Best Fighters.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
If truth be told most countries have some exceptional fighting units, the lack of fighting prowess from the Eyties is a bit unfair as their Alpinieri were/are excellent troops.

In WW2 the Finns were the toughest most resolute fighters but they tend to be forgotten because they were allied to the Nazis.
 
DevAdvocate said:
If truth be told most countries have some exceptional fighting units, the lack of fighting prowess from the Eyties is a bit unfair as their Alpinieri were/are excellent troops.

In WW2 the Finns were the toughest most resolute fighters but they tend to be forgotten because they were allied to the Nazis.
Click to expand...

Or the fact no one else could ski :D
 
Alot if things would determine your willingness to fight. I would say it is a trio of factors and the combination of these things will determine military success.

Pride - in the country is a big one. The extent to which you sre willing to lay down your life in the cause. If you dont value the cause enough to be willing to die for it then you arent going enter the same combat situation with the same intensity and commitment as someone who accepts the risk of their death and sees it as a worthwhile one.

Intelligence - in the tactical sense. No good having a passionate well equipped force if you cannot direct its operations properly.

Technology - and equipment. All the soldiers and smarts in the world wint save you in a battle against an Apache if you do not have the equipment to counter
 
But a soldier fron The Uk can believe that he's in a war zone such as Iraq, for all the wrong reasons. He might think that the UK is there because of US pressure. he does not believe in the war, but he's willing to lay his life on the line.
 
The Hatem-Bomb said:
Alot if things would determine your willingness to fight. I would say it is a trio of factors and the combination of these things will determine military success.

Pride - in the country is a big one. The extent to which you sre willing to lay down your life in the cause. If you dont value the cause enough to be willing to die for it then you arent going enter the same combat situation with the same intensity and commitment as someone who accepts the risk of their death and sees it as a worthwhile one.

Intelligence - in the tactical sense. No good having a passionate well equipped force if you cannot direct its operations properly.

Technology - and equipment. All the soldiers and smarts in the world wint save you in a battle against an Apache if you do not have the equipment to counter
Click to expand...

From what I've heard/read, most soldiers tend to fight for friends and unit rather than their country.
 
As a general rule of thumb, if a country is mainly:

beer drinking = good at fighting (Britain, Germany, USA etc)
wine drinking = ****e at fighting (France, Italy etc)
 
Maybe I explained wrongly. The first point was mainly about first you must motivate your men to fight and be willing to die. The longest used military tactic. Be it the vikings with their promises of Valhalla with a death in battle, jihadists and their promises of virgins, nazis and their loyalty to the Fuhrer (spelling?) or love for queen and country.
 
It's a cliche but it's all about training, the British Army has the best training, that allied to a historical background of liking a good old scrap and espirit de corps is what makes UK troops (I count the Ghurkas in that, and the Irish) the best fighting men in the world at this time.
 
DevAdvocate said:
It's a cliche but it's all about training, the British Army has the best training, that allied to a historical background of liking a good old scrap and espirit de corps is what makes UK troops (I count the Ghurkas in that, and the Irish) the best fighting men in the world at this time.
Click to expand...

Let's not discount the role of good, old-fashioned homo-erotica.

[video=youtube;7zWUISfxyLs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7zWUISfxyLs[/video]
 
MD 20/20 said:
Yes thats if they don't knock you out first, anyone who believes size is of major importance has never had any real experience and if they have they are lying.

To answer the question I'd say Gurkhas also.
Click to expand...

Thats bull **** otherwise there would be no weight classes in boxing, mma, or any other sport where people fight each other.If two fighters are technically evenly matched but there is a large weight difference then the big guy will win 9 out 10 times imo.
 
jolls said:
Thats bull **** otherwise there would be no weight classes in boxing, mma, or any other sport where people fight each other.If two fighters are technically evenly matched but there is a large weight difference then the big guy will win 9 out 10 times imo.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree. Hence why boxers who go up a weight division, and are as light as they can possibly be to qualify, often struggle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back