Man for man, who is the more disciplined army, American or British?

Question

(and i ask that the question is thought about, with patriotic spraffing kept to a minumum.)

Answer 1

If you're talking about 20th-21st century then probably the british, however 18-19th century the british DID have a slight problem with keeping the johnny wrapped up, also they were convicts so their lives meant nothing to the upper echelons but there were decent regiments too. but atm considering WW2, vietnam, korea and both gulf conflicts i think the british have a better fighting force but they have less sophisticated equipment and have done since the first world war. we lost the edge after the industrial revolution died down. frankly i'd be happy if the british army was just enough to defend us and keep us safe rather than send them off to a country which frankly was no threat to us whatsoever *cough*iraq*cough*

Answer 2

I've only ever served in the British Army 1957-1965 so have no way of knowing just how much discipline there is in the US Army. On the whole I'd say that both armies are pretty much the same when it comes to military disipline.

Cannot see any advantage for either army claiming it has more discipline.

People say that the American soldier is 'trigger happy'. Well, at least the average GI gets the ammo with which to carry out the job. I recall being on duty in riot situations in Cyprus with a rifle with no ammo. Fat lot of use. I got the impression that my officers were more scared of me shooting them than shooting over the heads of the crowd. Hence no ammo.

If you read up on the British Army in the American Colonies during the Revolution, you soon come across a real trigger and bayonet happy army - Us! Ye Brits.

Answer 3

British. By miles. Better trained, better disciplined, infinitely more reliable.
Just be glad, Americans, that the British Army fights alongside you. Because if they didn't, they'd bloody well shoot back when you hit them with 'friendly fire.' We don't make stupid mistakes like your lot.

And since I'm ex Royal Navy, and would normally refer to the Army as Pongo's, that show's just how low down the evolutionary scale I think the US Army really is.

Answer 4

the British army the Americans are better equipped than us but the British soldier is better trained take the royal marines 32 weeks training the hardest training in the world then you have SAS/SBS /PARAS

Answer 5

Impossible to tell.

If we are going to use friendly fire as a standard, use the percents, not the number of soldiers.

We have American arrogance, and you have British arrogance.

I am not "trigger happy", and have never served with any 'trigger happy" people.

Answer 6

As far as discipline is concerned, I would say they are probably on a par. However, as far as professionalism is concerned, I would have to say that the British win hands down.

Answer 7

come on now
you don't get to choose your brothers
we are too alike to do this
"but Mum loved you best stuff"
As an American soldiers Mother I would like to say how deeply grateful I am too the Briish for supporting us in the war on terror.
I will say we both need to mind the enemies we have allowed to enter our countries too and with a will.

Answer 8

I would give the nod to the British over the US Army, but take it back if you compare the British Army with the US Marines !

Answer 9

Compare the numbers of people killed by people on their own side - American on American with British on British or even American on British with British on American.

In the two invasions of Iraq I think you will find which side has been responsible for more "friendly fire" deaths per head of troops on the ground.

Answer 10

I would say which ever one still supports the idea that going to War with Iraq was a good idea is the most disciplined. I have no idea how some of them can continue to see that ideology.