And it's no coincidence that one of the best combat knives is specifically designed to hack off limbsTexas Joker 52 said:But, most definitely Gurkhas, all the way. Cool under fire, polite, nicest guys you'll ever meet. But also the most dangerous to go against, especially with their Kukris. Yes, the knife that puts the Bowie to shame, and is possibly the best combat knife in existence.
That's my problem with the US army, your superior technology and numbers always seem to make for very sloppy grunts. Whereas in Israel or here we make do with buying slightly older tech and spend our time trying to make sure our soldiers are up to scratch. Then again, the US tends to use its armed forces very differently to Israel and AustraliaGekford said:Australia or Israel have the best small armies in the world man for man they are significantly better then say the US or China. America how ever easily has the best tech in the world which gives them a huge advatage. As for individual units the Australian SAS are the best by far closely followed buy the brits. SEALS get a good rap but have the huge technical backing of the US behind them so they tend not to be as good as either SAS for individual skills
The SAS was founded in 1941 by David Stirling during WWII.thaluikhain said:Define "deadly".
As mentioned, nuclear weaponry tends to overshadow much else.
Except the SAS hadn't been founded yet. People who were involved in WW2 ended up in the SAS, though.That_Sneaky_Camper said:they have a well-earned reputation starting as far back as World War II.
I have a feeling spartans versus common soldiers today wouldn't stand much of a chance.Garen Truscott said:How about the Spartans (the real ones from Sparta) if you are going to get historical.
Let's not forget USA <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax>overthrowing Iran's elected, civilian government to make way for an autocratic regime which eventually led to today's Islamic Republic.Whoatemysupper said:The Afghan Army? Because their training is 100% given by foreign nations and this isn't the case where the promising pupil surpasses the sensei on their mountain fortress/temple. As far as overcoming the Russians and Americans, the Taliban were initially trained, armed, and funded by the CIA to combat the Russian occupation.ElPatron said:The Afghanis.
They resisted against the Russian and American elite. How about that? Afghanistan is where empires go to die.
Things kinda went downhill with the Taliban acting autonomously when they kicked out the Soviets (Russians isn't really appropriate when I think about but hey, digressions are cool) and the U.S. would like people to forget that they had any stance other than "These guys are really bad people and they must die." and actually were used them as a tool to fight the Soviets.
Now that I think about it, the U.S. has a bit of a track record when it comes to this. Did they not support the Japanese Emperor during the Boshin War? Similar time frame and a Shogun might have maintained Isolation. Meaning their would be no embargo by the U.S in the first place and then no Pearl Harbor attack; so no Pacific Theatre.
Actually the British may have done something similar with the Russian Revolution. Did they not maintain relations and weapons deals with the regime that had cast out the relatives (royalty)? And wasn't Rasputin shot with a British spy's pistol? Years later, the world could have ended.
So, good job western society, you are amazing at causing yourself short-term relief and long-term pain.
Disclaimer: I am not a historian and I may be confused, misremembering things, misinformed, or wrong.
Which the Space Marines regularly fight the physical incarnation of, sure there's the war on disease, but when was the last time your pharmacist plunged a psychically charged lance into the spinal column of a 200ft tall mass of infectious pus and bile that caused all those around it flesh to melt and bones to boil?Ultratwinkie said:That's because we haven't had a war with something infinite. The only thing that is close is the war on illness and disease.
Er, yes and no. While the US does have a lot of fnacy new toys, it still uses lots of old gear other nations have abandoned. The standard service rifle being the M16 or M4 (depending on branch) comes to mind.Dryk said:That's my problem with the US army, your superior technology and numbers always seem to make for very sloppy grunts. Whereas in Israel or here we make do with buying slightly older tech and spend our time trying to make sure our soldiers are up to scratch. Then again, the US tends to use its armed forces very differently to Israel and Australia