Posting mode: Reply
[Return]
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Verification
Get a new challenge Get an audio challengeGet a visual challenge Help
File
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • このサイトについて - 翻訳


  • NOTICE: We will begin accepting janitor applications at 3:00PM EST on January 23rd, for approximately 24-48 hours. Interested? Read more here!

    This will be your only opportunity to apply! Be sure to read that page and mark your calendar.

    File : 1295740300.jpg-(292 KB, 1600x1000, 012856624037.jpg)
    292 KB Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)18:51 No.8139669  
    Their military sucks.

    Discuss.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)18:52 No.8139672
    Military?
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)18:52 No.8139673
    they have functional armor.
    discuss
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)18:56 No.8139704
    If by functional you mean weak, then yes, they do.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:05 No.8139753
    I've always thought of their military as stronger than the US's. Probably because most of the people that join there do it because it's what they want to do, not just to pay for college or because they can't find a job.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:06 No.8139763
         File1295741194.gif-(55 KB, 320x240, 9573-1934.gif)
    55 KB
    >>8139669
    It doesn't matter because you will not ever be in it.
    Discuss.

    You are trolling.
    Discuss

    You are a complete faggot for coming here.
    Discuss
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:06 No.8139764
    >>8139753
    cant tell if troll or just stupid.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:07 No.8139768
    >>8139753
    The British military?
    Stronger than ours?

    What?
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:08 No.8139775
    >>8139753
    Look at the numbers.
    ...Or, what really matters, look at the missile systems and budgets.
    ...Or just analyze it the easy way: the US could nuke the brits off of the globe with no hassle.
    Also,
    >>8139763
    ^This.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:09 No.8139780
    >>8139775

    Nukes are irrelevant, Brits could do exactly the same to the us

    Plus, the us special forces are pussy fags compared to the SAS
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:10 No.8139784
    It's obvious this is a troll. So lets not get into the same old trite arguments of "my dad can beat up your dad!".

    Please, let this die.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:11 No.8139790
    >>8139775

    If it's a numbers game, then no, the Brits definitely lose. I was talking about the skill of the individuals.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:14 No.8139808
         File1295741665.jpg-(38 KB, 528x528, 1292114915330.jpg)
    38 KB
    I dunno about their military..

    but they can't own any weapons and for some reason still post on /k/..
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:14 No.8139810
    >>8139780
    >Plus, the us special forces are pussy fags compared to the SAS
    Oh and i guess you're such a fucking expert since you've been in both or even either.
    >> Spine Breaker 2000 !!jIcPNMSVBL3 01/22/11(Sat)19:16 No.8139821
    >>8139753
    When I was in the Armed Force's Career centre waiting for my inverview for the RAF, every conversation I overheard there was that people couldn't join until they'd spent criminal convictions completely, or waited until they were eligible to again due to serving time.

    A lot of people who join do so for the same reason people do in the US, they cant get a job anywhere else and they're desperate. Folk who really want to join generally go through Sixth Form at least before going so they don't end up doing shitty jobs.

    As for our military sucking? We're pretty well equipped, the L85a2 is a fantastic and extremely accurate basic infantry rifle, and our Air Force is pretty hard to match with it's Eurofighter Typhoons. Hell, the only people who can match that are the other countries who have the Eurofighter.

    Quality, not quantity is our motto. Even though people like ex-cons are desperate to join, we don't readily accept them, and certaintly don't put them in anything other than a basic infantry role. I know quite a few soldiers, and all of them have at least College education. We don't have a USMC equivelant, because we don't look for misguided young people to con into thinking "HURRH BADASS" before sending them in as cannon fodder.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:16 No.8139823
    >>8139780
    1'st SFOD-D > SAS

    /ownedfaggot
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:16 No.8139826
    Their soldiers are the best in the world. Their equipment is state of the art. They maintain an independent Navy.

    They wrote the rules and everyone else tried to replicate it.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:18 No.8139834
    >>8139826
    Their soldiers are still being killed by arabs just like ours
    Their navy is nothing compared to ours
    They do have good equipment but we have lasers
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:18 No.8139840
         File1295741938.jpg-(101 KB, 468x764, iranletterR3003_468x764.jpg)
    101 KB
    The current Brit military is pretty freaking weak, all these decades of a PC society has raised a generation of wimps who put shame on the previous generations who doggedly fought the Germans like lions in WW1 & 2.

    case in point:
    In 2007 a bunch of softcock Royal Marine Fags in an inflatable were easily captured by the Iranians in the persian gulf.

    Iran tried to pull the same shit to the Aussies and they showed the Iranians they were willing to put up a fight as any true warrior should. So the Iranians backed off.

    see
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6228342.stm

    and

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Iranian_seizure_of_Royal_Navy_personnel
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:19 No.8139844
         File1295741960.jpg-(25 KB, 240x240, 1289880949136.jpg)
    25 KB
    >>8139780
    nigga dont know shit about CCT. THEE most dangerous operators in the world.
    >> Spine Breaker 2000 !!jIcPNMSVBL3 01/22/11(Sat)19:19 No.8139845
    >>8139821
    Additionally, we have some pretty fantastic units. The Gurkhas come to mind. Not even British but willing to do all kinds of crazy shit, just for the honour. The Gurkhas, the Green Beret Commandos, the SAS. All fantastic.

    OP is probably just a troll who equates size and sledgehammer tactics with strength. The British Military is a scalpel. We make precise cuts.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:20 No.8139852
    >>8139834

    >laser
    >built by BaE systems
    >equipped on Royal Navy ships

    >Their navy is nothing compared to ours

    It's the only other Navy in the world that actually has all the tools a Navy is meant to have.

    >Their soldiers are still being killed by arabs just like ours

    Anyone can get killed by anyone else, that's a retarded point and you know it.
    >> Girl !!xfn1bmb3QAI 01/22/11(Sat)19:21 No.8139857
    If British military is so good, why do their royalty wear American hats with American flags on them when they're deployed?
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:21 No.8139862
    >>8139845
    OP is certainly a troll, but not one that actually cares much about the topic of this thread.
    >> Spine Breaker 2000 !!jIcPNMSVBL3 01/22/11(Sat)19:22 No.8139866
    >>8139857
    Wat. Even if this was true, the monarchy is not a valid representation of Britain. They're a tourist attraction, nothing more.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:22 No.8139867
    >>8139840

    >were willing to put up a fight as any true warrior should.

    Kinda like all those Americans that got captured in Afghanistan/Iraq who got paraded around on TV before begging for their lives?
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:23 No.8139871
    >>8139852
    Actually Boeing has built the one i was referring to and put it on a C-130
    and I've never heard of any laser being put on the Royal navy ships


    >It's the only other Navy in the world that actually has all the tools a Navy is meant to have.
    Oh and what's that?

    >Anyone can get killed by anyone else, that's a retarded point and you know it.
    So i can go up to an SAS trooper and kill him easily?
    If that was so then it seems he isn't so elite.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:23 No.8139872
    >>8139857

    If the American military is so good why did it go around begging all the other countries in the world to join them in a war that highlighted you as the useless bunch of fat cunts that you are?
    >> Girl !!xfn1bmb3QAI 01/22/11(Sat)19:24 No.8139874
    >>8139866
    Just sayin'. If the prince of England himself wears an American flag while deployed, what does that say about his country or military?
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:24 No.8139877
    It doesn't suck. But they have cut it the bare minimum, They aren't going to be entering any wars. They will still assist the U.S. in occupations, and will assist in a war, which is all they need. As long as they have the U.S. as an ally, they don't need overwhelming force. I personally think the U.S. should leave NATO and go back to isolationism until we are needed again. Until then I think we should work on improving are country and helping are people. Not occupying other countries.
    >> Spine Breaker 2000 !!jIcPNMSVBL3 01/22/11(Sat)19:25 No.8139886
    >>8139874
    It says, for aforementioned reasons, nothing. He's an inbred like the rest of the royals, paraded around to earn some dollar from tourists. He's not a real British soldier. I doubt he's ever been within 100 miles of a combat zone.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:26 No.8139887
    >>8139874

    >and I've never heard of any laser being put on the Royal navy ships

    There's plenty.

    >Oh and what's that?

    Submarines, force projection, carriers, its own infantry forces.

    >So i can go up to an SAS trooper and kill him easily?

    I meant anyone on a battlefield. The Waffen SS got picked off by a bunch of French students. Rangers got gutted and skinned by Vietnamese.

    You on the other hand probably couldn't even kill yourself.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:26 No.8139888
    >>8139872
    Wow, Do you not understand how NATO works? God you are so fucking stupid. I guess thats to be expected of the British educational system though.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:26 No.8139889
    >>8139877
    This
    Fuck the world, fend for yourselfs
    >> Spine Breaker 2000 !!jIcPNMSVBL3 01/22/11(Sat)19:27 No.8139897
    >>8139877
    We don't really pride ourselves on "entering wars" which we don't really have anything to do with. It's not our intention to go around policing the world, but to defend ourselves when we need to.

    And if there was a major situation where Britain did need to defend itself, the overwhelming likelyhood would be that all of NATO would be involved in the conflict too.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:28 No.8139901
    >>8139887
    There's plenty.
    You mean the one that was supposed to dazzle the pilots?


    >Submarines, force projection, carriers, its own infantry forces.
    Implying the U.S doesn't have ten times as many

    I meant anyone on a battlefield. The Waffen SS got picked off by a bunch of French students. Rangers got gutted and skinned by Vietnamese.

    >You on the other hand probably couldn't even kill yourself.
    Oh and you know me? For all you know i could be a former Navy Seal.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:28 No.8139902
    >>8139808
    >weapons
    >is more than just guns
    >you're a fuckig retard
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:28 No.8139904
    I wish the U.S. military employed the Commonwealth regimental system.

    It's perfect in its simplicity and has withstood centuries. Who hasn't heard of the Black Watch, the King's Own Rifles, the Coldstream Guards, the Blues and Royals, the Honourable Artillery Company (they date back to the 1500s!) ?

    In the words of George Vanier "They won't die for a flag but they'll bloody die for the Van Doos!"
    >> Girl !!xfn1bmb3QAI 01/22/11(Sat)19:29 No.8139905
         File1295742543.jpg-(50 KB, 484x640, harryinterview_600x793.jpg)
    50 KB
    >>8139886
    Iunnnooooo. He probably wears it hoping the U.S. forces will adopt him so he's less likely to get killed. Especially considering he's stuck with the massive POS that is the SA80, video related.
    Poor piece of shit can't even fire more than two rounds in succession without jamming.
    http://www.apacheclips.com/media/27491/British_Troops_Ambushed/
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:29 No.8139906
    >>8139888

    Afghanistan is a NATO commitment, Iraq isn't.

    You cried and screamed when France wouldn't join you for months. Then because they didn't, they suddenly were useless in your eyes.

    The only competent Americans I ever worked with were Cavalry and a few officers from the Air Force. Everyone else was a complete moron. Some of them couldn't even spell. There was a ton of Mexicans, blacks and other undesirables.

    But they went there for FREDUM right
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:30 No.8139911
    >>8139823

    >US special forces better than the SAS


    HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

    OH WOW
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:31 No.8139917
    If Britan had the same numbers and equipment as the US military they would slaughter them, simply because their soldiers aren't fucking stupid teenagers and actually get good training.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:31 No.8139919
    >>8139906
    >The only competent Americans I ever worked with were Cavalry and a few officers from the Air Force. Everyone else was a complete moron. Some of them couldn't even spell. There was a ton of Mexicans, blacks and other undesirables

    >Probably worked with one or two units and is now judging them all
    Oh England

    >>8139911
    Can you prove either is better than the other?
    No, then shut the fuck up
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:32 No.8139921
    >>8139911
    You do realize SAS and Special Forces both are trained for specific situations? And yes, The US special forces is a better fighting force than the SAS
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:33 No.8139926
    >>8139917
    If Britain had the same numbers and equipment as the US military they would have the same training as us since the only reason they get good training is because they have one fifth the amount of troops we do.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:33 No.8139927
    >>8139919

    The SAS has not only been around far longer than Delta or SEALs but they've had a far more successful and extensive operational history. They're also trained to fill far more roles too.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:33 No.8139930
    >>8139917
    >If

    Yeah, IF, but until that magical world comes to be, you depend on us, and your leaders spend their days trying not to piss us off.

    feels good to be superior.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:33 No.8139932
    >>8139886

    >He's not a real British soldier

    Yes he is, and he's a lot more real than 90 percent of the Army and 99 percent of the US Military that sits around doing nothing all day and being a REMF.

    He didn't have to join the Army. He didn't have to do anything, he could have just taken the easy route. Nice one trying to score points with the Americans by bashing someone who you've never met and has done more work in their life than the majority of the British population.

    >He probably wears it hoping the U.S. forces will adopt him so he's less likely to get killed

    He wore it because it was going to be a fucking liability if the media got hold of it. Which it did. The American media took all these photos and spread it all over. So he had to go home. You put your own troops at risk and ours because of your moronic media.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:35 No.8139938
    >>8139930

    You won't be superior once China decides they've had enough of your shit.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:35 No.8139940
         File1295742948.jpg-(39 KB, 300x441, 98438920.jpg)
    39 KB
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:35 No.8139942
    >>8139927
    It doesn't matter if they've been around longer and had more ops
    It's all about the training and i can say that neither of us don't know enough about them to judge who is better.
    As for more successful you can't really judge that since both have a lot of classified ops you never hear about .
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:36 No.8139948
    >>8139938
    >China
    >Attacking us
    Oh England
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:37 No.8139952
    >>8139930

    >you depend on us

    Why do you ask us to go along with your adventures into third world countries then?

    Remember when you invaded Vietnam, completely failed at everything and made yourself look foolish? You relied on the Australians/Kiwis to bail you out, and you still bashed their contributions. Despite them being the only successful ones.

    Even American citizens hate their military. It's not the 80s anymore. The 3rd Shock Army is not coming over the border. They aren't buying it, and a military that had a reputation for good soldiers turned into a fucking welfare event.

    You have little yellow cards you flash in training if you're finding it too difficult. When I lagged behind on an exercise after recovering from an injury, I got punched in the back of the head and kicked repeatedly on the floor whilst two Corporals screamed at me.
    >> Spine Breaker 2000 !!jIcPNMSVBL3 01/22/11(Sat)19:37 No.8139954
    >>8139905
    Since H&K fixed the L85 and made the L85a2, it's been a very reliable rifle, and still maintains fantastic accuracy. Just the reputation of being jamtastic has survived.

    It's getting more and more adaptable now, Daniel Defense are making an RIS system for it which is being put on more and more units. Like any rifle though, it needs maintainance. Who is to say the guys in the video didn't clean their rifles often enough? The vast majority of weapons will malfunction if they're not properly maintained.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:37 No.8139956
    >>8139938
    China is dependent on US, we are the consumers and they are the supplier

    Take away the consumer and the company will fall. Which is why China strives to please us.

    Face it, America is the world power. The world needs America. Weather you like it or not.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:38 No.8139958
    >>8139952
    >You have little yellow cards you flash in training if you're finding it too difficult.
    Yep you're fucking retarded
    Just get the fuck out.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:38 No.8139959
    We've been strong allies since WW2, we both have highly respectable militaries and we'l both continue to help eachother out in future conflicts.

    Anyone who says otherwise is a troll.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:39 No.8139964
    >>8139952
    Cools story bro.

    Now if we remove all the bullshit historical "facts" you pulled out of your ass, We are just left with your lies about being in the military.

    5 star post.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:41 No.8139972
    >>8139956

    >Take away the consumer and the company will fall

    What a fucking stupid attempt to understand modern economics. You cannot take away consumers. You can't even replace the stuff China sells to you with your own goods because that would cost you even more money.

    Americans don't buy things out of necessity. They buy things because they think its good value or popular. If people bought the things they needed then people would own barely anything.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:42 No.8139985
    >>8139753
    you always thought wrong. man for man they're about the same, but the whole UK military is smaller than the USMC, which is the smallest branch of the US armed forces.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:44 No.8139991
         File1295743463.jpg-(2.12 MB, 2560x1920, francestrong.jpg)
    2.12 MB
    Don't the French have the largest military in western europe? And they do also have the FFL.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:44 No.8139994
    >>8139991
    We r legun
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:46 No.8140000
    >>8139991
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_size_of_armed_forces
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:46 No.8140002
    ITT: Young civilian anons from both sides of the atlantic get trolled very hard
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:46 No.8140004
    >>8139991
    Yeah, but the American media portrays you as a bunch of cowardly faggots, so it doesn't count.

    Because the Americans are always right.

    About everything.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:48 No.8140008
    >>8139958

    >Now if we remove all the bullshit historical "facts" you pulled out of your ass

    All of them are true and you know it. Your "soldiers" died for nothing in Vietnam and when you lost terribly to a third world country you attacked the Australians, despite them actually making progress.

    >>8139991

    Yes, which is why the US wanted France as an ally in Iraq. When it said "Non" they got very upset and began to cry.

    In France no one gave a shit and went on with their lives. Americans still get mad to this day.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:49 No.8140009
    >>8140004
    I know you are being facetious but I felt myself taking great pride in that fact.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:49 No.8140011
         File1295743789.jpg-(288 KB, 700x881, France.jpg)
    288 KB
    >>8140004
    >>8140004
    Yeah but the people who aren't retards in the U.S know the French have a good military.
    Of course i'm still going to make jokes about it the same way you guys make fat jokes
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:50 No.8140016
    >>8140008

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Long_Tan
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:51 No.8140019
         File1295743874.png-(15 KB, 674x433, 1285616582010.png)
    15 KB
    I am british and i can say with confidence that our military does suck. Our soldiers afghanistan are to concerned for their own safety to go outside to do any patrols without 10,000 american soldiers to back them up. The only defence we now have against russian subs is warnings from norway and american airforce planes to flush them out, hell even the royal navy managed to beach its newest most advanced sub.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:53 No.8140030
    >>8140008
    We were very successful in Vietnam
    Every battle fought, we won
    We inflicted heavy casualties on them and we forced them into a cease fire.
    They violated that after we had almost completely left
    Also you replied to the wrong post
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:56 No.8140044
    >>8140030
    And yet, you lost.

    It's almost as though killing the most people in this war...didn't result in victory for your side?

    Hm, odd.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:56 No.8140046
    >>8140030

    Hes trolling you, all of the allied forces in Vietnam were extremely successful.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:58 No.8140054
    troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread troll thread
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:58 No.8140056
         File1295744314.gif-(1.49 MB, 264x226, clustercuss.gif)
    1.49 MB
    I say we settle this.
    >US vs. UK
    We will use Australia as our battle ground, it will allow for air, naval, and ground engagements.
    Winner gets Canada.

    Whose in?
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:58 No.8140057
    >>8140044
    I don't see how you thing we lost a war we were no longer involved in
    I'm put this simply so you can understand it

    We forced the North into a cease fire which means they weren't going to fight anymore
    Once we thought everything was good we left.
    Later on they decided to be bitches and violate the cease fire.
    God Brits are fucking retarded
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:59 No.8140063
    >>8140056

    >implying you wont end up having to team up to battle against Australias wildlife
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:59 No.8140064
    >>8140054
    Overall this has been a successful venture, I thank you all for your cooperation.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)19:59 No.8140065
    >>8140056
    I'm in
    But i'm not fighting any land sharks
    That's not in my pay grade.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:00 No.8140071
    >>8140063
    Land sharks
    Land sharks everywhere
    Dammit Steve Irwin would have been the greatest soldier ever.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:00 No.8140072
    >71 posts and 9 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.

    You're all a bunch of faggots.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:02 No.8140079
    >>8140030
    >We were very successful in Vietnam
    no
    >Every battle fought, we won
    no
    >We inflicted heavy casualties on them and we forced them into a cease fire.
    we didn't force anything
    >They violated that after we had almost completely left
    owned
    >Also you replied to the wrong post
    2/5
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:03 No.8140088
    >>8140079
    Why don't you just get the fuck out since you don't seem to know anything about this.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:05 No.8140103
         File1295744733.jpg-(12 KB, 260x194, 1290502715204.jpg)
    12 KB
    >>8140088
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:06 No.8140107
    >>8140088

    Stop being trolled
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:06 No.8140108
    >>8140103
    Yes i am mad.
    I hate trying to explain things to retards
    In fact i just got trolled didn't i?
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:07 No.8140113
    >>8140088
    Says the guy who still repeats "we won every battle" like his desperate claims will somehow make it true.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:09 No.8140128
    >>8140113
    From a History channel source
    Myth: The United States lost the war in Vietnam.

    The American military was not defeated in Vietnam. The American military did not lose a battle of any consequence. From a military standpoint, it was almost an unprecedented performance. (Westmoreland quoting Douglas Pike, a professor at the University of California, Berkley a renowned expert on the Vietnam War) [Westmoreland] This included Tet 68, which was a major military defeat for the VC and NVA.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:15 No.8140158
    >>8140128
    >Myth: The United States lost the war in Vietnam.
    The fact that the history channel would claim this undermines the credibility of the history channel more then it validates this insane claim.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:16 No.8140166
    >>8140158
    Then go ahead and name one battle of importance the US lost while fighting the war.
    They lost minor skirmishes yes but never major battles.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:20 No.8140181
         File1295745616.jpg-(67 KB, 300x321, 1215924611686.jpg)
    67 KB
    >> tru_junglist !!GCI71WmObsA 01/22/11(Sat)20:20 No.8140182
    >>8140158
    the us military didn't lose the war. the politicians did. all of our military objectives were accomplished. it's the politicians who failed.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:21 No.8140184
    >>8140166
    battles!=wars
    To win a war you need to achieve your objectives and prevent your opponent from achieving theirs, not just stack bodies like cordwood. Did the US achieve the goals they set out to? no. Did the North Vietnamese achieve theirs? yes. So: North Vietnam indisputably won.
    >> Anonymous 01/22/11(Sat)20:23 No.8140197
    Battle of Hoa Da-Song Mao



    [Return]
    Delete Post [File Only]
    Password
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]