of, and they die if they are wrong. And people like Jason D apparently haven't spent much time around real soldiers either. Just his Militia buddies

Answer 7

US troops are my preference. They have nicer uniforms, cleaner boots & smarter haircuts. They are also much worse at soldiering than either Brits or Aussies.

Given a choice I'd rather face US troops in war. They let a lot of rounds off, but don't hit much. Unless you are a Brit or Aussie, in which case you'd better worry...heard of 'friendly fire'...

Now don't get me started on the Marines....

Answer 8

British and Australian above American it's a question of style

Answer 9

All soldiers in Iraq are the best in the world to me, and i am proud of American, British, Australian, Canadian and every other nation who are there.
American soldiers are up to their eyes in **** over there and are up there with the bravest men and women on the planet.

Answer 10

You have to remember that the British have been there and done it all before. Twenty years in Malaya, thirty years in Northern Ireland, so they already know all the tried and tested methods for defeating insurgents whereas American troops have to learn new lessons as they go along.