How tough do you think Anericans are?

[longly]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

 

[konradv]

If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

I think they found that out on November 8, 2016.

 

[night_son]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

First off, whilst many American younger men and soon-to-be young men are addicted to video games, porn, discovering their feminine sides and social justice man buns, they hail from tough as nails American stock of old; they could be trained up by the proper cadre. Second, Russia is neither an "enemy" we need to fear or posture against with saber rattling, nor would the Russians stand the slightest chance of defeating us in a conventional war of any kind. I could explain to you why, with a deep, factual, irrefutable strategic breakdown of US and Russian military forces but I haven't the time nor the motivation to properly educate you.

My sense, after reading your post, is that you aren't an American but rather a distant foreign person who views American politics remotely through a lens of left-leaning historical revision. Nothing wrong with that, I suppose. As they say, opinions are like assholes. The world of online interaction these days is nothing more than a constant masquerade.

 

[9thIDdoc]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

The only point I agree with you on is that as a Nation we are morally weak. "WE" were most certainly neither defeated nor humiliated in Vietnam and the grit we displayed there drew a surprising amount of admiration from our enemies.
Wars may be started by nations but are fought by a small portion of that nation known as military which may include militia. In Vietnam the average soldier displayed far more grit and will than was asked or expected and we withdrew with honor and reputation intact. The problems we had in Vietnam were a direct result of morally weak civilians and the weak willed and dishonorable civilians they elected to run that war.
"WE" were cowed by no one. I resent your use of "WE". Rather than being a "loss" our war in Vietnam contributed to our win of the far more important Cold War.
An army by no means needs to be big to win. In Vietnam we were at all times greatly outnumbered by our enemies but we almost always won our battles. Our current military could take out all of Alexander the Great's entire fabled army before lunch and with few if any casualties.
In 1968 I received my draft notice then enlisted in an effort to receive my preferred training so I'm not sure if I would be considered a draftee or a volunteer. What I am sure of is that the draft is a type of slavery and slaves often make poor warriors.
"No state has an inherent right to survive through conscript troops and in the long run no state ever has. Roman matrons used to say to their sons: "Come back with your shield, or on it." Later on, this custom declined. So did Rome."

Excerpt from the notebooks of Lazarus Long, from Robert Heinlein's "Time Enough for Love"

 

[odanny]

Most countries are tougher than the United States, we are soft, both literally (fat), and figuratively, in ground combat.

Our advantage has always been technology and the highest volume of firepower, but that did shit in the jungles of Vietnam, and has done squat in Afghanistan. In terms of one to one, other less advanced countries have a toughness advantage, because it is bred into them. Not everyone in those countries relies on their smartphone, their social media, their central air and furnace, etc, etc. etc., so yea, of course they will be tougher. But can they saturate the ground with high explosives like this country can? Probably not, considering so much of our 20 trillion dollars a year GDP gets wasted on the latest whiz bang, high tech weaponry.

 

[longly]

If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

I think they found that out on November 8, 2016.

I think you are wrong. I don’t think Putin will do anything as long as Trump is in office; he thinks Trump is crazy. Putin will wait for a liberal democrat president. No matter what the Russian did, we could deal with them if we were willing to use our tactical nukes, but we won’t; at least no democrat would.

 

[longly]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

The only point I agree with you on is that as a Nation we are morally weak. "WE" were most certainly neither defeated nor humiliated in Vietnam and the grit we displayed there drew a surprising amount of admiration from our enemies.
Wars may be started by nations but are fought by a small portion of that nation known as military which may include militia. In Vietnam the average soldier displayed far more grit and will than was asked or expected and we withdrew with honor and reputation intact. The problems we had in Vietnam were a direct result of morally weak civilians and the weak willed and dishonorable civilians they elected to run that war.
"WE" were cowed by no one. I resent your use of "WE". Rather than being a "loss" our war in Vietnam contributed to our win of the far more important Cold War.
An army by no means needs to be big to win. In Vietnam we were at all times greatly outnumbered by our enemies but we almost always won our battles. Our current military could take out all of Alexander the Great's entire fabled army before lunch and with few if any casualties.
In 1968 I received my draft notice then enlisted in an effort to receive my preferred training so I'm not sure if I would be considered a draftee or a volunteer. What I am sure of is that the draft is a type of slavery and slaves often make poor warriors.
"No state has an inherent right to survive through conscript troops and in the long run no state ever has. Roman matrons used to say to their sons: "Come back with your shield, or on it." Later on, this custom declined. So did Rome."

Excerpt from the notebooks of Lazarus Long, from Robert Heinlein's "Time Enough for Love"

“"WE" were most certainly neither defeated nor humiliated in Vietnam and the grit we displayed there drew a surprising amount of admiration from our enemies. “



(We didn’t depart Vietnam in a very dignified manner.)



“Wars may be started by nations but are fought by a small portion of that nation known as military which may include militia. In Vietnam the average soldier displayed far more grit and will than was asked or expected and we withdrew with honor and reputation intact. The problems we had in Vietnam were a direct result of morally weak civilians and the weak willed and dishonorable civilians they elected to run that war.”



(I was referring to the congress and the demoralized US civilian population. Our soldiers in Vietnam did well; of course, we had people like Kerry but he was an aberration.)

 

[Daryl Hunt]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

We are fat, over fed, pampered, etc.. But as the Japanese found out, take that away from us and we get very, very dangerous. In every war when we fought along side other countries, the American Fighting Man/or Woman is thought be a lot crazy but always gets the job done when others don't dare to tread. So keep thinking that way. But you would be making the same mistake that the Germans first made in 1917 and the Japanese did in 1941. Both were wrong. Remember, our Troops can go for long periods of time without supply lines in the case of the Iraq War. Just give him enough ammo and gas and one MRE a day and he gets the job done.

 

[9thIDdoc]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

The only point I agree with you on is that as a Nation we are morally weak. "WE" were most certainly neither defeated nor humiliated in Vietnam and the grit we displayed there drew a surprising amount of admiration from our enemies.
Wars may be started by nations but are fought by a small portion of that nation known as military which may include militia. In Vietnam the average soldier displayed far more grit and will than was asked or expected and we withdrew with honor and reputation intact. The problems we had in Vietnam were a direct result of morally weak civilians and the weak willed and dishonorable civilians they elected to run that war.
"WE" were cowed by no one. I resent your use of "WE". Rather than being a "loss" our war in Vietnam contributed to our win of the far more important Cold War.
An army by no means needs to be big to win. In Vietnam we were at all times greatly outnumbered by our enemies but we almost always won our battles. Our current military could take out all of Alexander the Great's entire fabled army before lunch and with few if any casualties.
In 1968 I received my draft notice then enlisted in an effort to receive my preferred training so I'm not sure if I would be considered a draftee or a volunteer. What I am sure of is that the draft is a type of slavery and slaves often make poor warriors.
"No state has an inherent right to survive through conscript troops and in the long run no state ever has. Roman matrons used to say to their sons: "Come back with your shield, or on it." Later on, this custom declined. So did Rome."

Excerpt from the notebooks of Lazarus Long, from Robert Heinlein's "Time Enough for Love"

“"WE" were most certainly neither defeated nor humiliated in Vietnam and the grit we displayed there drew a surprising amount of admiration from our enemies. “



(We didn’t depart Vietnam in a very dignified manner.)



“Wars may be started by nations but are fought by a small portion of that nation known as military which may include militia. In Vietnam the average soldier displayed far more grit and will than was asked or expected and we withdrew with honor and reputation intact. The problems we had in Vietnam were a direct result of morally weak civilians and the weak willed and dishonorable civilians they elected to run that war.”



(I was referring to the congress and the demoralized US civilian population. Our soldiers in Vietnam did well; of course, we had people like Kerry but he was an aberration.)

" (We didn’t depart Vietnam in a very dignified manner.) "
Bullshit. I left in a very dignified jet airliner in a nice cushy seat politely flirting with a stewardess. Maybe you were thinking of the French.

 

[toobfreak]

If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

I think they found that out on November 8, 2016.

Says the guy whose name rhymes with Comrade.

 

[fncceo]

I think, when the times call for it, Americans can rise to the occasion:

" Americans are soft and decadent, that they cannot and will not unite and work and fight. From Berlin, Rome and Tokyo we have been described as a nation of weaklings – 'playboys' – who would hire British soldiers, or Russian soldiers, or Chinese soldiers to do our fighting for us. Let them repeat that now! Let them tell that to General MacArthur and his men. Let them tell that to the sailors who today are hitting hard in the far waters of the Pacific. Let them tell that to the boys in the Flying Fortresses. Let them tell that to the Marines! "

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1942

 

[9thIDdoc]

Most countries are tougher than the United States, we are soft, both literally (fat), and figuratively, in ground combat.

Our advantage has always been technology and the highest volume of firepower, but that did shit in the jungles of Vietnam, and has done squat in Afghanistan. In terms of one to one, other less advanced countries have a toughness advantage, because it is bred into them. Not everyone in those countries relies on their smartphone, their social media, their central air and furnace, etc, etc. etc., so yea, of course they will be tougher. But can they saturate the ground with high explosives like this country can? Probably not, considering so much of our 20 trillion dollars a year GDP gets wasted on the latest whiz bang, high tech weaponry.

There may indeed be some waste but that whiz bang high tech weaponry saves lives and allows our military to protect us with fewer personnel which saves us what we would have had to spend on their pay, food, shelter, training, equipment, healthcare, and possible VA, death, or retirement benefits and compensation. Maybe waste but maybe cheap at twice the cost. Actually I think we should be spending more on high tech stuff. Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. In which case people die. Maybe many and maybe civilians. How much waste and death occurred on 9/11?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

The only point I agree with you on is that as a Nation we are morally weak. "WE" were most certainly neither defeated nor humiliated in Vietnam and the grit we displayed there drew a surprising amount of admiration from our enemies.
Wars may be started by nations but are fought by a small portion of that nation known as military which may include militia. In Vietnam the average soldier displayed far more grit and will than was asked or expected and we withdrew with honor and reputation intact. The problems we had in Vietnam were a direct result of morally weak civilians and the weak willed and dishonorable civilians they elected to run that war.
"WE" were cowed by no one. I resent your use of "WE". Rather than being a "loss" our war in Vietnam contributed to our win of the far more important Cold War.
An army by no means needs to be big to win. In Vietnam we were at all times greatly outnumbered by our enemies but we almost always won our battles. Our current military could take out all of Alexander the Great's entire fabled army before lunch and with few if any casualties.
In 1968 I received my draft notice then enlisted in an effort to receive my preferred training so I'm not sure if I would be considered a draftee or a volunteer. What I am sure of is that the draft is a type of slavery and slaves often make poor warriors.
"No state has an inherent right to survive through conscript troops and in the long run no state ever has. Roman matrons used to say to their sons: "Come back with your shield, or on it." Later on, this custom declined. So did Rome."

Excerpt from the notebooks of Lazarus Long, from Robert Heinlein's "Time Enough for Love"

“"WE" were most certainly neither defeated nor humiliated in Vietnam and the grit we displayed there drew a surprising amount of admiration from our enemies. “



(We didn’t depart Vietnam in a very dignified manner.)



“Wars may be started by nations but are fought by a small portion of that nation known as military which may include militia. In Vietnam the average soldier displayed far more grit and will than was asked or expected and we withdrew with honor and reputation intact. The problems we had in Vietnam were a direct result of morally weak civilians and the weak willed and dishonorable civilians they elected to run that war.”



(I was referring to the congress and the demoralized US civilian population. Our soldiers in Vietnam did well; of course, we had people like Kerry but he was an aberration.)

" (We didn’t depart Vietnam in a very dignified manner.) "
Bullshit. I left in a very dignified jet airliner in a nice cushy seat politely flirting with a stewardess. Maybe you were thinking of the French.

I left in an AC-130 with over 300 holes in it with warped wings. It's one hell of a long flight back at about 200 mph. Take off, climb out to 10,000 feet, fly for 6 hours and it's time to land and refuel and do it all over again. Start from Ubon, RTAB, refuel at Danang, do it again over and over all the way up through Japan, up the way to Alaska and back down to Washington state. I took that cushy commercial seat from Seattle. The AC was headed for Alabama for complete rebuild. The point being is, even with that exit, I wasn't ashamed of my Units Performance.

 

[harmonica]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then. We were defeated and humiliated by a fourth-rate military power to point we were cowed by the communist and did not resist them for the rest of the seventies with the coward Jimmy Carter being the greatest example of that period.

It took Ronald Reagan to turn things around; he could nothing about the culture, but he did resist the communist against considerable liberal opposition. Reagan used the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and other US presidents used our professional military to fight our little wars against terrorists. We have most likely the best military in the world; the problem is that they are not that big. If we get into a war with the Russians in the artic, we will lose. The only hope would be a fast decisive victory by our professional army. If it turns out to be a war of attrition we will lose. We have perhaps 250,000 front line trumps; we outnumber the Russian population by two to one, but they could put perhaps five times more combats troops in the field. The Russians have both a professional and a draftee army. Their people will submit to the draft, but ours won’t. We have a small army and no replacements. We would lose a war of attrition with the Russians. I love my grandchildren with all my heart, but to send them off to war would be nothing short of murder. If the Russians ever understand just how morally weak we are we are screwed.

Vietnam was unwinnable--all my links/proof here:

Vietnam War was unwinnable

..we are talking REALITY--not nuking anyone....not invading the north like the Russians and US did to Germany --that wasn't going to happen--even if they did invade the North, they couldn't stay there forever..... ..first--the French lost--and after we gave them MILLIONS$ and with all their...

www.usmessageboard.com

...the world's mightiest country was defeated by tiny Afghanistan --Britain....Russia was defeated in Afghanistan ....France was defeated in Vietnam....it's not so much the country's people/etc---
...etc

 

[harmonica]

My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then

you say:
'''My opinion on the current generation is that I think they are weak but it is not their fault. The degeneration of the US culture goes back to at least the Vietnam War. We started losing our grit in Vietnam and it only has gotten worse since then'''
bold mine
....how come we won in PG1?--VERY quickly in the ground war--it was a massacre

...you, like a lot of people, have about 0 knowledge of wars/military/history/etc

 

[harmonica]

Most countries are tougher than the United States, we are soft, both literally (fat), and figuratively, in ground combat.

Our advantage has always been technology and the highest volume of firepower, but that did shit in the jungles of Vietnam, and has done squat in Afghanistan. In terms of one to one, other less advanced countries have a toughness advantage, because it is bred into them. Not everyone in those countries relies on their smartphone, their social media, their central air and furnace, etc, etc. etc., so yea, of course they will be tougher. But can they saturate the ground with high explosives like this country can? Probably not, considering so much of our 20 trillion dollars a year GDP gets wasted on the latest whiz bang, high tech weaponry.

most countries??!!!hahahahahhahahahah
Africa can't even feed itself.....
..stop pissing on the American Flag and the American military you America hater.....you haven't even served--you don't know SHIT about the US military---you would fall out and cry if a DI yelled at you

 

[harmonica]

Most countries are tougher than the United States, we are soft, both literally (fat), and figuratively, in ground combat.

Our advantage has always been technology and the highest volume of firepower, but that did shit in the jungles of Vietnam, and has done squat in Afghanistan. In terms of one to one, other less advanced countries have a toughness advantage, because it is bred into them. Not everyone in those countries relies on their smartphone, their social media, their central air and furnace, etc, etc. etc., so yea, of course they will be tougher. But can they saturate the ground with high explosives like this country can? Probably not, considering so much of our 20 trillion dollars a year GDP gets wasted on the latest whiz bang, high tech weaponry.

.....I've been all over Europe and South America--I've trained with MANY countries' military...and many are NOT as good as us ...
..I've trained with the French Foreign Legion, Italians, Spanish, Venezuelans --all over South America....etc etc

 

[harmonica]

I think, when the times call for it, Americans can rise to the occasion:

" Americans are soft and decadent, that they cannot and will not unite and work and fight. From Berlin, Rome and Tokyo we have been described as a nation of weaklings – 'playboys' – who would hire British soldiers, or Russian soldiers, or Chinese soldiers to do our fighting for us. Let them repeat that now! Let them tell that to General MacArthur and his men. Let them tell that to the sailors who today are hitting hard in the far waters of the Pacific. Let them tell that to the boys in the Flying Fortresses. Let them tell that to the Marines! "

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1942

View attachment 358105

.....the Japanese thought we were soft/etc and the Americans thought the Japanese were soft/etc

 

[odanny]

Most countries are tougher than the United States, we are soft, both literally (fat), and figuratively, in ground combat.

Our advantage has always been technology and the highest volume of firepower, but that did shit in the jungles of Vietnam, and has done squat in Afghanistan. In terms of one to one, other less advanced countries have a toughness advantage, because it is bred into them. Not everyone in those countries relies on their smartphone, their social media, their central air and furnace, etc, etc. etc., so yea, of course they will be tougher. But can they saturate the ground with high explosives like this country can? Probably not, considering so much of our 20 trillion dollars a year GDP gets wasted on the latest whiz bang, high tech weaponry.

most countries??!!!hahahahahhahahahah
Africa can't even feed itself.....
..stop pissing on the American Flag and the American military you America hater.....you haven't even served--you don't know SHIT about the US military---you would fall out and cry if a DI yelled at you

I served 6 years in the U.S. Army you twat.

 

[odanny]

Most countries are tougher than the United States, we are soft, both literally (fat), and figuratively, in ground combat.

Our advantage has always been technology and the highest volume of firepower, but that did shit in the jungles of Vietnam, and has done squat in Afghanistan. In terms of one to one, other less advanced countries have a toughness advantage, because it is bred into them. Not everyone in those countries relies on their smartphone, their social media, their central air and furnace, etc, etc. etc., so yea, of course they will be tougher. But can they saturate the ground with high explosives like this country can? Probably not, considering so much of our 20 trillion dollars a year GDP gets wasted on the latest whiz bang, high tech weaponry.

.....I've been all over Europe and South America--I've trained with MANY countries' military...and many are NOT as good as us ...
..I've trained with the French Foreign Legion, Italians, Spanish, Venezuelans --all over South America....etc etc

Yea, I get it, and that's what sets the U.S. military apart from the rest of the world: training. Our training is the best, but I'm not talking spec. ops., I'm not even talking your average 11B, I'm talking about the toughness that comes from working outside in the bitter cold Russian steppe, or knowing from a young age on how to survive off the land and move thru the forests and jungles on other continents. Americans are, by and large, urbanized. We are something like 5% of the worlds population and consume 25% of its resources.

Of course, their militaries can't match ours, their training can't match ours, but in terms of toughness? I think they match up very favorably against Americans in that respect.