Does Eithiopia have a better army than the USA?

Question

the Ethiopians have taken all of Mogadishu, where the USA and its black hawk down fiasco was humiliated. is the American military is a set piece military who is unsuited for modern warfare?

they seem to have a convention army: tanks armed men in uniform fighting not a guerrilla war, but as most western armies would fight, yet they can do it the USA failed badly

if that is not the case, you lost in Somalia, Iraq, Vietnam, Korea do you have a big useless army

Answer 1

The only reason that happened is because although America is vastly superior with weapons that would be comparing Ethiopia to stones, the American Army continues to suffer from arrogance and a tendency to look at whole populations where ever deployed with contempt, force and threats, guaranteeing they end up with the whole population resenting them, even the one who despise their own government and would normally love to an American presence. They knew nothing of the locals if they had they might have realized those burning tires meant "everybody get your gun and come"

Answer 2

The Blackhawk down incident was a well planned ambush by the Islamic warlord of the day. It was designed to do what it did; test the courage of the new administration (Clinton) and to embarrass the US Military. Truly, the new president failed miserably; he retreated under fire and never retaliated for the lose of eighteen Rangers or this huge humiliation, just days into his new administration.

The military was under the control of a totally incompetent president who was pulling the strings, at the time! Had they been in total control, the Rangers would have regrouped, acquired the necessary equipment they had requested, but were denied, and taken a second and more successful run at the rebels. Instead, it ended as it did. The military did not suffer the humiliation, Clinton did! This single incident forever lost him the respect of the US Military, it's doubtful he will ever regain that respect.

Answer 3

The Ethiopians have the advantage of attacking a country that does not have a regular army.

The Somalian Council of Islamic Courts has a police force-style militia composed of "technicals" - a local term for armed volunteers with Toyota pickup trucks, rifles, a few heavy machine guns and a few grenade launchers. [the term "technicals" refers both to the militiamen and the vehicles they drive - I do not know the origin of the term]

The Somalians also do not have any kind of air force, or air defense system.

The Ethiopians threw 4,000 mechanized infantry with armor and artillery support at the Somalians, after pounding them from the air with fighter bomber aircraft.

It's not suprising that the Ethiopians were able to take Mogadishu.

They will have the same problem America is having in Iraq and Afghaninstan - HOLDING Somalia.

The Ethiopians will have to patrol a large hostile city with a brigade strength formation - and they will also have to protect their supply convoys, which will have to travel across a couple hundred miles of open highway, through deserts filled with arrned nomadic clans, and technicals.

Let's see how well the Ethiopian Army is doing 6 months from now - how do you say "Black Hawk Down" in Amharic?

Answer 4

Clearly Twist doesn't know about Black Hawk Down, WHICH WAS DURING CLINTON. Anyway yeah there is a difference in how they are running their military. That is the BIG thing. If we let the generals go out there and run a war without making them answer then we could accomplish alot more. Perhaps hold them to a certain standard in place, like the Geneva Convention, and beyond that pretty much let them run the war. AMERICANS aren't ready for MODERN warfare. Americans don't want Guerillia warfare and urban assualt in its uglyness. They are happy when it is like the "shock and awe" and they don't hear about what is going on. As soon as they hear that an innocent is killed they blame the army. They ignore that the other side is dressing up as civilians and hiding among them, shooting at the troops. They ignore about half of what is going on because they don't WANT to hear the whole story.

Answer 5

the U. S. military is barely extra suitable due them having extra suitable economic ingredients. i might say the British military are extra helpful knowledgeable, a minimum of the particular forces, and extra respected for no longer being as aggressive with the civilian inhabitants whos international places they are occupying. The British military seem to apply their heads extra, and not in basic terms their weapons, consequently "friendly hearth" incidents are in many circumstances the U. S. shooting the British, or themselves. yet the two do a large job. Hmmm..... no offense Monty yet technically it wasn't relatively the human beings that beat the British became it? enable's no longer ignore the large function that the French performed in it, oh and the Spanish and the Dutch! ( i'm refering to the yank revolution, do no longer comprehend something relating to the 1812 conflict and can't be arsed to have a seem yet i'm useful there will be some extra to that one too!) The French, Spanish and Dutch lent you their centuries previous comprehend-how of war and of combating the British, as nicely as their adult adult males. additionally the British have been out numbered with the aid of approximately 3-a million and thousands of miles faraway from their land, so the possibilities have been style of stacked interior the human beings favour. Had this been any incorrect way around at that element, the human beings invading Britain, out numbered with the aid of 3-a million and the Brits having help from extremely some the main effective international locations of the time i'm extremely useful the U. S. might have been defeated under such circumstances. the undeniable fact that it lasted see you later under such circumstances is that if something a testomony to how solid the British have been. in an attempt to the British, the yank revolution on no account relatively counts as a valid arguement! no person has invaded and conquered the British Isles considering the fact that 1066 as quickly as we've been all a bunch of peasants. considering the fact that then our tiny united states has been the sufferer of tried invasions many, many circumstances yet no person has ever controlled it, no longer even controlled to step foot on the land. My element being that it is slightly susceptible to convey the revolution into this. whilst the U. S. has effectively defended its land from invasion as many circumstances as us (from a united states that has as plenty militia might because of the fact the U. S., as has been the case for the British), and with out help from the international's premier international places, then honest sufficient!

Answer 6

No way my friend. The only problem is that we are fighting a politically correct war and fighting those who do not wear uniforms and hide behind children like cowards. If we used our full potential, there would be only another 100 hour war and we would roll through like we did the first time in iraq.

Answer 7

Every time I answer a question about the American military and admit the Chinese could beat us and that North Korea could in all likelihood force a stalemate I get called all kinds of names. But I am just reporting what the Army War College is reporting to senior pentagon officials. So it gives me great pleasure to say the Ethiopia military is not even in the same league.
Army consist of 230,000 + 200,000 militia troops

Air Force is some 4,500 officers and airmen operating approximately 150 combat aircraft, most of them Soviet manufactured fighter-bombers. Approximately seventy-nine helicopters performed reconnaissance, transport and ground support missions

Ethiopian armored and mechanized units had approximately 1,200 T-54/55 tanks and 100 T-62 tanks, all of Soviet manufacture, and about 1,100 armored personnel carriers (APCs), most of which were of Soviet origin.

Even though landlocked it has a Navy, two frigates, eight missile craft, six torpedo craft, six patrol boats, two amphibious craft, and two support/training craft


In Somalia we were not fighting a war and never pretended to be, we were to police and provide protection rather then fight a war we left.


God Bless you and Our Southern People.

Answer 8

Clinton ran because he is a wimp. The military did not want to leave. However, the mission is different. 1st, we were not trying to capture Mogadishu, we were delivering food and relief efforts to a nation in turmoil. 2nd, the Ethopian Army does not care about civilian casualties, but because they are not America, you will not hear about the civilian casualities.

What makes America's military limited is the fear of it inflicting collateral damage. We place the mission and soldiers lives in danger for the sake of civilians.

For example, the best way to deal with Fallujah would have been to order the evacuation of the city, round up all people in Fallujah, drop the MOAB and destroy the entire place, investigate and either release or detain the people, then rebuild it from ground up. But we decided to be the nice guy, and look what it got us. A more difficult task. Stupid liberals like you would of course not allow us to do the above scenario, and will only be happy when American soldiers are running around the battlefield shouting our Miranda rights, and using rubber bullets.

Answer 9

NO
Our Army has another problem. We have people here thinking war is all nice and neat. We have reporters and public watching every step they take and every action is Monday morning quarterback to no end.
War isn't nice Eithiopians understand that and go full out.
Our Army has too many restrictions. During WWII that didn't happen. We advance. Now it is polictal game and our guys die.

If we did go full on in Mogadishu bin laden won't wanted to attack the US because he would know that we mean business.

This isn't one world we all don't have the same values.

Answer 10

They weren't hampered by Bill Clinton , trying to run the show from the White House.