We are much smaller, and granted a lot of our equipment needs updating or downright replacement. However, I must point out that when we rolled out the first Halifax-Class frigates, both the US and the UK wanted to be able to build them for them but we refused to sell the blueprints and patents but did tell them that we were willing to build the ships for them.
However, I will stand by this until the day I die, Canadian soldiers are by far better troops than the Americans. Each Canadian Forces member is a versatile, multi-disciplinary, cross-trained, variously skilled professional with more than one highly specialized job.
This gives us the flexibility we need to operate, as well as limiting the number of support personnel we take along. As an EW operator, I have to be well versed in every aspect of electronic warfare, from interception to jamming, from setting up my equipment to changing the gear oil in the differentials of the armoured vehicles my equipment is mounted in.
And this versatility allows us to find seat of the pants solutions, improvise and find workarounds sticky situations that would require a specific piece of kit we don't have readily available by using other things. We just won't sit out a war because we're stuck in the mud but don't have a recovery truck to haul us out. Or wait for support when we blow a tire on the side of the road.
We might not have the numbers or the gear of the US, but make no mistake, man for man, the Canadian Forces are far superior to our southern neighbours.
Ishmael - Actually you can be proven wrong. WW1, Vimy Ridge. Where the Brits and the French failed, the Canadians succeeded at taking that bloody field. Dieppe, the suicide mission from which the Canadians returned. The Italy campaign of WW2, done single-handedly by a single Canadian division. D-Day on Juno Beach, by far the worst beach of the whole landing where not only did we take the ground but had to stop fter outrunning our support. That, and might I remind you that the US joined WW2 only after the attack on Pearl Harbour, and that by that point the Battle of the Atlantic and the Battle of Britain were pretty much over? Kapyong Hill, where a few hundred Canadians repelled thousands of Chineese troops. Then, how about something more recent, like the operations in Panwai District in the Kandahar region? Even the Brits are staying away from there and they're crazier than we are.
2007-01-12 08:13:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
Being run similar to the british and using some british training they would without a doubt man for man be better than the US soldiers. War is fought by soldiers not by machines and therefore war is won by soldiers not by machines. The following armys are better than the US because they train better. This is only man for man though. Australia, Canada, New Zealand. Britain is more 1 british soldier is equal to 4 US soldiers. I am comparing as if they had just a rifle and ammo, no support.
2007-01-12 19:32:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
While the Canadian force may not be all that mighty, they have no reason to worry, because they have very powerful friends (USA). In military capacity, the US is far away a superior force than that of Canada.
Also, who wants to attack Canada? They do nothing wrong and therefore have very few enemies. I love those Canucks. I only wish at time their American counterparts would act a little more like Canadians, you know keep to themselves and quit trying to stir up the damn pot.
2007-01-12 15:45:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Spent five years in the CF, worked with the US forces on a number of occasions and found this out.
THIS IS NOT A TRASH OF US MILITARY OR SOLDIERS. SEVERAL OF MY BEST FRIENDS ARE US MILITARY. (Well that could have sounded better....)
The US forces have better gear, more of it and better pay. They are significantly larger. That lack of gear and money usually is overcome by more and varied training.
Individual Canadian troops are (on average) better educated and better trained. In a Canadian Tank, you are expected to take over any position where in the US people tend to specialize a great deal (USMC's attitude that every soldier is a rifleman first is a specific exception.) For example, there are no POL specialists in the CF. Everyone in the armour units is trained to handle POL in all forms.
A good analogy would be the difference between buying furniture from a big box store or buying it from a carpenter.
Canadian forces use the British Regimental system rather than the US system. We tend to join and stay with a single unit rather than switch around. Our units have names instead of numbers and nicknames. For example, Princess Patricia's Light Infantry instead of 81st Airborne (Screaming Eagles)
Canadian soldiers tend to treat their position as a calling and not a job.
2007-01-12 16:31:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Compared to just about any other nation - Canada is all mouth and no military to back it up.
I do feel sorry for their troops. The best people that Canadian society produces and they get less respect (and benefits) than a homeless drug addict.
2007-01-12 15:47:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by MikeGolf 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Can you compare a Spider and an elephant together? it's incomparable. The United states has got the best military in the world.
2007-01-12 15:41:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Agentj100 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
Limp wrist to strong arm.... instead of sending our troops to Iraq they should be heading North... those up north can not take us over militarily but they are spreading the socialist cancer and should be stopped.... then, since our troops have the desert experience... send them south... clear out a 100 mile defence zone and keep the hords from the south out.
2007-01-12 15:39:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by idahomike2 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
Last I heard, Canada was still flying Bi-planes as compared to our new JSA that will be on line by 2008.
2007-01-12 15:35:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
We don't need a military. We have Brition and every other country in the Un. Just like the war between Canada and Us in 1812? Or did you Americans forget that Iraq, and Vietnam weren't the only wars you lost?
2007-01-12 15:32:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by rap3io4 1
·
2⤊
6⤋
lol at the cannucks. u can argue all u want about individual men since it cant be proven. what can be proven is that your military as a unit sucks. its among the weakest in the world.
u didnt win the war of 1812. i understand the need to lie since u have never won a war, ever.
comparison worst-- to best
2007-01-12 19:01:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by my name is call me ishmael 1
·
1⤊
4⤋