It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Harlequin
and you are not a moderator so stop pretending to be one ok.
Originally posted by Harlequin
one of the reasons for the massive difference in casualites is relevant experience for handling populations that are hostile to you
Originally posted by Harlequin
here we are 4 years on and the south is much more passified than the north. hmmm i wonder why.
Originally posted by Harlequin
Iraq is effectively broken down into 3 parts , north , middle and south , with the us forces in the north , the brits in the south and just about everyone else in the middle - the situation in the north was nothing like as volatile 4 years ago as it is now - and that is not to do with mixed ethnic populations but the initial handling of the situation ; and that handling was that poor here we are in 2007 with hourly bombings and open warfare.
you can only make a `first impression` once - and that is where the experience that the british has in ireland (and ignored by the usa over israelie experience) comes into play - sadly the us messed up and here we are (all imo of course) with the mess now.
originally posted by speakeroftruth
The United States has gotten itself into a position where the military is accepting quantity over quality. While I was still in the Army, the government lowered the ASVAB score requirement from a 31 to a 27.... Now, I scored a 78 on the ASVAB test, which, at least according to my recruiter, was in the top 20 percentile... Anyone that can't score a 31 or above on the ASVAB shouldn't,in all honesty, be allowed to joining any branch of the military.
The point I am making is that there are many immature and, yes, ignorant people that are allowed to join our military forces.
Originally posted by Iblis
Edit: The U.K. does deserve respect -- though, 'we' are not the ones who began this childish mud-slinging contest.
In all likely-hood, the United Kingdom would lose.
And your citizens should be happy about that.
While the United States continues to spend billions in military assets it will most likely not need for another twenty, thirty years, the United Kingdom's funds are being put into domestic programs which increase the living quality of its citizens.
The United Kingdom fields one of the most powerful, technologically advanced, and comprehensive armed forces in the world. The UK has the second highest military expenditure in the world[41] despite only having the 28th highest number of troops. It is also the second largest spender on military science, engineering and technology[42] Despite Britain's wide ranging capabilities, recent defence policy has a stated assumption that any large operation would be undertaken as part of a coalition. Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq (Granby, Desert Fox and Telic) may all be taken as precedent - indeed the last large scale military action in which the British armed forces fought alone was the Falklands War of 1982.
The Royal Navy is the second largest navy in the world in terms of gross tonnage, with 91 commissioned ships. The Naval Service (which comprises the Royal Navy and Royal Marines) had a strength of 35,470 in July 2006[43] and is charged with custody of the United Kingdom's independent strategic nuclear deterrent consisting of four Trident missile submarines, while the Royal Marines provide commando units for amphibious assault and for specialist reinforcement forces in and beyond the NATO area. According to the same source, the British Army had a strength of 100,010, while the Royal Air Force had a strength of 45,210. This puts the total number of regular Armed Forces personnel at 180,690 (not including civilians), nine percent of whom were women. This number is supported by reserve forces, including over 35,000 from the Territorial Army. The total number of serving personnel, including reserve forces, is therefore in the region of 225,000 (taking into account Navy, Marines and Air Force reserves).
Linky
Originally posted Niall197
That'll be the same invincible AAW system that nearly led to the battleship USS Missouri being struck by an Iraqi Silkworm during the first Gulf War (it finally got shot down by a Sea Dart from a British warship HMS Gloucester).
Originally posted Niall197
And what about the Chinese sub which popped up undetected in the midst of a Pacific CBG last year...
Originally posted by BlackWidow23