I think all 1st world countries have the same SF as US do , maybe they don't have such sums of money but I truly believe that US SF isn't that unique .rdx-fx wrote:
U.S. Special Forces;
- They can fight conventional warfare (regular army), first responder (ala Rangers and Marines), and unconventional (insurgent style)
- They're diplomats, teachers, the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, and a world class fighting force .. all in one
- They not only take the fight to the enemy, their stock in trade is to teach the natives how to do all of the above too.
Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways
Why excluding the Totenkopf?Flecco wrote:
The German Whermacht, Luftwaffe, SS military division (excluding the Totenkopf, disgusting bastards) aaaaaaaaaaaaaand the German Navy.
At the time of World War 2.
"They not only take the fight to the enemy, their stock in trade is to teach the natives how to do all of the above too."
Yeah! Didn't they train and arm the Iraqi's back in the 80's against, who was it...
"Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways"
That ain't unique, most all of the great armies of old trained some of the natives, and like the US, it was so they could fight against a common enemy
Yeah! Didn't they train and arm the Iraqi's back in the 80's against, who was it...
"Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways"
That ain't unique, most all of the great armies of old trained some of the natives, and like the US, it was so they could fight against a common enemy
Totenkopf was the SS.
Totenkopf is just the name of the deathhead they wore.
Flecco wrote:
The German Whermacht, Luftwaffe, SS military division (excluding the Totenkopf, disgusting bastards) aaaaaaaaaaaaaand the German Navy.
At the time of World War 2.
Yeah those Germans, about the best weapons development, training and fighting mindset. Shame about the ideals.
Totenkopf is just the name of the deathhead they wore.
Flecco wrote:
The German Whermacht, Luftwaffe, SS military division (excluding the Totenkopf, disgusting bastards) aaaaaaaaaaaaaand the German Navy.
At the time of World War 2.
Yeah those Germans, about the best weapons development, training and fighting mindset. Shame about the ideals.
charlie beckwith used the 22nd SAS as a model for delta.Longbow wrote:
I think all 1st world countries have the same SF as US do , maybe they don't have such sums of money but I truly believe that US SF isn't that unique .rdx-fx wrote:
U.S. Special Forces;
- They can fight conventional warfare (regular army), first responder (ala Rangers and Marines), and unconventional (insurgent style)
- They're diplomats, teachers, the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, and a world class fighting force .. all in one
- They not only take the fight to the enemy, their stock in trade is to teach the natives how to do all of the above too.
Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways
hell that is where he learned what he did.
however i do believe that we have the best SF guys....the most unique, if you will.
I know Totenkopf was an ss division. The 3rd to be precise.S/O421 wrote:
Totenkopf was the SS.
Totenkopf is just the name of the deathhead they wore.
But why exclude the Totenkopf division. The weren't the only ss division that commited war crimes.
Man, even the Allies commited quite some war crimes.
The US Military in 1989. No military force in history (or since) had the power to dominate every other military in the history of the world, combined. The Soviets in 1987 would be a close second, but their navy (outside of their subs) was so worthless as to be nonexistant.
I have no doubt that the last ones on the list are the French in 1919 and the French in 1939. At least the Poles had the courage to fight the Germans, instead of rolling over and offering them some fromage on a croissant.
I have no doubt that the last ones on the list are the French in 1919 and the French in 1939. At least the Poles had the courage to fight the Germans, instead of rolling over and offering them some fromage on a croissant.
ROFLrdx-fx wrote:
U.S. Special Forces;
- They can fight conventional warfare (regular army), first responder (ala Rangers and Marines), and unconventional (insurgent style)
- They're diplomats, teachers, the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, and a world class fighting force .. all in one
- They not only take the fight to the enemy, their stock in trade is to teach the natives how to do all of the above too.
Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways
American Special Forces are some of the worst in the world, the reason why Americans think they are so good,
is because of all the propaganda around them and shit, Navy Seals and Delta Force aint worth jackshit!
Well they are a little better than the Marines but the USMC is a joke aswell.'
The best soldiers today is
1. The SAS
2. Israelian Paratroopers
3. The Hunters Corps (Jægerkorpset)
Last edited by PHILIPS (2007-07-05 02:19:10)
French Foreign Legion
If the US special forces community is so worthless (and let's remember, there are many, many little bits to that community: the army has Rangers, Green Berets, SOAR, and Delta, the navy has UDT and the SEALS, the air scouts have PJ's, and the marines have recon), then why does the rest of the world want to come and cross-train with them so badly?PHILIPS wrote:
ROFLrdx-fx wrote:
U.S. Special Forces;
- They can fight conventional warfare (regular army), first responder (ala Rangers and Marines), and unconventional (insurgent style)
- They're diplomats, teachers, the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, and a world class fighting force .. all in one
- They not only take the fight to the enemy, their stock in trade is to teach the natives how to do all of the above too.
Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways
American Special Forces are some of the worst in the world, the reason why Americans think they are so good,
is because of all the propaganda around them and shit, Navy Seals and Delta Force aint worth jackshit!
Well they are a little better than the Marines but the USMC is a joke aswell.'
the macedonians. alexander.
as has been said before, each period in history has had its dominating empire / nation, and a corresponding military force. Comparing those really ain't that much useful, since they were all based on different tactics, weaponry, training, experience, etc...
The best combination of effectiveness, training, logistics and equipment in ancient times were probably the roman legions. Sparta doesn't count for me because they were considerably small and also didn't build an empire in the classical sense. Great warriors, maybe, but no nation-builders.
And in spite of their great reputation as fighters, Sparta was dominated by the great empires of their time.
In modern times, I'd say the prussians were pretty good, followed by the british infantry and the french ( 18th and early 19th century ).
As far as the 20th century is concerned, in the first half it was clearly us, the german army. The Wehrmacht defeated basically every european nation, and was only stopped because of a crazy leader ( Hitler ), the economic, logistic and military power of the US, and the fact that russia was willing to sacrifice millions of their own people. If it hadn't been for that, all of europe would be speaking german now.
The 20th century also marked a turning point because it was now painfully obvious that sheer manpower would not be enough to win the wars of the future.
Wars became more and more technological, with weapons that could kill hundreds, if not thousands of enemies with just the pressing of a button.
Logistics have also become more and more important, with todays armies not living off the land they fight on any more, but instead having to be supplied from hundreds or thousands of miles away.
That's why today, IMHO, the US Armed Forces are the most effective ( as far as conventional warfare is concerned ), because they have the technological and logistical capabilities to fight anyone, anywhere on the planet. No other nation today can rightfully claim that.
Then again, modern armies seem to have their problems with unconventional warfare, so "military power" is a relative term...
The best combination of effectiveness, training, logistics and equipment in ancient times were probably the roman legions. Sparta doesn't count for me because they were considerably small and also didn't build an empire in the classical sense. Great warriors, maybe, but no nation-builders.
And in spite of their great reputation as fighters, Sparta was dominated by the great empires of their time.
In modern times, I'd say the prussians were pretty good, followed by the british infantry and the french ( 18th and early 19th century ).
As far as the 20th century is concerned, in the first half it was clearly us, the german army. The Wehrmacht defeated basically every european nation, and was only stopped because of a crazy leader ( Hitler ), the economic, logistic and military power of the US, and the fact that russia was willing to sacrifice millions of their own people. If it hadn't been for that, all of europe would be speaking german now.
The 20th century also marked a turning point because it was now painfully obvious that sheer manpower would not be enough to win the wars of the future.
Wars became more and more technological, with weapons that could kill hundreds, if not thousands of enemies with just the pressing of a button.
Logistics have also become more and more important, with todays armies not living off the land they fight on any more, but instead having to be supplied from hundreds or thousands of miles away.
That's why today, IMHO, the US Armed Forces are the most effective ( as far as conventional warfare is concerned ), because they have the technological and logistical capabilities to fight anyone, anywhere on the planet. No other nation today can rightfully claim that.
Then again, modern armies seem to have their problems with unconventional warfare, so "military power" is a relative term...
They are all terrible, very bad special forces (if u can call them that) its yanks ffs.blisteringsilence wrote:
If the US special forces community is so worthless (and let's remember, there are many, many little bits to that community: the army has Rangers, Green Berets, SOAR, and Delta, the navy has UDT and the SEALS, the air scouts have PJ's, and the marines have recon), then why does the rest of the world want to come and cross-train with them so badly?PHILIPS wrote:
ROFLrdx-fx wrote:
U.S. Special Forces;
- They can fight conventional warfare (regular army), first responder (ala Rangers and Marines), and unconventional (insurgent style)
- They're diplomats, teachers, the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, and a world class fighting force .. all in one
- They not only take the fight to the enemy, their stock in trade is to teach the natives how to do all of the above too.
Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways
American Special Forces are some of the worst in the world, the reason why Americans think they are so good,
is because of all the propaganda around them and shit, Navy Seals and Delta Force aint worth jackshit!
Well they are a little better than the Marines but the USMC is a joke aswell.'
Its only special forces from other terrible countrys that wanna train with them, like Mexicans and all the other South American special forces.
Britain in the days of the british empire.
we had the largest empire the world has ever seen. then we got bored and gave it all back.
we had the largest empire the world has ever seen. then we got bored and gave it all back.
actually i'd say 1. The SAS / SBS - both as hard and effective as each other. SAS have just had more exposure so are better known.PHILIPS wrote:
ROFLrdx-fx wrote:
U.S. Special Forces;
- They can fight conventional warfare (regular army), first responder (ala Rangers and Marines), and unconventional (insurgent style)
- They're diplomats, teachers, the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, and a world class fighting force .. all in one
- They not only take the fight to the enemy, their stock in trade is to teach the natives how to do all of the above too.
Fairly unique in the history of warfare, to have a branch dedicated to training the locals how to fight their own wars in so many different ways
American Special Forces are some of the worst in the world, the reason why Americans think they are so good,
is because of all the propaganda around them and shit, Navy Seals and Delta Force aint worth jackshit!
Well they are a little better than the Marines but the USMC is a joke aswell.'
The best soldiers today is
1. The SAS
2. Israelian Paratroopers
3. The Hunters Corps (Jægerkorpset)
I would say the best military force for its time was the United States armed forces in WW2.
-radio heavy forces allowing for fast reaction times.
-soldiers highly motivated, good morale and almost always well supplied.
-massive air force that used its air power effectively
-advanced naval tactics and ships, largest in world by the end
-gifted leadership that was able to exploit the disadvantages of the enemy while at the same time overcoming theirs. (ie allied armour)
-fought on two fronts while being logistically sound through out both campaigns.
-was able to supply allied countries with arms and resources.
-was able to effectively work within a large alliance and coordinate large formations.
-large global impact by establishing America as a world superpower and developing nuclear technology.
-radio heavy forces allowing for fast reaction times.
-soldiers highly motivated, good morale and almost always well supplied.
-massive air force that used its air power effectively
-advanced naval tactics and ships, largest in world by the end
-gifted leadership that was able to exploit the disadvantages of the enemy while at the same time overcoming theirs. (ie allied armour)
-fought on two fronts while being logistically sound through out both campaigns.
-was able to supply allied countries with arms and resources.
-was able to effectively work within a large alliance and coordinate large formations.
-large global impact by establishing America as a world superpower and developing nuclear technology.
Last edited by Arcano-D.E.S (2007-07-05 03:18:44)
Indeed SAS is a great, but as you said they have gotten so much publicity ( positive ) compared to lets say Delta force who are more known in the public as a mess after some of the failures they had which went public. US special forces have had allot of problem with their hierarchy to many people are involved in the process when they have to make a swift decision, SAS the soliders are in position to make many of these desicions themselves, As far as i know that has changed since a few incidents ( Delta ) they had.senor_fulff wrote:
actually i'd say 1. The SAS / SBS - both as hard and effective as each other. SAS have just had more exposure so are better known.
Edit: If your interested in the politics behind SAS and it´s journey from WWII up to today, read Ghost Force by Ken Connor. http://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Force-Casse … amp;sr=8-3
Today it´s impossible for us to say who´s the best since we don´t have any insight we can only speculate.
Last edited by madmurre (2007-07-05 03:58:56)
Plus, they had those wicked elephants with 600 hitpoints each. Build like 200 of those and you could level anyone. In my experience, the Spaniards were the only ones who could beat the persians because they had those crazy monks on donkeys. You could run around like mad, converting the elephants, and then you could win.namsdrawkcaB wrote:
Personally I think the Perisan's. They were the nation which conqured the world for the longest. Before the romans they has something like nearly all of euope and 1/3 of asia.
Their army was like 1 million and the Romans were like 250,000-500,000 max. Not even i dont think.
Age of Empires FTW!
Castro, Geuvara & Cienfuegos' revolutionary Cuban army. They ousted a brutal dictator starting off with a force of less than 200 men, engaging in guerrilla warfare against a well armed army backed by the US. They then managed to repel the US Bay of Pigs invasion. David v Goliath - David winning. Hats off.
we all watch to much "300"2tuff wrote:
Spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarta!
SAS and SBS
Last edited by Ghosty (2007-07-05 05:39:37)
The Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan.
Agreed, that was some crazy shit.sergeriver wrote:
The Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mong … re_map.gif
.Gif'd, like the other guy with the conquest map thing.
The Legacy still exists today, what with alot of Muslims in Central/South Asia having the surname "Khan"
And it was all in like a century, none of that over 6000 years stuff.
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2007-07-05 05:46:36)
Either the Romans or the present day US.
No other countries have had armies that are so much more powerful than everyone elses at the time.
The British Empire, whilst it was really powerful, had European rivals who weren't far behind (most notably the French).
No other countries have had armies that are so much more powerful than everyone elses at the time.
The British Empire, whilst it was really powerful, had European rivals who weren't far behind (most notably the French).