Missy89:


But the same British Military surrendered to the Japanese even thou it was a smaller force. They were even holding a white flag , flanked by 2 Japanese soldiers as their cowardly generals laid down their arms. and if you remember very well, there were more British troops defending Singapore (more than those in London) at that time!. The same British were escaping thru the sea from mainland Europe in 1940 and were retreating at night in 2007 from Basra.

The points u raised are valid but this doesn't make them the best infantry in the world. You can say they have one of the best training but when it comes to testing that training in any conflict, there are many factors to consider.

The Russians might have little/not the best training due to their short conscription timelines but that doesn't mean they wold be easily defeated in an open conflict with the British. and the British will never fight their US counterparts so how do we measure their capability against seasoned soldiers?

Contract Solders are always better indeed but in a full scale war, a conscript army will have the advantage because they will save time in mobilization and get more men to the front line on time,and there would be little desertion. Some of the new recruits that have gone thru basic training before will only need to go thru a crash course in their battle inoculation and be ready to fight.
Vietnam was an example.

Bravo!

I cannot say I agree with all your points, but you've raised many good ones. Although, I haven't been able to prove conclusively the british have the best Infantry in the world, I still stand on the fact they are the best.

"Who has the best Infantry in the world?"...... still remains an open to dialogue.

Who do you (missy89) consider to be the best Infantry in the world?

Henry120:


Bravo!

I cannot say I agree with all your points, but you've raised many good ones. Although, I haven't been able to prove conclusively the british have the best Infantry in the world, I still stand on the fact they are the best.

"Who has the best Infantry in the world?"...... still remains an open to dialogue.

Who do you (missy89) consider to be the best Infantry in the world?

Hard to pick one tbh. I have meet a Canadian solider before who thinks they are the best. NATO troops are generally well trained and since it is a security alliance, they pretty much have the same training these days. If you compare their program with the Russians and the Chinese, NATO is way ahead but that doesn't mean they would win an open conflict with the East because there are other factors to consider (morale, terrain etc)

Henry120:




For you, no list is enough.

Your vast military knowledge is giving me goose bumps.

Will serve shymexx my divorce papers in the morning and take his house and every penny in his account

Missy89:


Will serve shymexx my divorce papers in the morning and take his house and every penny in his account

Yeah baby , please do. In addition, i'll also give you all of mine.

Missy89:


World best might be over the top but better than Russian conscripts? most likely!

Wrong..the Russian military has been undergoing a lot of modernization of late; reducing its size and improving quality of equipment..several large divisions have been reduced too..Its now drifting away from the old Soviet "Quantity over Quality" ideology that made mobilization clumsy..For example, the U.S always had the edge in military technology during the cold war..F4s were better than Mig-17s and 21s, F-15s and 16s better than 3rd gen Su-27s and Mig-29s, the same for tanks too..T-55s performed very badly for the arabs against western equipment..T-72s too weren't any better..fast foward to 2014, Russians are now coming up with better jets, better tanks, etc..Conscript army? Nah, not anymore.

Missy89:


Hard to pick one tbh. I have meet a Canadian solider before who thinks they are the best. NATO troops are generally well trained and since it is a security alliance, they pretty much have the same training these days. If you compare their program with the Russians and the Chinese, NATO is way ahead but that doesn't mean they would win an open conflict with the East because there are other factors to consider (morale, terrain etc)

In truth, comparing their training programs, NATO bar the U.S, aren't ahead of the russians and chinese. The chinese and russians have been ramping up trainings, as we speak, there are chinese J-11's in russia carrying out exercises with russian SU-35, SU-27 and MIG-31's. There is another major naval exercise planned for early 2015 in the Mediterranean.

U.S trainings are wider and of a broader spectrum, than all of their NATO partners.

*Exercise combined resolve is currently taking place for NATO troops though.

celeron40:
Wrong..the Russian military has been undergoing a lot of modernization of late; reducing its size and improving quality of equipment..several large divisions have been reduced too..Its now drifting away from the old Soviet "Quantity over Quality" ideology that made mobilization clumsy..For example, the U.S always had the edge in military technology during the cold war..F4s were better than Mig-17s and 21s, F-15s and 16s better than 3rd gen Su-27s and Mig-29s, the same for tanks too..T-55s performed very badly for the arabs against western equipment..T-72s too weren't any better..fast foward to 2014, Russians are now coming up with better jets, better tanks, etc..Conscript army? Nah, not anymore.

everything u said here is false.

Yes the Russians are modernizing but not reducing. they are only reshuffling their military. they are cutting the officer corps and recruiting more NCOs. They still want at least 1M active troops but so far they have a little over 800k. What they did was re organize their military units to make it easier to deploy unlike before.

US was not ahead in technology either. there was no gap during the soviet times. the SU27 is just as good as the F15s.
When the Soviet Union fell and East Germany joined NATO. they were the only one to have the MiG29 in their inventory. The East Germans were the best pilots in NATO at that time and every American and British pilot usually want to fly to Germany and train with the MiG. the tech was so good, they started copying it. For example the look and shoot tech that is on the pilots helmet was developed by Mikoyan way before American pilots started using it (hornet pilots had to turn the nose of their plane in other to shoot. the MiG pilot just have to look and shoot). and it had a better thrust to weight ratio, The gun cannons were bigger (in fact u only need to shoot one round to blow up a F18 hornet)

The tanks that was sold to the Arabs were export versions and everything boils down to tactic. You cant compare how a Russian will use a Russian tank to how an Arab that isn't well trained will use it. Over half of Russia's military personnel are still conscripts and serve a year or 2. only elite units and the nuke units are contract soldiers.

Henry120:


In truth, comparing their training programs, NATO bar the U.S, aren't ahead of the russians and chinese. The chinese and russians have been ramping up trainings, as we speak, there are chinese J-11's in russia carrying out exercises with russian SU-35, SU-27 and MIG-31's. There is another major naval exercise planned for early 2015 in the Mediterranean.

U.S trainings are wider and of a broader spectrum, than all of their NATO partners.

*Exercise combined resolve is currently taking place for NATO troops though.

no matter how hard the Chinese and the Russians train, they cant log more hours than NATO pilots. its like a 5:1 ratio. They are closing the gap thou

Missy89:


no matter how hard the Chinese and the Russians train, they cant log more hours than NATO pilots. its like a 5:1 ratio. They are closing the gap thou

dis is funny o.missy89 ar u really a gal.cos most naija gal dont knw jack about defsec.al dey knw is read rom.novels and watch borin naija movies.

"A show of force" that's all it is the Brits will never be able to take on Russia on their own, and they'll never try.

In my eyes that exercise was just a failed attempt at trying to intimidate Russia.

Nato should stick to what it knows best and that's dropping bombs on 'Third World Countries'

Centrifude:


Nato should stick to what it knows best and that's dropping bombs on 'Third World Countries'

*ROTFL*

....

The title of this thread in itself is laughable.

When will an African nation gain power?