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.

 

USA can take on the rest of the world???

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by C11H17N2NaO2S
 



I was wondering when you were going to hop on this bandwagon with your pissing and moaning about American troops, while at the same time, tooting your own pathetic horn about your "mad combat skillz".

Gonna take some time and add about how US troops get more medals? I loved when you were crying the blues about that one.

Now be a good example to everyone and move out and draw fire.




posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by signal2noise
 


i've already said i didn't want people bashing the US, that wasn't the reason for this.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by signal2noise
 


Regardless of his stupidity he does make a point, American troops are pretty # on the ground. I dont mean with regards to combat engagements but with regards to actual occupational skills, policing and community relations. Thats basicaly why you need proffesional armys such Britain to move in on the ground after the American carpet bombing has stopd. And medals?, different nations have different criteria for awarding medals, some are more lax than others.

And American mercenaries?, jeesus....



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
This whole war thing itself serves a bigger purpose. It aims at bringing a big governing council for european and noth america. The only pain will be middle east countries by their rapidly growing poplulation. By this i mean the islamist countries. So America and allies are hell bent on disarming them completely. Or atleast bringing their population down. I think when the war breaks out there is a good chance 50% of world population will die and aftermath situation will be suitable for proposing the council for bringing the west countries under one roof. Possibly even the globe by making the UN much more stronger. And finally America cant take on the rest of world. But America combined with European Union against Russia ,China and possibly India will result in chaos. I think thats why they are occupying Afghanistan so close to these three nations.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
No the US could not defeat the worlds armies combined, But I reckon they could beat every country one at the time bar Russia and China where they would fight to a stalemate on Russian/Chinese territory, the US navy would prevent any invasion from Russia/China but they would not be able to militarily defeat either of them.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by PlayeR87]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by signal2noise
 


Definitately, I have no like for the Armed forces in any country and I purely joined for two reasons. To learn skills that would not be available on Civvy street. And two to kill legally. Im not longer in the Mil and can not stand others who so willingly do the bidding of their countries heirarchy for no money and for the wrong reasons. No one in the mil deserves any empathy. Get out and get a proper job and let the people who want to start these wars do it themselves.

You my friend watch other peoples posting but have contributed nothing to society ever. I bet you live with your mum. Or is she dead? At your age probably dead!



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
They LOST Vietnam, they have been getting whipped in Afganistan and would do against China and Russia.


Wow, really? Been to Afganistan lately? I know your answer: That would be a big no. Well, I have. We ain't losing there, regardless what the media is trying to pawn off on the public.


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
I am from a military background myself, Northern Ireland, Sierra Leone, Bosnia.


And everyone here knows what a tremendous military powerhouse N. Ireland, Sierra Leone and Bosnia are.



Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
Im still alive without any so called war Post war syndrome BS.


Probably because you saw zero combat. And what sort of combat in Sierra Leone? Picking on some farmer with a rusted AK?

And not every US Troop has PTSD. I sure don't.


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
They are not well trained....except for in ganging up on people in large numbers. They have big mouths and they purely rely on they superior weapons. YES they do have the best kit and weapons.


Hmmmm.....US troops have the best training out there. Who has better?


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
But they have zero standards. Zero initiative and zero brains. They try to win with brawn alone.....and without NUKES in todays world that dont win anything but beauty pageants.


Wrong again. US forces have initiative and brains. Soviet troops weren't even given maps and compass to work with.


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
They are ill disciplined, have no real talent for war (they have the numbers so they can sacrifice many men without a seconds thought), have the dumbest people commanding units, regiments.


Once again, your lack of research and knowledge is showing. US troops are well known for NOT sacrificing men without thought.


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
Without their great technology they are worthless. Not one other nations including Canada like serving with the Yanks. Its a fact.


A fact, huh? Care to back that up with a source or two? Because if they didn't like serving with US troops, then why do so many countries send their men here to train? And that also goes back to your worthless comment about not being well trained.

You're a no-go at this station.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
LET THE ONLINE WARS COMMENCE!



don't forget to flag and star



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


I dont mean offence but US are heavily dependant on their technologies. They are good with all the satellite and bombing from sitting in a closed room. Here i'm not saying US is not good in man to man combat faced directly with the enemy. But we are yet to know that. They have not been in a full scale war with a big country. Even in world war 2 they came almost during the end. Used nukes on Japan. To really know what their military is about they have to fight with Russia or China on full scale.
But honestly i hope WW3 would be devastating for everyone. So it would be good to think why the world is in such a crisis we are all living in the present day.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Yeah I realize that but this is about the American Army not the Russians or Chinese.

You are correct the Russians couldn't beat the rag-tag bunch of herders and farmers either.

Russians or Chinese couldn't win a war against the whole world either, just like the Americans. If either two of those powers ally then the third is toast, simple as that.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnze
Did they really?, China pretty much burnd North Vietnam to the ground.

As for Afghanistan, # that, no one apart from Ghengis has ever really conquerd that crazy place. Britain and Russia fought each other for about a 100 years for Afghanistan with no real succes and seems like folks will keep on fighting for it with no great success.




HA HA
Ok I had my laugh

You left out Alexander the Great.




posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Who has better training than the US?

Well these are better trained and more feared than any US SF.

1) British SAS
2) Russian Spetznas
3) German GSG-9
4) Polish GROM - (even President Bush commended them for helping US in the Gulf)
5) British SBS
6) British Royal Marine
7) French foreign Legion

Thats who are better trained. BUT yes America have the numbers so they can win some things. Still not very good though.

And as you have been to Afgan (supposedly) you are getting caned by them out there. Everyone knows it.

Yes you probably are killing more people but most are civilians as you usually kill.

And I served only what was available. Afgan was not a war for us when I was in the Mil. So why did you QUIT and why not there now? To much for you. Or the know that you are losing?



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
Russians or Chinese couldn't win a war against the whole world either, just like the Americans. If either two of those powers ally then the third is toast, simple as that.


Exactly, but I haven't seen a thread titled, "Russia (or China) can take on the rest of the world??" here on ATS.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielhanson420
funny the only war i'v heard of america winning was against its self.


We actually lost that one in the long term.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by TheComte
Russians or Chinese couldn't win a war against the whole world either, just like the Americans. If either two of those powers ally then the third is toast, simple as that.


Exactly, but I haven't seen a thread titled, "Russia (or China) can take on the rest of the world??" here on ATS.


That's because they're not trying to.

Yet.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
Who has better training than the US?

Well these are better trained and more feared than any US SF.

1) British SAS
2) Russian Spetznas
3) German GSG-9
4) Polish GROM - (even President Bush commended them for helping US in the Gulf)
5) British SBS
6) British Royal Marine



All of these are very well trained, but better trained? Hmmmm....this BS debate has gone on before.

And the "French Foreign Legion" is better than US SF? Nah.....sorry about that.


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
And as you have been to Afgan (supposedly) you are getting caned by them out there. Everyone knows it.


Yes, I have been. No, we aren't.


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
Yes you probably are killing more people but most are civilians as you usually kill.


It's true that US forces have killed civilians, but steps are being taken to reduce that. I don't see the insurgents doing anything like that.


Originally posted by C11H17N2NaO2S
And I served only what was available. Afgan was not a war for us when I was in the Mil. So why did you QUIT and why not there now? To much for you. Or the know that you are losing?


Quit? Well, if you did any actual research, the US military is working with something called, "rotations". You go over, you come back, you go over, you come back. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Pretty easy to understand.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Slim
LET THE ONLINE WARS COMMENCE!



don't forget to flag and star


Yeah, it didn't take long for this thread to go downhill in a hand cart, did it?

Sorry about that.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by signal2noise
 


I'm sorry, my mistake. I wrote so much. I even edited it a few times. What I tried to say was 'Germany assumed bcuz of their huge army that they were unstoppable but got THEIR asses kicked by an inferior army.' Meaning the French when Germany failed at pushing them back from some of their bigger forts(Maginot) Germany couldnt close in on them and the French pushed them back. Sorry, guess I could've elaborated a bit as well, it happens.
I think Germany was either given the forts or won the forts in the end. Either way, they got them in the end.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Well if you are still in then I wish you well. However it is a fact that people will back their "team" no matter what and especially if on that team.

As you are currently a serving soldier why do you actually think you are over there?

Do you believe that you are working to a "real" goal?

This terrorism, do you believe it to be a real or concocted threat?

How many planes have you been on that had terrorists on?
Infact how many friends of yours have?
If the US is so well trained and prepared how did a few third world losers manage to infiltrate and blow up the twin towers? The start of this war YOU are fighting!

Tell me how they managed that then!! I would love to hear your opinion genuinely! because everyone on this thread is stating the US can beat anyone.

How is that possible when they can't protect their own people? UNLESS they let it happen!! Maybe???

How did these people get the better of the US mil, gov etc. And on your own soil?



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Russia could not aford to keep up with the USA when it start to build massive aircraft carriers so they set up a think tank to come up with a plan and that plan was to stay ahead of americia with missiles and torpedos.

Fact is the american fleet is a sitting duck and can not defend against a russina attack and remember that mother of all bombs well Russia has one three times as big.

The USA spent millions to develope a pen that would work in space and the russians decide to use pencils.

Most people are convince the american won WWII but do some history and you will see they were johny come late and Russia did the real work and paid the real price.

Does anyone know who takes the real big bits up to the space station ? it's Russia and the only thing the USA won Russia on was the nuke and the moon landings and a lot of people would argue with that one

Just because the yanks go around shouting there gobs off and showing it's hardware does not mean they are ahead of Russia and if you thow in China then america would not last long with it's obeast population and yes we have all see stealth but what have we not seen from the other sides.

The AK-47 for it's price is the worlds best gun ever made and even Europe leads the USA when it comes to satalite systems needed to guild bombs and they americans had the cheek toy say they whould shoot it down if we did not turn it off when asked ! Mr T about sums it all up.

I'm not sure many americans knowing that they are being lead along by the zionists would be to keen to sign up for a war in anycase and most people in the army are black and go in because they can not get jobs so i would guess they harbour a resentment towards the system and won't go out on a limb if pushed.

Yes i nearly forgot america has 5000 nukes but we have moved on from the days they gave black death in a blanket to an old indian war cheif and who knows what modern bio-weapons can do and thats before throwing in a little nanotech.

If we are to beleive what we are told a guy that goes around on a donkey and lives in a cave took out a good chunk of the USA without any trouble on 9/11 but thats just stupid, stupid to beleive.

Now i love the old war movies, don't get me wrong but any new major war could well be fought out in hospitals and labs using test tubes whilst our zionist leaders sit it out underground as the world is made a greener place but they forgot one minor detail about all the nuclear reactors going critical without being maintained.

Ask people from the second world war and they will tell you that when the germans bombed the british ducked and when the british bombed the germans ducked but when the americans bombed everyone ducked.

Don't mix hollywood with the real deal.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by LieBuster]

[edit on 2-6-2010 by LieBuster]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join