English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

as an Englishman who is currently flying home from a business trip to the USA i am asking this.
AS everyone is aware the American troops have been tarred the worst in the world mainly for shooting people who are on the same side, but i have a theory which could change that.
My theory is that the American soldiers are given guns which were previously used at fairgrounds, the fairgound workers traditionally bend the barrells thus rendering it extremely diffcult to win a prize.These guns are then given to USA military for use in wars.
Anyone agree?

2007-07-26 01:16:50 · 39 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

39 answers

I find it hard to agree they are the most sophisticated army in the world !! :)

2007-07-26 01:19:56 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 2 6

The "best" army is a pretty ambiguous term. The U.S. certainly has the biggest but the level of skill and training of the average U.S. soldier is the subject of derision and laughter among the militaries of several countries. The Israeli's probably have the most experienced army on the planet simply because they've been more or less at war since 1947. As for the weapons, the M-16A2 is the standard U.S. army issue. It's an assault rifle and you don't see those on fairgrounds. Regarding friendly fire incidents, yes, the U.S. does seem to have more of those than anyone else. My uncle in WWII got tired of being bombed by the Americans so much so that he actually shot down a U.S. bomber.

2007-07-26 01:26:21 · answer #2 · answered by kevpet2005 5 · 1 1

Biggest Army. Not the best. Not by a bloody long distance. Unlike the American military who thinks bigger is better (bigger bombs, bigger planes, bigger idiots etc.) we know smaller and highly trained is much better.
And they don't shoot round corners, just dead straight at their allies. Because their training is so crap they can't tell the difference between a fluorescent Allied forces identity marker on a British APC and a surface to air missile launcher.
But hey, not many Yanks will know about that, because your government thinks it's 'collateral damage' to kill your allies.
Well our government may think the sun shines out of Washington, but the average Brit thinks your government is full of sh!t and your military is little better than boy scouts with guns.

2007-07-27 11:37:51 · answer #3 · answered by Beastie 7 · 0 0

I don't believe that they are the worse of the worse, yes they do kill each other and normally the English army, this is because they are so gun-ho all the time.

I think they need to be taken into a country where a REAL war is happening and let them get on with it.

Anyone that thinks the ARMIES are the lowest form of life is a complete IDIOT, without these fine people fighting for Queen and country then we would be in all kinds of problems. Thats the same with you Americans, who is going to protect your way of life if they wasn't there.

2007-07-26 01:23:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

lol americans just take a bloody joke. Well if u americans had searched the bloody terrorists on sept 11th none of thsi would have happened. The US has tonnes of troops, thsi doesnt make them the best. The British are small but very well trained. Britain has kicked most peoples arses for years, but least we did it alone. The US have never been to war on their own, maybe the early years, but they still needed the French lol The best army is the Israelis, equipped and well trained, and managed to fight a war on all four fronts, without any help.

2007-07-26 01:32:50 · answer #5 · answered by danny o 2 · 4 1

Bloody chap, I do believe you need your head screwed on properly. First, for the situation to asrise, you have to be engaged in a fight for something. Your country is not very good at engaging in battles. May I aslo point out that other countries that are fighting have maybe 50-100 soldiers fighting. This compared to the hundred thousand seems to square off the odds of having an incident.I suggest you scurry back to England and handle your problems with the terrorist blowing your stuff up. By the way, why can't you get a handle on that?

2007-07-26 01:23:26 · answer #6 · answered by spag 4 · 3 2

To all the American who's ego's have been bruised ...

What's all this ridiculous propaganda that the Americans claim about WW 1 and WW 2?

The Soviets defeated the Nazis in WW2, without Hitler invading Russia in Winter, the Americans (who turned up late for both wars AFTER seeing which side would win) and the rest of the world would have been the losers.

The Americans wall street industrialists where on Hitler's side in the 1930's as several documents that have just been discovered have shown. The Wall street industrialists where plotting to overthrow the US Government in 1933 to replace it with a fascist dictatorship. When the plot was uncovered and stopped, the plotters walked away scott free and decided to covertly plan for a German victory.

The Grandfather of the Current President was involved and despite this plot being discovered, Prescott Bush went on to further fund the Nazi War Machine.

The Americans NEVER saved our bacon in either war, they waited for the outcome to be determined and turned up late on the winning side and are very trying to turn up early for world war three!

As for the war of independence? Do you Americans really care? If so, why have you allowed GW Bush and his neocons to return your republic to the former level of a colony?

You have been arrogantly sleeping your way into dictatorship.

Bush has wiped his *** on your constitution and the ONLY thing that will stop the USA being returned to full COVERT British colonial rule is Ron Paul. You are our puppets. MI6 issues instructions to MOSSAD, who in turn own your congress and have bought your political system hook line and sinker. You work for us. You think that you are free and that is the best part, you are not free and we laugh at you.

But you would not care about that. You had your minor victory only recently, 250 years is a very short time in our global planning. The war of independence was a minor and temporary set-back.

2007-07-26 04:03:14 · answer #7 · answered by kenhallonthenet 5 · 3 3

What an odd theory. The US military does not purchase second hand weapons. I've also seen few carnivals using the M-16, M-24, or M-110

2007-07-26 01:25:06 · answer #8 · answered by Rob B 7 · 2 1

War is about death and destruction. Machines are used to deliver as broad a field of death and destruction as possible. Those troops who die from friendly fire do not die from a bullet fired from the rifle of a single soldier. They die from the explosive destruction of a machine firing a weapon miles away.
No matter how careful the targeting, friendly fire will always have a toll on the battlefield.

2007-07-26 01:46:09 · answer #9 · answered by .... . .-.. .-.. --- 4 · 1 0

The USA does have the best military in the world, bar none. (Though I think we would agree that your SAS is by far the best trained force in the world).

In war friendly fire is common place, It is just reported more as the US military is run by a civilian government. Friendly fire incidences in totalitarian governments are simply not reported.

2007-07-26 01:51:23 · answer #10 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 1 1

best army says who ???????
biggest is not best 1 on 1 the yanks would run a mile
just ask the slant eyed lot that sorted them out
like all nation the english r there to sort it out ( and sort the frogs n germans out )
like chelsea footy club throw enough cash at it u will get somewere

2007-07-26 05:47:11 · answer #11 · answered by sheffrys 2 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers