why are american soldiers only?

Question

half as good as the british soldier,lets face it they are not exactly proffesional otherwise they wouldn't shoot at their allies ,,

Answer 1

british forces are simply better trained and more professional

as for friendly fire it seems to come from a philophy of shoot at anything that moves. i blame this on american culture, after all, more people die from being shot in america than anywhere else in the world.

Answer 2

The American Soldier (Generic term for All branched of service Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine) is rated second to no one. A small percentage of the US population join the military to escape poverty. Most recruits join out of a sense of Duty to their Nation. Some join to gain valuable educational benefits. To the SSGT in the AF the Army hasn't met all of its recruiting goals. Otherwise please explain all of the enlistment bonuses that are be offered ?? Please check your info.
Now as for why the American Soldier is only "half as good" as the British soldier ?? Hmmm What century are you talking about ?? I am pretty sure that you are not talking about this century. And you couldn't be talking about this year. I have had the honor of working side by side with several British Troops and they were very professional. But to say that the American soldier wont measure up to a Brit is plain Stupid. The American Soldier is very Proffesional. Yes the American Military does have some serious Knuckleheads. But so does every other Military in the World. Some more than others. The American Soldier is not half as good as anyone They are equaled to and surpass most. Please remember that the common American Soldier has more lattitude to make decisions than the common British Soldier. Why is that ??? Because the American Military has trust and faith in its Soldiers. The British Military is still too class conscious and that is the downfall of the British Military.


As far as the Friendly Fire.... It happens. When was the last time that you were sitting in a foreign country in a hostile environment and had to make a decision of life or death ??? It is so easy to sit back in a nice safe area and second guess someone else. As for the Terry Lloyd... I wasn't there but if it went down as I have heard... That he failed to stop when ordered to, Well I would have shot him myself. Rules of Engagement are in place for a reason. Disregard an order in a hostile area and imminent death can occur. Terry thought he could disregard the rules and got called on them. The price tag was high, His life. Instead of feeling sorry for Terry Lloyd. Think of the Soldier who pulled the trigger. That is the one I feel sorry for. Even though that Soldier did his job he has to live with the fact that he killed a Stupid Journalist. Friendly Fire is a Reality. Soldiers try not to make mistakes but they happen. Sure as the sun will rise in the Morning.

Answer 3

If the Brits had half of the equipment that the yanks have we could kick any Army up and down Blackpool's golden mile. In the first Gulf war , my Uncle (Ssgt, Royal Engineers) had to actually show an American Officer how to use certain pieces of equipment properly because Yank didn't have a clue.
I grew up next to a American Air force Base in Britain, and the Yank service Personnel were some of the worst people I have ever met.
A friend of mine who works on this base as MOD service support was referred to from a American as a "Foreign National", In England ! what does that tell you.
As to that reference that the Brits haven't been in a major engagement in the two middle east theaters, you should check the news because we have been in many, but sorry I forgot the Americans are only interested in theirselves.
Maybe we should ask why Soldiers fight, Yanks say (and I have heard personnel to say) "to kick *** man". Brits say "for Queen and Country" still. The yanks are probably still Jealous of our Empire we had.

Answer 4

Okay, as a brit living in New York i have mixed feelings on this subject.
Fisrtly and probably most importantly every Army in the world recruits it's Soldiers frm the lower classes, this is how the recruiters hit there targets.

Take it if you where from a small mining community in the North of England, or a coucil estate in London, What future do you have. There are no manufacturing jobs around, and you dont have the qualifications to obtain any other form of employment apart from fast food outlets. The military can teach you how to live your life, look after yourself and teach a trade for when you leave. They also pay fairly well all things considered.

Training is very difficult to compare, the UK forces are a lot smaller than US, Therefore training is more ona one to one basis and the right regiments, what is left of them rotate around the globe on a regular basis ( N.Ireland, Balkans, Middle East etc etc.) Therefore training is varied adn can be more focused.
The US Army has many Divisions and therefore trainign is not so much on a one on one basis. However they have the budget to train the people to a very high standard.

On a par there are differences to each but there plus & minus balance out. What UK soldiers lack in equipment they make up for in there ability to adapt. US soldiers are the best equipped in the World there is no denying this, however what they lack in adaptibility they make up for in Strength and determination.

Friendly Fire or " Blue on Blue " will always happen regardless if we are fighting in 2006 or 1066, In the heat of battle it is very difficult to work out who is who, The UK had a blue on blue between themselves involving 2 Challenger Tanks, as unfirtunate as it is, Most tanks look very similair in the dark and when you are engaging opposition forces this will happen.

With regard to the Incident involving the ITV journalist, this debate will go on for ages, however do not forget two things. First - these soldiers are in a land where there is no clear definition as to who the enemy is. These people have a habit of loading cars up with plastic explosive and then drive them into barriers manned by soldiers. Secondly - If they had been pat of a official group then this accident would not have happened, as it is they where "freelancing" and theerfore the whereabouts where not known.

Too some of the comments that have been posted in here, you need to watch or read some more current affairs. UK forces are currently involved in some of the harshest fighting in Afghanistan, and there have been a number of fatalaties caused by mounting attacks by the insurgents there.

What we all need to do is to wish our serviceman and women where ever they are serving a safe and speedy return from these conflicts.

Answer 5

The Americans aren't very bright and their training regimes aren't very good so us British have to train them,the American military know and have admitted that the British are the best(even Navy Seals admit it) and when they are in the heat of the moment they panic and just fire anywhere.The only thing the British lack in is equipment(blame the government)and maybe manpower but apart from that...the best.As for friendly fire the British have only done that once or twice...Challenger 2 on Challenger 2,everyone knows that the only thing that can destroy a Challenger 2 is another Challenger 2(Abrams doesn't stand a chance)
Our military is second to none and that's a fact
God Save The Queen

Answer 6

There are incidents of 'blue on blue'. The british military is very proffesional and the training is excellent. However we are lacking in our equipment. Our guys never seem to have the kit they need. The US officers do seem very competant but their grunts trigger happy nature is a result of the US love of guns. And yea we did lose to you guys back in the old days. But ask yourself this 'is your independance a good thing?'. Look at the aussies, everyone seems to like them, and they are still part of the commonwealth

Answer 7

The UK is not free from friendly fire casualties caused by their own forces. Troops from both nations can be excellent, professional soldiers and inept fools. I do not think it is correct to make this comparison, especially when many of the differences in the field are not due to training or troop quality but are policy differences. The "hearts and minds" idea that the UK have been following leads to considerably different actions and use of force than the US doctrine.

Answer 8

Yeah this makes a lot of since. Lets all bash the American military while they are sleeping.

I think Montgomery explained it best. We are in worse situations and using more fire power so of course there are going to be more accidents. There is nothing to back up whose better. Its just all opinion. As as for the idea that American military only join the military for a stint. I suggest you do your research. The military has meet its recruiting goals every year since the war started and it has been even higher before the military. I suggest yall all do your research before trying to bash a fellow military branch. We all work just as hard. I know because I have been to war with these diffrent countries (Brits, Aussies, and Canucks). They are all great people and appreciate the support they receive but again we are all fighting the same battle so there is no need to try to figure out who is the better trained.

Answer 9

Firstly, the US army is much bigger than the UK army, so the probability is higher that an American will shoot an ally. Also the scale of the US operations are bigger, meaning they are firing more weapons with bigger scales of destruction and longer ranges. British troops don't really occupy the same position on the battlefield where it is easy to make these kinds of mistakes. They are not really comparable in this sense. Secondly what evidence are you basing this assumption? There is no research document that seriously sets out to evaluate which soldier is the clear-cut best. Its only the British media who like to put this hypothesis forward. British soldiers do shoot their allies but it isn't as sensational to the press.

Answer 10

I don't think the ordinary soldiers (the grunts) are as well trained as the British Privates, many of them are just looking for a way out of poverty by joining the military.

Answer 11

Hey rooster head- Both countries have had friendly fire casualties
Both are extremely well trained, and both are very capable. Both train with each other on a regular basis. And they have been whipped by who? No One. Even if you want to talk about Vietnam, North Vietnamese casualties were over 10 times higher than American. American forces controlled most of the geography. The only thing that can beat the American Military is the American press. Which is mostly made up of liars and cowards that would sell their soul and their mother for ratings. America and Britain's combined military power far exceeds the rest of the worlds combined.