Who has the higher quality troops America or Britain????

Question

I am British and I believe that if we were to go to war with the USA we would be beaten pretty badly. I believe the British to be of a much higher quality than the USAs but they would dominate us due to their far superior in number and with all of their aircraft and tanks. Also I believe that in an all out war, no helicopters or artillery or jets, just infantry and tanks, the British would still lose but the Americans would take much higher losses than us due to the fact that we get better training etc. What do you all believe. By the way, I am not knocking the Americans, they are doing so well especially in the middle east (just in case any over sensitive yanks are out there)!

lol take a chill nektie ffs you uneducated twerp. I said I wasnt meaning to offend any Americans read the bloody question!!!!

Answer 1

Same training methods, same equipment, nothing will be different.



.

Answer 2

The way to look at it is like this: The US Military is all about overwhelming firepower in the opening moments of any given war - the "awe & destruction" thing, thereby eliminating the opposition before they have a chance to shoot back - that's why, when engaged in any long-term combat situation (eg Vietnam, Korea, Iraq) they tend to lose the battles, as they are not trained, prepared or equipped for fighting intense battles over extended periods of time.

The Brits however, tend to superior tactically and strategically, looking at the longer-term, and planning around that. The UK might have less weaponary at it's disposal, but that doesn't mean their kit is any less good than teh Americans. Take tanks for example - we all know that the Abrahms is an awesome MBT, we see them on the news daily. However, what tank currently holds the record for the longest tank-to-tank kill ever? A British Challenger2 that took out an Iraqi T-72 at a range of around 2 MILES!

We, the Brits have a smaller, but much more versatile and better trained military than the Americans, but they have vastly larger forces.

Luckily, we are unlikely to go to war with the US (again), so we'll never really find out. I think the yanks would win, but only due to a standing army that makes our military look like part-timers!! If we were to pitch an equal number of US and UK soldiers against each other, the UK would win without a doubt - far more experience in many types of combat than the Americans.

That's not to say that the US Military is rubbish, far from it - I'd rate them as about the 3rd ot 4th best-trained forced in the world, with the UK as number 1, the Israelis at 2nd, possibly.

Also, as far as things like Iraq or Afghanistan go, our armies there are performing a dual army/policing role, something the UK military got lots of practice at during the Troubles in Northern Ireland, having a heavy presence but a presence that can be engaged with, as opposed to the American technique of shoot first, ask questions later.

Answer 3

Id say it was Even Stevens! there are good and bad points about either force!. If there is one difference than seems to stand out between the two forces, its the American shoot first and ask questions afterwards mentality..

This approach to warfare really stems from right back when the America was still a British possession.. The guerrilla tactics used to fight against crown soldiers kill or be killed are the very same tactics being used by Iraqi and other irregular forces around the world and down through the ages..

I don't know whether the tactic is right or wrong.. I do know that you wont win any hearts and minds if you shoot everyone first!.Sometime a softly softly approach can work wonders!.

Answer 4

Britain. By miles. We're more highly trained, better trained to boot, and we don't have the technological kit the Yanks have got because, mostly, they won't trust their closest ally to have it. The Yanks have the best kit, we've got the best men.

Best example I know of. On patrol in the Gulf a couple of years back, our ship got a signal from an American one. Their techs couldn't find out what was wrong with one of their close in weapons systems, and asked our team to go across to their ship and help out because our ship had the same system.
Our team. One Petty Officer, one Leading Hand. The Yanks were two things shortly after they arrived.
One. Surprised there were only two when they had a team of ten.
Two. Very surprised when it took the PO ten minutes to find what they hadn't managed to find and fix in six days.

That says enough about their skills, doesn't it?

Undoubtedly, in a war with America Britain would lose, primarily to weight of numbers, but the American public would soon realise that the number of US body bags coming out of Iraq is nothing compared to what they'd lose if they ever tried it with us.

Another story I saw during a documentary about the French Foreign Legion was that Special Forces and elite units from Britain and America went to French Guiana and attempted the Foreign Legions's assault course there. I can't remember the exact times, but the SAS, SBS and even the non Special Forces Royal Marines got around it in a faster time than the Yanks supposedly incredible Delta Force lot.
Of course, the Foreign Legion boys do it faster. They are, without doubt, the hardest army unit anywhere on the planet not actually classified as specials.

Snowy, mate, big thumbs up for you. That's the Navy's reputation taken a big *** hit. Not so much for being captured in the first place, but if I hear about that f'ing kid whining about his iPod again I'll find him and kick his teeth down his throat. He shouldn't have had the bloody thing out during a boarding op in the first place. Little tosspot.

Answer 5

Man for man (and women), pound for pound our armed forces are the best in the world.
The only reason that the Americans would beat us is sheer numbers and money spent on kit. They have some brilliant ships (Nimitz class carriers, Ohio class SSBN's etc), and weapons (m4 carbine (though the C8 is a better variant) but their jets are inferior to ours in every way except numbers. Those who know anything about air warfare will know what I mean and dont ***** about F15's and F16's would kick a tornados **** in a straight fight. Tornados were never designed to 'turn and burn' with teen series fighters, they were designed to put a nuke on the kremlin while flying at not more than 100ft. Nothing else in the air can do that (fly 1000 miles at 100ft). As for dogfighting, the 'tiffie' (typhoon) is second to none and if you think the F22 stands a chance think again, the Typhoon radar picks up the f22 easily and is far more manouverable and will have a far better missile then the AMRAAM in the meteor.
Our troops are far better trained, but they have 10 times more troops, basically cannon fodder.
The royal Marines, the Gurkhas, the Para's, the RAF regiment, The SBS and the SAS are all the best elite troops in the world.

If our mod had the same budget, we would be the worlds leading military power. To put it into context, The US annual budget for their 'Deltas', SEALS, and Green Berets is more than the annual budget for our ENTIRE armed forces, RN, RAF and British army.
The British armed forces are widely regarded as the best in the world DESPITE the lack of funds and kit. That says a lot about the soldiers we have. Once we get our QE2 class carriers and F35's, Astute going operational, multiple tiffie squadrons and all those lovely type 45's then no force, even 3 times our size could compete. Unfortunatley, the yanks have projectable forces roughly 10 times ours.
Its Quantity, not quality, a bit like their fast food lol.

Answer 6

US v UK is a foregone conclusion simply due to the vastly superior numbers of the US forces.

However, lets say a random 10,000 British troops were pitched against 10,000 random US troops. I believe the UK would be victors largely because the British soldier is trained to multi-task whereas the US soldier seems to train to a specific, narrow role. Also, the British get plenty of chance to practice skirmishing each week at closing time on a saturday night!

The history of the past 100 years shows, I hope, that the two sets of forces are at their strongest when combined. Not in half-baked lunacy like Iraq, but in the proper stuff like WWs I and II.

Answer 7

Things seem to have changed here lately, Dr. The world was a bit surprised over the recent capture of the giggling British ship crew that surrendered to the Iranian ship. Just this week, an Australian ship nearly suffered the same fate in a similar situation. But the Aussies pointed their weapons, yelled "colorful language", according to the article, and the Iranians left. It seems the nature of the Iranians is to push, but only until someone pushes back. I spent the 1980s and 90s interviewing U.S. WW II veterans. All had great respect for the fighting nature of the British. One Vet told me, "When they had something to fight about, they sure could fight." You're right about the British receiving excellent training. I agree completely. And I would certainly hope that the U.S. and Great Britain would never have to face off. Ever since 1776, we've kinda got used to you guys.

Answer 8

The point is that when you have as small a military force as the UK you have to rely on different things.

As an example.

The British Army has less than 100,000 men and women. Of these only about 25,000 are what you would describe as gun carrying combat troops.

That means that the fighting strength of the British army is about the equivalent of the crowd at a second division football match.

Compare that with an army of over a million men plus twice that in reserves.

That tiny British force is than backed up by an Air Force which has less planes than Richard Branson, and a Navy that has to borrow ships off cross channel ferry companies just to get stuff around.

Our SA80 rifles (even the mark two's) are so crap our special forces refuse to use them. Our battlefield radios ar so bad commanders use their personal cellphones, our troops share body armour, and we sent our boys and girls to the desert with green camo and boots which melted in the heat.

All of that means that because the British forces have been in constant action since the end of the second world war around the globe, their training has to be extremely high to stop them being wiped out due to lack of supply, air support, equipment etc etc etc.

Sorry my gung ho American buddies but that is the truth. They have to be very good otherwise they would all be dead by now through not being able to rely on your massive back up resources to get then out of the crap every time.

That is not to say that US forces are not well trained because they are....but they are trained much more to rely on hardware and technology, and less on personal initiative.

Also because of 50 years of fighting counter insurgency wars (succesfully) British forces are much more adept at isolating and fighting the bad guys rather than flattening a civilian village to get one sniper and then turning the whole region against you for ever.

Now in the interests of balance and fairness.....

I am humilated and ashamed by the royal Navy idiots who got captured by the Iranians a few weeks ago. They should be court martialled for cowardice, incompetance, and treason and drummed out of the Navy, as should their commanders.

The royal Navy has a proud tradition of fighting hard under impossible conditions and overwhelming odds and this overweight bunch of immature fools have stained that.

Answer 9

I question the so called better British troops of today. I can't remember British sailors being captured and taunted in the first or second world war without firing a single shot no matter about them being out gunned, just look back at the Falkland war and remember the fight the small garrison put up against a massiff invading force, before Thatcher intervened.

Answer 10

i think the british troops are far superior to the americans(many other nations too) but the americans military technology is obviously the most advanced in the world.Take a look at the military engagements that america has been in in the past and you will find out that they are pretty useless in a war(search google!).PS...100% best answer goes to Bert :)

Answer 11

US Army HOOAH!

But really, I believe that the US would have the advantage here. Though, the US and Brtiain won't go to war because the moron in office right now is going to be replaced soon. Hopefully, our next president won't be such a disappointment.