Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Well, I've seen some interesting Our countries army is better than your countries army, on other forums, and well to be honest I liked it, so much mis-information, so much arrogance, so much... sticking up fro your countries fighting forces!
Anyway, I wanted to know what you think of your countries military, what do you consider it's weaknesses, what do you consider it's strengths? are you proud of it? If yes or no, why?
As a side note, I wanted to know what Imperial guard Doctrines you think would best suit YOUR countries army? Don't go stickin' your nose into other peoples fun! Unless asked too, besides, if your not partial to YOUR nations military... well shame on you!
I from America, and I'll express my veiws later, because as of yet I have not figured out a way to express them without getting in fight, which in real life I usaully win, but this is the internet, and yelling makes the mods go, hmm lets push the big red button here... so please try to be pleasant and respect other peoples veiws. Alright right, Ladies and Gentlemen, let's have it!
Qui est Mortis? Lol, the rep... neggatized for something... lol that nobody payed attention too... Lol Goodbye all, BTW This is permanent goodbye so save some bandwidth mods delete this account :D :evil: :D :evil: :D
The Canadian Military is completely underfunded for its intended purpose. We have excellent soldiers and training, but our Government won't give them the support they deserve. We send our troops all over the world and are put in harms way with pathetic equipment, and no way to get moved around but by our allies (little way of transportation).
Canada has a proud Military History. We were the "elite" soldiers in WW1, won battles the French and British had given up on (Pashendale and Vimy Ridge). We had a large presence in WWII; landed at D-Day, protected the Atlantic Convoys, and liberated Holland.
I hope our new government raises our Military spending, not to become an agressive army, but to properly equip our troops to do the job we are asking them to do. I suppose we are the same all Western Militaries other than the US and the U.K., but that doesn't make it right.
Last edited by Diggums Hammer; January 31st, 2006 at 04:59.
"A love for tradition has never weakened a nation, indeed it has strengthened nations in their hour of peril."
Sir Winston Churchil
Oh no, this got ugly fast last time I saw it, mainly because some people claimed the US army should be classified as having the "conscripts" doctrine and others claimed the whole US army were storm troopers.
So yeah. No way am I going to mention any other country's military and get into a silly argument
The Australian army has a very proud military tradition and a keen sense of mateship and the spirit of ANZAC (an Australian myth of self-sacrifice and courage that we celebrate every year on ANZAC day). We have always been exceptional soldiers in harsh enviroments, adapting well to desert and jungle warfare despite our relative lack of equipment. The Australian army historically has excelled at fighting guerillas on their own terms, eg the Boers and the Viet Cong were both very respectful of the average "digger" (as the brits nicknamed us), and we were far better jungle fighters than the poor old Japanese in WWII.
By the way Diggums the ANZACs were at Paschendael too, it wasn't just you canucks :yes: In fact there's an awesome 1/35th scale diorama of ANZACs and Canadians going over the top at Paschendael here at my work at the war memorial. It's one of the things that made me interested in modelling as a kid.
We are a small nation though and some of our support vehicles are outdated US or European cast offs. Our army is tiny and we don't have many tanks. Quite a few of our soldiers are veterans though, probably due to the small size of our armed forces. Our SAS is on a par with that of the British, so anyone who knows about these things knows that's petty bloody good.
IG doctrines for the Aussies I would say are:
Close order drill (mateship)
Last edited by Kahoolin; January 31st, 2006 at 05:34.
One of the issues with the Australian armed forces, is the size and equipment each of the arms has access to..
The Air Force is still using 20yo ex-US equipment that is well on it's way past the effective useby date; as far as I'm aware, more is being spent on maintaining the old squadrons than it would cost to buy replacement squadrons. Not a good way to do things. Recently the government announced that they would be buying more old jetfighters from the US, F-15's I think it was going to be, to replace the oldest of the planes currently in service.
The Navy on the other hand is getting money all the time for new equipment, it's just being spent on relatively useless equipment (Collins Class Sub anyone?). To exacerbate the problems the navy has, is the fact that currently about 70% of the Navy's manpower is being spent on Coast Guard duties, for which they are ill equipped. There's no point in having a half dozen big guns (or even small guns) if you aren't allowed to fire them at the ship you have cornered doing illegal things.
While the Army (footsloggers) itself is well trained, they are still pretty poorly equipped. The announcement from the goverment recently said that Australia was buying a number of ex-US tanks (Bradley M2's) to replace the even older one's currently in use. These tanks are nearly WWII era vehicles that have been "upgraded". And for this, a few hundred million$ is being paid for not only second hand equipment, but obsolete equipment. Good thing the troops can take care of themselves isn't it.
In some ways buying old equipment makes sense, but when a Sea Hawk 'copter crashed last year just because it was 20 years old and there was nothing mainenance could have done to prevent it, it is time to consider buying brand new equipment.
Mysterious Member of the ANZAC Clan
I'll go for the UK, although I don't know everything i'll do the best I can.
The British army, from what I can make out is a very well put together, well equipped, excellently trained fighting force. The traditions of officer training and guarding the queen are combined with upto date equipment and tactics to give us the edge in most combats. In Iraq, for example, I beleive the British military is seen in a better light than the Americans as we appear to respect the everyday citizens of Iraq more, hence why the British areas see a lot less violence.
Pride and joy of the British military. Steeped in tradition, but also very upto date. We provide planes for aircraft carriers for the Americans, (Harrier Jump Jets), and our Naval expertise are without peer on this planet, (in my opinion). This comes from having a well trained and proud Navy who know where they come from in history, and the standard that they have to follow.
Probably the British Militaries weakest area. We buy helicopters from the Americans, (Apaches), and we are part of the Eurofighter program. This however does not deter from the fact that we still have one of the best trained and equiped air forces in the sky.
These are my opinions on the UK military. I would like to think that, on an even playing field, with the same number of troops, ships, planes etc, I would say that the British Military is the equal of anyone in the world right now.
Just my opinion :ninja:
You must have missed the news reports about the guns that got shipped to Iraq that jammed when they got sand in them, or the boots that began to blister and split in the heat. There was a huge fuss made about it in the Commons, but it was in the run-up to the Tuition Fees debate, and so got rather pushed under the carpet.Originally Posted by gingerninja
But yeah, I'm not sure what I think of our army... they seem to be trying to stress that they're not just about fighting at the moment in their ad campaigns, and they're having a major regimental reshuffle at present, destroying traditions like that of the Scottish "Black Watch" regiment, acclaimed for its actions in Basra a year or so ago. Not sure quite what effect things will have, but they're a mite confusing for the layman at present.
Just because it can't be used in a desert! :wacko:
I agree, but that appears to be happening with everyones kit, so we are no worse off. I didn't know about the Black Watch though. I still stand by most of my statement though.
the main problem with the Scottish regiments at the moment are these plans to merge them into one super regiment.
i am quite personally against this idea as one of the reasons the Scottish regiments are so effective is how the whole force has a very clan like system to it as it has been since god knows when.
personally I believe that the British army can't be beat for its training but we have to remember that every army is trained to use what it has available.
for example US troops tend to have a lot more resources and man power than a lot of other nations militaries (Great Britain being a good example). and as such their combat doctrine is based around that fact. the British armed forces tend to not have the advantages of the United States and so depends on its troops being trained to a point where they are worth 1.5-2 times that of another army
another good way to look at a militaries fighting style is to look at the equipment they use for example.
the main battle tank (or at least most famous) the Americans have at the current moment is the M1 Abrams main battle tank.
this monster tends to suit the American style of battle nicely with lots of tech designed for group combat (greater resources tends to allow that a fair bit) and they are a moderately all round tank.
on the other hand you have the British Challenger MK2 battle tank
this tank is geared towards quality over quantity which suits the smaller British armed forces very well. in comparison to the M1 abrams its slower but from reports from iraq none of these beasties have been destroyed compared to a couple of abrams which were lost in the conflict. taking that into account i am assuming that the challenger tends to have a much stronger armour to make up for its slower pace. but its the weapon system that makes this juggernaut lethal with a 120mm RIFLED! main gun. the accuracy on this gun is quite incredible with boasts by the crews to hit a moving football (soccer to any one who is thinking other wise) at 5 miles. quite a boast i have to admit but non the less from what ive seen of it im pretty sure it might be able to nicely. unlike the American tank there is only about 300-400 of the British challenger in service and most of these are in the Scots dragoon guard.
in general i personally feel that british troops are probebly the best trained in the world but of course im pretty bias
but when it comes to man power and resources the USA has that title as far as i know
spambot kill tally: 79
[16:19] <@Alzer> Arky's right though
[16:20] <@Kaiser-> I know he is.
[16:20] <@Kaiser-> He usually is.
[16:20] <@Kaiser-> Sometimes it's intentional.
[00:01] <+zubus> i love you, ya skirt wearin nothern monkey! ^_^
My grandfather and great grandfather were both in the Gordon Highlanders, and later served in India with the Rajputana Rifles (my GGF was the CO).Originally Posted by Arklite
Merging ain't that bad though. My dad was in the 12/16th Hunter River Lancers, which used to be the 12th and 16th Ausralian Light Horse regiments. They merged when we changed all of our light horse to armoured regiments (tanks are better than horses ).
The Australian light horse has a very proud tradition (the Beersheba charge, etc) so all that really happened was that 12th/16th has the battle honours of BOTH the 12th and 16th light horse on their regimental guidon. They still recognize and celebrate that they were once smaller regiments, but now they are a super regiment with the traditions and honours of both. Think of it like this: The nation we call England used to be made up of dukedoms like Northumberland, York, etc. England now incorporates these old petty nations and remembers them, they haven't really been lost. Times have just changed
EDIT: By the way, it seems we only have the Commonwealth members bragging about their military. Where are all the Viking members, are they all on holiday or something?
Last edited by Kahoolin; January 31st, 2006 at 21:38.
I never joined any of the US armed forces. I wanted to fly A-10s really bad. However, when I spoke with a recruiter he said my chances were poor because of my ailing vision and poor knee. I was glad he was honest cause I would have hated to sign up and not get my goal position.
As far as the Tank argument there is a real good article on strategypage by Harold C. Hutchison.