|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67
CEG\'er
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67 |
I was active duty. and i do take pride in it i just dont use a computer well. i never said army did it by them selfs dumbass i said army did more than the marines and no [censored] one service can function properly what the [censored] do you think kosovo was???
00 Contour SVT Black
#557 of 2150
Fabricated Nov 24 1999
Currently unmoded
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760 |
Originally posted by Number47:
I was active duty. and i do take pride in it i just dont use a computer well. i never said army did it by them selfs dumbass i said army did more than the marines and no [censored] one service can function properly what the [censored] do you think kosovo was???
I'm sorry, the army is superior.
Please, enlighten me...what was Kosovo? What was it about? Who did what? Please, tell me oh great Purple Heart winner.
Ryan
Trollin!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67 |
Lets see kosovo was an air war only conducted by the navy and airforce it was to keep a civil war from escalating. and i'm sorry if you have a problem with me being in the service and you couldnt and you want to know another little tid-bit army has more planes than the airforce and more tanks the the marines and once again i have to correct you i never said they they army was superior i just said we did more is that to big a concept your you little mine to grasp??
00 Contour SVT Black
#557 of 2150
Fabricated Nov 24 1999
Currently unmoded
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,203
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,203 |
This gets a BIIIIG L-O-L!!
You are barking up the wroooonnnng tree with "Vive el Todras" there #47... I hate to say it, but you are certainly not helping the stigma that that Army grunts typically receive. That being that they are cocky, ignorant 18 year olds with weapons. The Army does some great things, because they are a great force. And I do mean great as in size, not as in a heroic or outstanding way. I don't mean to knock on the Army here, just simply am trying to point out it's purpose. Let me break it down for you...
Tactical Advantages of each Force
Army - Pure numbers. Largest Force. Great massive ground combat/artillery effort. Does all the heavy lifting of the military.
Navy - Simple enough. A floating country. Launches TLAMS,JDAMS, other missiles, planes, helo's, expeditionary forces, special ops, etc.
Air Force - Air Dominance. Can attack anywhere and anything, using various missiles intended for different purposes on various aircraft intended for different purposes.
Marines - Amphibious, highly maneuverable, small, tactically efficient units. Extremely mobile, go anywhere do anything in a quick amount of time without causing much fuss.
Now then, you have to understand that in today's military EACH force is extremely joint. All are dependent on eachother. Air Force can't hit #$%^ without the Army or Marine forces laser-guidance systems. Same goes for Navy/Marine aircraft and missiles. Army can't do anything quietely or quickly, i.e., huge force=huge attention to there existence in an area and huge amounts of time to deploy and setup command. And none of the forces would be where they are without the aid of the CIA. Huge amounts of intelligence advantages are gained from them, which saves countless lives of guys like you, in an war era where intelligence is EVERYTHING. The Army "does more" because the Army "has more". I hope you can grasp that.
I highly doubt the Army has more planes than the Air Force. I'd like to see some backing of this point. I can't recall ever hearing about an Army F-117 or B-2 or AC-10 executing the latest bombing strike. Or an Army AH-1 Cobra gunship helo attacking the caves in Afghanistan. I do recall Army helos executing cargo and troop deployment, which is what the Army's good at. I hope you can start to see that there are no longer HUGE gaps between services. We truely are becoming one military. And that's the way it should be. Look at the huge military victories we've had in Desert Storm, Afghanistan, and Iraq. You can't deny that these have been some of the best fought "wars" in human history. We have had EXTREMELY low comparitive casualties, and it was done through JOINT operations.
It's very simple to look at it this way:
This was something someone showed to me, written by the President of the Naval War College. It's slightly Marine biased(can ya blame me?), but a good way of looking at the forces seperately.
The Air Force reminded me of a French Poodle. The poodle always looks perfect... sometimes a bit pampered and always travels first class. But don't ever forget that the poodle was bred as a hunting dog and in a fight it's very dangerous.
The Army is kind of like a St. Bernard. It's big and heavy and sometimes seems a bit clumsy. But it's very powerful and has lots of stamina. So you want it for the long haul.
The Navy, God bless us, is a Golden Retriever. They're good natured and great around the house. The kids love 'em. Sometimes their hair is a bit long... they go wandering off for long periods of time, and they love water.
Marines I see as two breeds, Rottweilers or Dobermans, because Marines come in two varieties, big and mean or skinny and mean. They're aggressive on the attack and tenacious on defense. They've got really short hair and they always go for the throat. That sounds like a Marine to me!
Last edited by PlatoSVT; 11/10/05 05:04 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760 |
Originally posted by Number47:
Lets see kosovo was an air war only conducted by the navy and airforce it was to keep a civil war from escalating. and i'm sorry if you have a problem with me being in the service and you couldnt and you want to know another little tid-bit army has more planes than the airforce and more tanks the the marines and once again i have to correct you i never said they they army was superior i just said we did more is that to big a concept your you little mine to grasp??
You don't have to say it; its your 'superior' attitude.
Kosovo was only an air war? Interesting. Maybe I should call my best friend up and ask him what he did in Kosovo for a year? BTW, he's an Army grunt. Or maybe I should walk down the hallway to a Marine I served with, and ask him what he did in Hungary the last time Kosovo got hot? BTW, he's an Intel Marine attached to a Fixed Wing squadron at the time. So, pleae re-read your history.
And BTW, we didn't get involved because it was a civil war. We got involved due to the ethnic cleansing that was going on by Molosevic and Arnac (sp?).
Again, of course the Army has more tanks than the Corps. Um, you are 2x + the size of the Corps, I hope you would be better equipped than us. How bout I'll bring up the fact that the Marine Corps operates with old Army equipment that you (the Army) deems 'old' just as good if not better than their previois owners.
The Army has more planes than the AF? Hmm, I've heard that one before, but I can't remember the last time I seen a C-130, C-5, or C-17 with Army markings on it.
And by your attitude, I highly doubt you were ever 'active duty'. By your attitude, you portray yourself to be a reservist who was called to active duty, which is NOT the same thing. However, that does not diminsh your service.
Ryan
Trollin!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037 |
Originally posted by Desea vivo el Todras:
The Army has more planes than the AF?
Oh, back that one up. The Army is specifically DIS-allowed from having any combat-capable fixed-wing assets, and from having much in the way of ANY fixed-wings. Period. On 06 April 1966, a formal agreement between the Chief of Staff, US Army and the Chief of Staff, US Air Force relinquished Army claims fixed-wing aircraft designed for tactical airlift. It's referred to colloquially as the Key West Agreement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_West_Agreement
The Army since then only operates a small fleet of light cargo planes (C-23 Sherpas) and a few miscellaneous administrative support airplanes, and now the Army and AF are duking it out over the C-23 replacement.
Now, if by "plane" you're including helicopters, you *might* have a case, but I'd love to see a comparison.
"Think of it, if you like, as a librarian with a G-string under the tweed." Clarkson on the Mondeo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67 |
Army has more of a *variety* of aircraft that is what was i ment as for all the other [censored] i'm not going to waste my time and read
00 Contour SVT Black
#557 of 2150
Fabricated Nov 24 1999
Currently unmoded
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,203
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,203 |
Originally posted by Number47:
i'm not going to waste my time and read
Rofl! Can't say this is unexpected...
And no, the Army doesn't have more of a "variety". That still belongs to most likely the Air Force, but any other force has more variety than the Army. Like was said before, their #1 aviation purposes are cargo and troop deployment.
Last edited by PlatoSVT; 11/11/05 03:55 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by PlatoSVT:
Originally posted by Number47:
i'm not going to waste my time and read
Rofl! Can't say this is unexpected...
And no, the Army doesn't have more of a "variety". That still belongs to most likely the Air Force, but any other force has more variety than the Army. Like was said before, their #1 aviation purposes are cargo and troop deployment.
I have to disagree.
The Army MAY have more aircraft because of the sheer number of helicopters. They also have a large variety of various configurations of those helicopters. I'd say that maybe the Airforce has more variety but not the other services.
The have a chunk of fixed wing but they aren't combat.
The army is especially good at combat and have a large amount of gunships.
BUT, their number one purpose is not troop deplyment and cargo. They have huge numbers of Kiowa and Apache gunships for the purposes of scouting and attack.
They have huge numbers of blackhawks and even still using the UH1 in the guard.
Army doesn't use the AH1 Cobra anymore and sold it to the Marine Corps. However, almost all of the combat pilots in the army are former Cobra gunship pilots and they are some of the best at what they do.
The Apache is now the gunship of choice in the Army and let me tell you, with its avionics it is hands down the best gunship in the military.
When you think of the A10 tank killers, that is what the Apache is also good at. However, they've found a new use for the A10s and Apaches...that is everything BUT cargo!
Convoy escort, security air recon, patrols, attack, etc.
The Army is the best suited for anything to do with ground force combat due to size as you pointed out but also because they have 220 years of producing outstanding officers specializing in ground combat.
IN the long run, there is no victory without the boots on the ground or the way to support them.
Don't forget that the Airforce is just a piece of the Army that was cut off like the long hair they represent.
All the great Airforce commanders of the day were Army officers that started their career with the Army.
The Army is changing because it sees less need for the huge armored force warfare of the 20th century. There is sooooo much work in the light response category that they need to adjust the force...More work to go around than the Marines can handle I guess.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,203
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,203 |
Thanks warmonger, that was very informative, but not disrespectful. I learned alot from that. Originally posted by warmonger:
IN the long run, there is no victory without the boots on the ground or the way to support them.
And there's no victory without each piece of the military in today's world. That's exactly what I'm saying, but wars are not won solely by any one branch of the military.
Originally posted by warmonger:
There is sooooo much work in the light response category that they need to adjust the force...More work to go around than the Marines can handle I guess.
Heh, and I do agree with you here. Considering that modern ground warfare is basically adapting to become exactly what Marines are trained for. That being small, light armored, mobile units.
So are you implying that we should start actually giving the Marines the financial/equipment backing that they deserve? They've been exceling with Army/Navy leftovers for the past 50 years. Imagine what they could do with more resources! Or the Army could just continue what they're doing and keep learning from the Marines style of combat/training/creative adaptation to any situation.
|
|
|
|
|
