Re: 'I didn't think of Iraqis as humans,' says soldier who raped & killed 14 yr old g
WARNING; PREPARE THYSELF FOR UBER-POST!
What a laughable british pussy you are. The U.S. military is designed to fight conventional wars 1st. Rapid assaults 2nd and counter insurgencies a distant 3rd.
What the HELL is this crappy about leaving with our tail between our legs? We're still in fucking Iraq and guess what happened when we pulled out of Iraq? We sent them to Afghanistan.
But let's think about how damn effette the British are that they've had to be relieved by the Americans 2x.
Once in Basra where the Iraqi commanders thought so little of the British that they may have been left out of the planning process for the operation to retake Basra by the U.S. and Iraqi militaries and then again in southern Afghanistan.
Then consider that you sissies get pushed around by Muslims in your own country in the name of diversity. Groups like Islam4UK wank all over you because they know you p.c. fools won't do anything.
The worst part about it is that you've exported your Insanity to the rest of Europe and now the people there are paying the price for following the British government's lead.
Your country was harboring all sorts of Islamists before and after 9/11, some of whom have been linked to terrorist attacks around the globe.
So stfu you deluded british idiot.
And what a laughable american idiot you are; you'd do well to cease your flaming btw.
Now I'm going to systematically destroy your flame. I mean argument.
1: The american military is NOT designed to win conventional wars very fast, it's designed to make LOTS of money for the arms manufacturers.
Don't believe me? Then for the sake of brevity, here's a single example:
american soldiers must buy their own body armour, their choice, however, is limited to interceptor, even though the guy who designed interceptor way back when now says it is no longer the best body armour.
Other 1st world militaries (that don't spend as much as the rest of the world combined) supply their soldiers body armour free.
2: Yeah your still there, but you've got your tails between your legs: crews of the Stryer, rather than patrolling with the vehicle, would take a position somewhere away from base, then move the vehicles icon around on the screen and send fake messages to fool command that they were patrolling.
3: The americans have been relieved by the Brits plenty of times, you just don't hear about it.
One British guy I know talked about how he relieved the yanks in his warrior IFV (Go on, challenge me to compare the Warrior to your piece of shit Bradley. I DARE YOU) and you didn't hear them shooting their big mouths off then. Yes. I am looking at you, big mouth :tongue:
The reason the Brits combat effectiveness has suffered is that between 9,000 men the Brits have 8 (yes, eight) helicopters. This has obvious drawbacks for tactical mobility.
The americans, with their 10,000 troops have 136 helicopters.
The american soldiers are however less effective than their British counterparts because they're using M4 carbines (max effective range 100 metres, after which the bullet simply functions as a standard .22 round and is only effective with a critical hit (C.N.S., for example) and M16A2s, which, although longer ranged, has no automatic fire capability and is a LONG rifle, limiting it's use in urban combat (which we see a lot of over there).
Not only that, but the quality of AMERICAN troops is poorer. An Irish soldier (part of the British army) wrote in his book that he complained that american soldiers wouldn't go on patrol, thus leaving the taliban free to move around while the coalition forces stayed in camp and failed to take the initiative (What happened? What do you think? He got a telling off from higher up because the British military is denied it's teeth. All the problems of the american military are swept under the carpet and the British military keeps quiet on the orders of British politicians.
In case you're not aware, this lack of initiative would lead to the camps being surrounded. Remember Stalingrad? Of course you don't...
What you also don't hear about is how the ANA hates it's M16A2's, prefers AK pattern rifles, but uses M16A2s because it's ordered to.
In Apache Dawn by Damien Lewis British Apache pilots report that american pilots operate in heirarchy rather than in a team in their Apaches, leading to poorer performance and one american pilot claiming that he sunk the Taliban Navy.
Yeah, you read that right, The Taliban Navy.
No, the Taliban don't have a navy.
And no, they never did.
Incidentally, the British apache is superior to the american Apache, with more horsepower and superior software. As a result it has suffered no combat losses and hasn't had half the reliability porblems of the american Apache. In case you didn't know the american Apache was so unreliable that the worldwide fleet had to be grounded and canabalised for spares in O.D.S. because the thing is so unreliable. So why did the us army buy such an unreliable thing? Because that means that instead of just paying the arms manufacturers for the cobra (superior to the Apache) the us taxpayer could pay for the Apache too! Golden handshakes all round!
If the British were left out of combat planning it's because of american generals and their arrogance, it's no fault of the British.
As for groups such as Islam4UK, they don't push us around, we laugh at them.
Know what happens when you stick your head up above the parapit? It gets shot off.
You're an idiot if you think those guys aren't under surveilance.
Not only that, but Moslems don't push people around in Britain; as a non-white race they instead have a long history of being pushed around in Britain.
I should know; I've lived there, but don't let that stop me letting you tell everyone what you "know" from having been there.
Exported our insanity to the rest of Europe? They're paying the price for following our lead? I have no idea what you're talking about, why don't you elaborate, rather than making baseless accusations (although I've observed that it does seem to be a speciality of yours).
Britain has indeed harboured militant Islamists. Are you trying to suggest that america hasn't and or doesn't?
That nobody in america has ever had terrorist links across the globe?
Lets not forget how the american people demonstrated what glorious allies they were by donating money to the I.R.A. so that the I.R.A. could perform terrorist attacks on the English and other Irish.
That's right: americans have funded terror (and so has your government).
Here endeth the lesson.
/UBER-POST
.
