RAIMIUS wrote:
USMC (although the Marines usually use their airpower to protect themselves, since theirs not a large force).
The guy you're quoting is a dipshit, but the Marines have developed a close air support doctrine, wherein every single weapon, infantry, airpower, and armor is welded into one weapon, where air support like F/A-18s and the soon to be F-35s pound the enemy from above, while rotor wings like Cobras and Hueys get the enemy up close and personal. Armor provides ground support to the infantry, and the infantry obviously storm the weaken defense.
In Vietnam, the US Army called in an Airstrike that hit the enemy target 120miles away from Army positions, in contrast, the USMC called their USMC Aviators to hit a strike 12 miles from marine positions.
This scenario is intended to show the corps' dedication to supporting the grunts.
And for the idiot aka Philips, Delta Force > USMC > Rangers.
And even then, Delta Force and USMC have a hard time with each other.
dc_involved wrote:
Off the top of my head iraq springs to mind. Special forces are usually responsible for identifying key targets in a conflict. I can't think of another country that flattened as many marketplaces and homes whilst managing not to eliminate targets.
I've been trying to locate it to no avail at the mo, but i remember seeing a programme where the FFL, SAS and American equivalent all competed on an assault course and america lost bigtime. FFL whipped arse, SAS close behind and america hours behind
1. Sounds like a rigged program
2. Sounds like said program got ripped from someone's arse
3. I'm saying you're a liar who has no idea what he's talking about.
I really wouldn't call the Ottomans that great of a power in terms of military organization. They were able to advance like parasites because the Byzantine Empire was dying, and they were sucking life out of it. When the Ottomans met a highly organized army and with good morale, they got crushed. (Army was that of the Timurids).
Similarly, when 120,000 Turks landed at Malta and faced 500 knights and 1,300 Men at arms, they were repulsed with startling casualties (the knights didn't have it so easy either, but whatever).
The Ottoman army was also pretty crap, they had an elite corps of cavalry and infantry (Janissaries) but it was inflated a conscripted group of Arabs, Armenians, and Persians, all with their native gear, which at this point was degenerate, all for the sake of gaining strength in numbers, but it merely gave Ottoman commanders false confidence. If the Byzantines had been in their prime, the Ottomans would have been crushed.
And btw, if you think Otto is related to the Ottoman empire, you're mistaken. Otto I was the founder of the Holy Roman Empire and Otto Von Bismark owned the French seven or eight hundred years later.
Osman was the founder of the Ottoman Empire. FYI.
Last edited by The_Mac (2007-07-06 12:24:22)
