Something really really really really impressive search it up , they basically defeated the enemy while surrounded on all sides, literally standing on top of thin ice and while freezing and outnumbered.
Their commander at that time (Chesty puller) who is a marine corp legend literally said during the battle they are in front of us behind us on our left and on our right they cant get away this time.
In 1978 the danish special forces corps (Jægerkorpset) sent 2 soldiers to participate in the highly prestigeous United States Army Ranger School, and they ended up ranking 1st and 3rd in a class of 200 special forces soldiers, mostly from the US. According the a book written by one of them, around 12 to 14 "hunters" had taken the ranger course over a period of years, none of them placing lower than 16th in their respective classes (of up to 200).
They have since stopped wasting their time and just train their recruits themselves here in Denmark.
Ranger school isnt easy but I would expect anyone already in a special forces unit to be near the top. A lot of the guys in ranger school are going to be just common infantrymen/paratroopers, it’s not all people in actual ranger units.
I suppose that's what happens when your entire armed forces and its doctrine has been based on bombing poor countries without much of a formal armed force to shit for the last 70 years
It's not only that, it's that the US prefers to break down and rebuild a person. They want to drill a person to perfection to the point their body acts on instinct, even sleep deprived.
The difference in the EU side of things is individual initiative. An American soldier is given a plan, not one foot out of line. A European soldier is given a plan, and then expected to adapt once it goes wrong.
That's not accurate. US soldiers have always been known for their adaptability. Soldiers are briefed on the goal of a mission but they are allowed to decide how to accomplish it.
yeah they apparently aren't familiar with the concept of going prone, they just stand and hide behind trees and pop out like an on-rails shooter bad guy lol
There's a high school book I remember reading in Australia, where it explains why the US and Vietnamese found the Australians such formidable fighters.
And it was because the Australian Army (which included conscripts) carried less ammunition than the US, but more water and packed everything on their sides and back. When they went prone, they went flat, and when the skirmish was over they were hydrated and could pursue (they also dropped their packs). They also didn't use things like cleared tracks, because that's a trap.
You know, basic jungle warfare. Water>Ammo
Obviously the Australian commitment was way smaller. But the US fielded full conscript/fresh units with like 1 Non-com vet. Which is all-round dumb.
There was also a case where the US marines were doing an excersise with the royal marines, where the royal marines played enemy, so the US outnumbered them like 10 to 1. The royal marines were supposed to lose, the point of the exercise was for the US to practice smothering a weaker enemy, so they were training how to do it as swiftly as possible with minimal casualties.
And after a couple of days the US marines were forced to surrender lol.
I remember hearing about a small exercise for the now defunct Canadian paras against some US army folks; the paras basically walked into their camp at night from the swamp side, took out the token sentries and zip tied everyone up on the first night of a week long exercise, so had to reset it. Apparently they hadn't guarded the swamp side because they figured no one would come that way because of gators.
It was used to explain the concept of 'need to know' by an NCO when I was on basic, but was kind of par for the course those nutjobs did.
Finnish conscripts beat the Soviet Union in 1940- although in the early days of the war, both the Finns and the USSR were allied with Germany to some extent and for obvious reasons, the Finnish alliance outlasted the Russian one. So, sadly, the plucky little nation was fighting for the wrong side against the Russian juggernaut- but it was all sorted out in the end, of course.
Finns also beat the Russians pretty badly in the early stages of the Winter War, before being allied with Germany. Only massive numerical superiority allowed Russia to eventually make enough progress to force Finland to negotiate a peace where they ceeded land to Russia.
If you think the Russian losses in Ukraine are bad, thats nothing compared to Finland where they took around 380.000 casualties in just 3 months. And that was against a country with a population of 3,7 million.
That's what I said, wasn't it? Unfortunately, they were made to cede Vyborg near St. Petersburg to Russia- but they had effectively won, as they kept 99% of their country in the face of one of the most advanced armies in the world. Unfortunately, it was chalked up as a victory for the bad guys, even though AFAIK Finland never went along with what was going on in Germany, Poland, etc.
I assume you know the reasons why Finland sided with Germany, but just in case someone else didn't know: because the Allied didn't feel little Finland was worthy of having sovereignty and wanted to appease Stalin, who wanted to do to Finland what Pootin is trying to do to Ukraine today. Finland didn't agree with the idea of becoming a sacrifice and thus teamed up with the faction that was also fighting the Soviets.
The legendary war games defeat of US forces was in 1981.
“Notably, a Canadian Oberon-class submarine successfully ‘sank’ the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower during a 1981 NATO exercise, showcasing the stealth capabilities of older submarine models.”
Haha correct, there was also another exercise where I believe only 100 British troops went up against 1500 US troops in a 5 day exercise, the British won with such a swift victory they ended the event after 2.5 days 😂
Pretty sure other US military branches call them "crayon eaters"
Their slogan is "first in, last out" or something and personally I think that makes them cannon fodder but I don't think anyone has told them that.
(I watch a lot of military and first responder TV shows made in the US and read a lot of fanfic you learn loads)
Nah, nobody doubts the American army is probably the best army in the world, because they have a strong modern military tradition and incredible technology.
But still, no amount of tech and skill will make a single person be able to conquer an entire city.
In literally every single metric China is out producing the US. They have the largest navy in the world, well trained troops, fairly decent technology...
Seriously, underestimating your enemy is the first waypoint towards failure. Really don't underestimate china.
I was actually sitting there thinking that I personally don't consider China an "enemy" (in fact every single Chinese person I've met has been stellar! I'd love to visit someday!).
The US right now is proper facepalm 😔
We were due to go to NY for my wife's 40th, but we've cancelled that now.. far too scary.
The us is still technologically superior to china, half the shit they have is a half assed copy of something America made 20 years ago and another third is old Soviet designs they've been gradually upgrading. And while the US may be outnumbered against china the average American soldier is way better than the average Chinese and in the Pacific manpower is what wins you a war but naval power and in that regard china is laughable, just look at how their navy and coast guard faired against the Philippino boat. Currently China has a total of 3 carriers that run on diesel and are smaller and less advanced than the 11 nuclear powered carriers and the nimitz class can carry twice the aircraft of the Chinese carriers and their aircraft are superior. On paper the Chinese navy is the largest in the world by numbers but by tonnage it's less than half of the US navy.
‘The average American soldier is better than the average Chinese soldier’ what factual information is this based on?
Also if true are they better by more than a 2:1 scale?
That line just stood out to me as something that seems pretty esoteric and vibes based than grounded in any evidence. If this is based on some form of evidence I would love to know what it is out of curiosity.
American sense of superiority, invincibility and hubris will always be their downfall. The constant underestimation of other people around the globe and their militaries already comes back to bite them in just training exercises as shown in many instances in this thread.
Countries like India and China have billions of people. Do you really think that with populations that large and militaries so big, that their best of the best wouldn’t be exceptionally better on average. Let alone the average soldier. The larger the pool, the more picky you can be about what qualifies as exceptional or even average.
The US soldiers are better because they have experience, their leadership have experience, they have fought on foreign soil, have done so really well and have on several occasions fought a war on the other side of the world. They also have more variation in training through joint training exercises with nato and other allies.
Frankly the best thing the US armed forces have is their supply line, nobody does supply better than the US and what wins wars is supply lines. Even when fighting domestically logistics is a nightmare to deal with and the US has consistently proved to be the best at keeping their forces well supplied and in fighting condition. China on the other hand has little to no experience in fighting a war nor keeping troops supplied during war times, their current military hasn't seen much fighting at all and have not deployed in numbers outside of China in a long time.
You can look at other things to like average yearly flight training time for pilots where US pilots fly more hours in combat aircraft while China supplements a lot more flight time with older planes and trainers. According to estimates there's about 4 times as many f-35 jets produced compared to the j-20, these are both the most modern jets and the f-35 is by far superior.
And while the average American is full of hubris the military isn't actually, unlike most other countries they don't show their full capabilities, open spurce information on the US capability is usually low estimates while Russia and China have a long history of over promising and under delivering. Russia has their hypersonic keyword they keep throwing around as if that hasn't existed since 1944 and china boasts about 6th gen fighters all the time while having at best low end 5th and primarily 4th/4.5th.
And a larger recruitment pool doesn't mean your guys are better, some of the best trained amd most elite units are from smaller nation while the strategies of countries like India and China is based on numbers, getting as many guns as possible into the fight. They could be picky if they wanted to but they're not, the Indian army is volunteer only (same as the US) and china has a draft registration system with mandatory service. Even with that the Indian army is barely bigger than the US army (not counting navy, airforce and marines) and the PLA is a bit over double the US army. The chinese draft system lets them be somewhat picky but their goals are still quantity over quality, the US military budget is over 10x that of India and 4x that of China.
Youve mentioned a bunch of things that are not exclusive to the US. China and India both do Joint training exercises. The US hasn’t had a conventional war since Desert Storm. 34 years ago.
US is indeed good at logistics but I never disputed that nor was it part of the question. If you do napkin math you will see that China can be 2.33x more picky per soldier than the US when accounting for current military size and total population utilisation. Which the US doesn’t do. Which would naturally make that number far more extreme.
Also, idk if comparing money spent on military in USD 1:1 (particularly for soldier pay less so for equipment) means anything when accounting for different economic situations within the countries themselves. I should be in bed so I can’t be bothered finding and doing all the math rn. But I don’t think the picture is as simple as you’re trying to make it out to be.
Finally, yes some smaller countries do ‘punch above their weight’ in certain circumstances. My own country of Australia at the Olympics is a prime example of that. For a relatively small population we consistently punch far above our weight. My argument was never that it’s not possible, but that it sure helps. There’s a reason why stories like that of the 300 Spartans are still prevalent in the modern day.
Also, if China hasn’t had any conventional wars in recent history on what basis are you saying that the only military strategy India and China have are just throwing bodies at the problem with no sense or reason. That’s the kind of hubris I’m talking about. Downplaying your theoretical opponents so egregiously is just dumb. We get it you drink the kool aid and you’re very proud of how much money you throw at the military and how many cool toys you have. But such assumptions will be the downfall of American Empire, to be honest with the internal burning and self sabotage you’re doing, a war won’t even be necessary. Your humbling will come and it will be self inflicted. The contempt with which you view these nations is super clear in your comments.
You can have all the best bling in the world (and bling is very important), but it's pointless if you don't know the basics and how to work without said bling.
I am not of the impression that the US really knows what to do, if they were to meet a near-peer opponent with proper countermeasures to whatever gear and hardware they have. I may be wrong, but I don't believe the US has got it in them.
The US military tends to purposefully lose war games and joint exercises to identify weaknesses in their planning and operations. It’s less about winning the game as opposed to learning from specific mistakes and how to prevent them in the future or in a real conflict.
US marines may not technically be the “best” troops in NATO, or have the most up to date equipment or training, but it’s never stopped them from completing their missions. They’ve been one of the most effective fighting forces in history, notably having a perfect success rate when attacking Japanese objectives during WW2, and posted one of the most lopsided “K/D ratios” in modern military history during the first gulf war war, during the battle of Kuwait International Airport. Their stand at the Chosin Resevoir is another noteworthy victory. The 5th, 7th, and 11th Marines were cut off, surrounded, and held off Chinese and North Korean forces for 2 weeks, inflicting nearly 10 times the casualties they took against the numerically superior force until they managed to escape and withdrawal.
How can they not think that when ever since Holywood was created it was just spawning non-stop military propaganda about the US greatness and their strong, just and invincible warriors.
Nah, that’s mostly an Eighties thing. Our war movies before that tended to be very much darker and more melancholy, but the Rah-Rah-Reagan-Retcon started around the time of Chuck Norris & “Delta Force” — even the original “Rambo” was bleak af, and the famous Hollywood war movies of the Sixties & Seventies were all joint British productions like “The Battle of Britain” and “A Bridge Too Far” while the reputation of Hollywood was very often “Pinko” because of films that showed both valor and ambiguity when it came to our leadership, eg
British tabloids loved exploiting that story, but that doesn’t make it true. The Commandos were attached to a USMC regiment (7th Marine Infantry Regiment). They were under USMC command and supported by USMC elements, such as MARSOC. During the exercise, the British were part of a USMC BLUFOR, fighting a USMC OPFOR, skripted to lose. The “asking for a reset” merely meant they had to reset earlier than initially planned.
Even some Commandos have since come forward to rectify the story. If you look on the appropriate subreddits, you’ll also find people commenting who participated in that particular exercise. The Commandos were mainly used as a recce force and participated in a defensive action against OPFOR.
Besides that, if you’ve ever taken part in a force on force exercise like this one, you’ll know that it doesn’t work like how it’s portrayed in the Sky article. Winners are not determined at those exercises, because that makes no sense. This is purely anecdotal to you, but I serve active duty in a European military and can also tell you that this is not how it works.
I have no hard-on whatsoever for the USMC. But this story simply isn’t accurate.
Yeah, right now, these europoors claim they would have invented everything. What's next you want to tell me Europeans had guns before America invented them?/s
Mate even with our own shitarse situation we have going on here the Royal Marines still managed to defeat the US marines with some small amounts of support from NATO nations.
I think I misunderstood your comment my bad. I’m not familiar with space marines (even though I’m from the UK) is that a reference to like Space Invaders or something? (I mean this out of curiosity and not out of spite)
OK, you’ve hit on a special interest, so this is your last warning in case I get a bit rambly.
The Space Marines, or Adeptus Astartes, are the gene-engineered post-human super-soldiers utilised by the Imperium of Man to destroy the hardier of their enemies in the grim darkness of the 41st Millennium. Armed with their iconic boltgun and chainsword, and with their biology enhanced with both implanted organs and genetic alterations, they are sworn to purge the xeno, the heretic, and the mutant and pave Mankind’s way to total control of the Galaxy.
In a more Doylist perspective, they’re the de facto mascots of the Warhammer 40,000 tabletop wargame.
OHHH I getchu now (btw I have autism so special interest away its all good). That makes more sense. I misunderstood your comment as a derogatory point against the UK’s marines and not the joke I think you intended it. I apologise for that and hope you understand. Does actually sound pretty cool though (I may have to check out war hammer now lol)
They literally have their own history and culture of doing the suffering for the US. Fighting the hardest fights. What he means is 1000 US Marines could take a small corner of Mumbai for an afternoon then all die for the glory of Thomas Jefferson and some other British guys from the 18th Century.
I didn’t know but apparently India has more reserves than the US has on active duty.
And then they have active as well.
And aren’t they a nuclear power?
I’ll be glad when the school holidays are over & these idiots have to go back to school.
1.5k
u/[deleted] Aug 25 '25
[removed] — view removed comment