# The most effective/efficient modern army?



## Watanbe (Apr 30, 2007)

Who is the most effective/efficient post WW2 force. Note: not the largest or most powerful country in the world.  

IMO it is Israel quite easily. The victories that they have won have been incredible and the ruthless efficientcy in which they operate is inspiring considering their tough location and situation. 

While this is I suppose bias I also think that Australia has served itself very well in all theatres since WW2. Showing expertise, efficientcy and determination.

This countries in this poll are chosen mainly on their involvement in post war conflicts. Im sure I have missed some countries and I apologise if I have.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 30, 2007)

I know there are many people that will not agree with me here, but I have to say the US military. This is also not because I served in the US Army. It is quite simple the US military recieves more money for training and equipment than any military in the world. It is the best paid military and the best fed military. The US military has the best state of the art equipment and the best equipped ground troops. It also has the best capabilities to reach out and touch someone litterally within minutes to hours of hositilities starting. Also the US NCO corps is the finest NCOs in the world and a military can not function without its NCOs.


----------



## pbfoot (Apr 30, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I know there are many people that will not agree with me here, but I have to say the US military. This is also not because I served in the US Army. It is quite simple the US military recieves more money for training and equipment than any military in the world. It is the best paid military and the best fed military. The US military has the best state of the art equipment and the best equipped ground troops. It also has the best capabilities to reach out and touch someone litterally within minutes to hours of hositilities starting. Also the US NCO corps is the finest NCOs in the world and a military can not function without its NCOs.


We were always paid better then you guys back in my day if my conversion of ranks is correct an E1 gets 2500 a month an E5 up to 5500 an E8 up to 7300


----------



## amrit (Apr 30, 2007)

The swiss army - they must be the most efficient/effective because nobody's dared fight them for centuries.


----------



## comiso90 (Apr 30, 2007)

amrit said:


> The swiss army - they must be the most efficient/effective because nobody's dared fight them for centuries.



The terrain has more to do with that than fear of their Army.

*Israel*... 
Their small size means better quality control
Their survival is always at stake
As Watanbe has said, they are not afraid to be ruthless
Omni-present, daily reminders of "The Enemy"
High Esprit de Corps
Amazing pedigree for short existance
always on alert
high emphasis on personal audacity
good weapons
support of the home front
Religious faith always ads more fervor
Not quite as Hamstrung as other western powers by Public Opinion
The support of Jerry Seinfeld


----------



## amrit (Apr 30, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> The terrain has more to do with that than fear of their Army.
> 
> *Israel*...
> Their small size means better quality control
> ...



I agree that the IDF are generally of high order. However, I would disagree on on their complete home support or being unified in thought and action - there is growing discontent with the way that they are being used (a problem that most armies have with their political leaders). Just one example:



> The five are part of a growing movement that the military has had to contend with since the Palestinian uprising began more than three years ago. Hundreds of soldiers, alleging human rights abuses against Palestinians, have refused to serve in the West Bank and Gaza including, just last month, 13 members of the crack Sayeret Matkal, the most storied unit in the Israeli military.



Israel jails 5 as dissent on military rises - The Boston Globe


----------



## comiso90 (Apr 30, 2007)

amrit said:


> I agree that the IDF are generally of high order. However, I would disagree on on their complete home support or being unified in thought and action - there is growing discontent with the way that they are being used (a problem that most armies have with their political leaders). Just one example:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel jails 5 as dissent on military rises - The Boston Globe



I didn't say "Complete" support. I even qualified the 'Not quite as hamstrung... " statement. They took a beating over their last incursion. 

But they average Israeli knows all that stands between their kibbutz and annihilation is the IDF.


----------



## Watanbe (May 1, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I know there are many people that will not agree with me here, but I have to say the US military. This is also not because I served in the US Army. It is quite simple the US military recieves more money for training and equipment than any military in the world. It is the best paid military and the best fed military. The US military has the best state of the art equipment and the best equipped ground troops. It also has the best capabilities to reach out and touch someone litterally within minutes to hours of hositilities starting. Also the US NCO corps is the finest NCOs in the world and a military can not function without its NCOs.



While you do make good points.  I think that the US have struggled to adjust to differing types of warfare. In Vietnam the US were accused of being inefficient etc. Firing at anything that moves. 

In plain open warfare there isnt a nation that could touch the Americans, they have superior equipment and have it in enough numbers for it to cause a significant impact. however I think that they are not the most effective/efficient modern force.


----------



## Heinz (May 1, 2007)

US for me closely followe by Israel


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 1, 2007)

Watanbe said:


> While you do make good points.  I think that the US have struggled to adjust to differing types of warfare. In Vietnam the US were accused of being inefficient etc. Firing at anything that moves.
> 
> In plain open warfare there isnt a nation that could touch the Americans, they have superior equipment and have it in enough numbers for it to cause a significant impact. however I think that they are not the most effective/efficient modern force.



Wrong...

The US military has no problem training and adjusting to different styles of warfare. We recieve the correct training and we have no problem for instance fighting the war in Iraq. The thing that holds us back now is Politics. You can not fight with you hand behind your back.

Vietnam is a bad example. Half the soldiers over there "kids"... Vietnam also is an example similiar tot he war in Iraq at the moment. Politics is holding the forces back.

The simple fact is the US military is the most efficiet and finest fighting force the world has ever seen.

Name me a military that is more modern and efficient. I have probably worked with them and will can tell you how they learned from us.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 1, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> We were always paid better then you guys back in my day if my conversion of ranks is correct an E1 gets 2500 a month an E5 up to 5500 an E8 up to 7300



E1s do not make that much money, unless they are married and overseas.

However if you take all the extra pay that a soldier gets, there is no military in the world that pays its soldiers better than the US military.


----------



## Lucky13 (May 1, 2007)

Swedish Army. We kicked everyones ass before (Vikings) and we can do it again....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 1, 2007)

Come on over and try!


----------



## comiso90 (May 1, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Wrong...
> 
> The simple fact is the US military is the most efficiet and finest fighting force the world has ever seen.



Bold statement but it's more of an opinion. 

I believe it's the Israeli's...

While many American youth join the military out of patriotic conviction, most join for adventure, money, jobs and education.

Israeli youth, while forced to join, understand just how high the stakes are for them. Mix the high stakes with religious conviction and you have a formula for efficiency by necessity-- for the sake of survival.

The shear size of the American military means unavoidable inherent inefficiencies.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 1, 2007)

And why do they have to conscript there soldiers? 

Because if they did not not eneogh would join the military.

The all Voluntary Military is still the most efficient because only the people who wish to be there are there.


----------



## comiso90 (May 1, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> And why do they have to conscript there soldiers?
> 
> Because if they did not not eneogh would join the military.
> 
> The all Voluntary Military is still the most efficient because only the people who wish to be there are there.



Because the population is so small...

I'm not saying that the US is not efficient... it's just second... because of it's size, bueracrocy and motivational factors.


----------



## Lucky13 (May 1, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Come on over and try!


Let's settle this over a few pints and drams mate....less blood that way.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 1, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Let's settle this over a few pints and drams mate....less blood that way.



Ill drink the that!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 1, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> Because the population is so small...
> 
> I'm not saying that the US is not efficient... it's just second... because of it's size, bueracrocy and motivational factors.



You pit the IDF agianst the US and it would not stand a chance. Fortunatly it would not happen.


----------



## pbfoot (May 1, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> E1s do not make that much money, unless they are married and overseas.
> 
> However if you take all the extra pay that a soldier gets, there is no military in the world that pays its soldiers better than the US military.


I justed compared and at present exchange rates the CAF makes more then you guys in US dollars
US Canada 
E1 1301 2100
E5 2174 3200
E8 2881 4000
I did a rough conversion with the exchange rates and was generous at 15% this is no spec trades or danger or flight or diving pay
I believe the Aussies are also paid better


----------



## comiso90 (May 1, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You pit the IDF agianst the US and it would not stand a chance. Fortunatly it would not happen.



The thread is not who is the mightiest..
Certainly the US would win... maybe just with the marines.

it is about who is the most efficient...


----------



## Lucky13 (May 1, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> The thread is not who is the mightiest..
> Certainly the US would win... maybe just with the marines.


For the sake of a quiet life, I won't say anything....


----------



## comiso90 (May 1, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> For the sake of a quiet life, I won't say anything....



Well the marines and and 3 carriers.

The Army can sleep in.


----------



## mkloby (May 1, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> The thread is not who is the mightiest..
> Certainly the US would win... maybe just with the marines.
> 
> it is about who is the most efficient...



Man - I haven't been on for a few days and look at all this! Find me a foreign force of roughly 30,000 men that can stand up to a signle USMC MEF.

USMC definitely fits this description - most effective and efficient.

Thanks for playing


----------



## Wildcat (May 1, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> I justed compared and at present exchange rates the CAF makes more then you guys in US dollars
> US Canada
> E1 1301 2100
> E5 2174 3200
> ...



Adler how well does the US forces get paid whilst on operations? When I was in the Gulf I was getting $200 a day danger money + sea going allowance (or field allowance) + my normal wage all Tax free. Needless to say my 7 months away earned me quite a bit of money!


----------



## comiso90 (May 1, 2007)

mkloby said:


> Man - I haven't been on for a few days and look at all this! Find me a foreign force of roughly 30,000 men that can stand up to a signle USMC MEF.
> 
> USMC definitely fits this description - most effective and efficient.
> 
> Thanks for playing



If u noticed I singled out the USMC before. Their smaller numbers make them more efficient.


----------



## mkloby (May 1, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> For the sake of a quiet life, I won't say anything....



So - what do we mean by that???


----------



## pbfoot (May 1, 2007)

Since we aren't included up here I must be impartial and I'll pick the Aussies the only thing they probably lack is cold weather work . Would've picked the Brits but don't like the class distinction between ranks and commissioned guys


----------



## Lucky13 (May 2, 2007)

Just let's us say that they (USMC) couldn't handle our week long march....   We march more on one day than some others do under a week....
Could be the fresh mountain air too.   My personal opinion is that they couldn't concentratem because of all the blonde, blue eyed, long legged and big breasted birds..... 

Fantastic bunch of people they were.


----------



## 102first_hussars (May 2, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Just let's us say that they (USMC) couldn't handle our week long march....   We march more on one day than some others do under a week....
> Could be the fresh mountain air too.   My personal opinion is that they couldn't concentratem because of all the blonde, blue eyed, long legged and big breasted birds.....
> 
> Fantastic bunch of people they were.



Have you ever seen them march on TV, god, i shout at the T.V. 

"Dig In Youre Left Heel, GODDD!"


----------



## Lucky13 (May 2, 2007)




----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 2, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> The thread is not who is the mightiest..
> Certainly the US would win... maybe just with the marines.
> 
> it is about who is the most efficient...




I agree and I dont think that anyone out there is more efficient. The US military can make the most out of any situation. No other military can project its power as the US can. It also has the most support from any of the other services than any military in the world. The joint operations conducted by all these services together is what gets the job done.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 2, 2007)

Wildcat said:


> Adler how well does the US forces get paid whilst on operations? When I was in the Gulf I was getting $200 a day danger money + sea going allowance (or field allowance) + my normal wage all Tax free. Needless to say my 7 months away earned me quite a bit of money!



When I was deployed I was brining in my normal wage, flightpay, my housing allowance (because my rent back in Germany still had to be paid), my Cost of Living Allowance (because my family was still in Germany), Seperate rations (but I recieved that in Germany anyhow because I was aircrew and married), Hostile Fire Pay, and Family Seperation Pay.

And all of that was Tax Free. I was bringing in close to 6000 a month.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 2, 2007)

102first_hussars said:


> Have you ever seen them march on TV, god, i shout at the T.V.
> 
> "Dig In Youre Left Heel, GODDD!"



We dont march like you guys, because we dont want to look like you guys. Not everyone things it looks great...


----------



## mkloby (May 2, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Just let's us say that they (USMC) couldn't handle our week long march....   We march more on one day than some others do under a week....
> Could be the fresh mountain air too.   My personal opinion is that they couldn't concentratem because of all the blonde, blue eyed, long legged and big breasted birds.....
> 
> Fantastic bunch of people they were.



Yeah yeah yeah - every european proudly touts their hardness and unsurpassed marching ability with conceit... same old story. Then there's always the "our forces are smaller and better trained" myth. If that's what it takes for you to puff out your chest my friend, go ahead. How many US Marines have you trained with, since you are so quick ridicule their abilities?

Not to mention no combat experience as an organization.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 2, 2007)

Here Here!


----------



## Lucky13 (May 2, 2007)

Sometimes the truth hurts a wee bit....     And I'm NOT ridiculing(?) anyone here. We also had two officers who had served with the French Foreign Legion, nutcases both of them. 
You can't always expect to be the best.....


----------



## mkloby (May 2, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Sometimes the truth hurts a wee bit....



The "truth" that is just a baseless declaration w/o any foundation? You criticize qualities qualities of an military organization that you know virtually nothing about. About the only thing hurt here is your credibility.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 2, 2007)

Have to agree with you here, especially when the person is basing there knowledge off of being in there countries military for a whole what...16 months.


----------



## Glider (May 2, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> When I was deployed I was brining in my normal wage, flightpay, my housing allowance (because my rent back in Germany still had to be paid), my Cost of Living Allowance (because my family was still in Germany), Seperate rations (but I recieved that in Germany anyhow because I was aircrew and married), Hostile Fire Pay, and Family Seperation Pay.
> 
> And all of that was Tax Free. I was bringing in close to 6000 a month.



If efficient equals, cost effective then UK should win. I know it was a long time ago and may well have changed now, but when I was deployed I didn't get any danger money, hostile fire money or other extras for having the pleasure of being shot at. It was deemed as being expected when you joined.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 2, 2007)

Glider said:


> If efficient equals, cost effective then UK should win. I know it was a long time ago and may well have changed now, but when I was deployed I didn't get any danger money, hostile fire money or other extras for having the pleasure of being shot at. It was deemed as being expected when you joined.



Well that is what is good about the US military. It takes care of its soldiers. Most of those allowances I recieved whether I was deployed or not. The Army paid the rent on my house, they gave me COLA to adjust to the high cost of living in Germany, they gave me Seperate Rations to buy food for my family and flight pay I recieved regardless if I was deployed or not because that was my job, I flew every day.

The only extra allowances for being deployed were the Hostile Fire Pay and the Family Seperation Pay. 

The only real good thing was that it was tax free and there was nothign to spend money on in the desert so you save a butt load of money.


----------



## Lucky13 (May 2, 2007)

I'm not gonna go into a war of words here fellas, it's not worth it. I respect you guys too much go where you start to call each other names etc... 
It's true that I maybe just spent 16 months in the Rangers, I can easily count the nights that I spent in the bed on the regiment and not out in the bushes playing war, but as Sweden doesn't have a professional army like you guys, the UK and some others we have to train harder to keep up with the big boys....
What happened back then has absolutely nothing to do with ridiculing anyone or their proffesionalism (is that even a word ) in the field of conflict....
It's true that I only trained the with USMC once, but had I chosen to stay with in the military it would possibly happened more times and not only with them. I want you to remember one thing and one thing only, I have the outmost respect for the USMC and nothing will ever change that. These were some of the best guys that I've ever met, too bad that I lost the contact with those that I got to know.
I'm sorry if I stepped on your toes...


----------



## Hunter368 (May 2, 2007)

I think Canada's should be the most efficient in the world!!!

It's true it's true.

We spend less on our military then France, UK, Germany, Japan, Israel, USA and most other nations on the planet.

But we are the safest nation on the planet..........no one would dare invade us!

Who can boast spending less then us on its military (and yet have so much natural resources and valuable territory that people would love to take from us)......and yet be as safe as we are from invasion? No one.

Canada is #1 hands down.

Who can argue that point?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 2, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> I'm not gonna go into a war of words here fellas, it's not worth it. I respect you guys too much go where you start to call each other names etc...
> It's true that I maybe just spent 16 months in the Rangers, I can easily count the nights that I spent in the bed on the regiment and not out in the bushes playing war, but as Sweden doesn't have a professional army like you guys, the UK and some others we have to train harder to keep up with the big boys...



Hey I was just giving you a hard time...

Like you like to joke with me in other threads I was doing the same with you here.


----------



## Lucky13 (May 2, 2007)

Aah....do I feel stupid? 
Damn!
Oooh.....look at the time...
What's that?
Ok, I'll be right over....
Sorry, need to dash....
  




---------------------------------------------------->> Ziiiip!


----------



## Matt308 (May 2, 2007)

Hunter368 said:


> I think Canada's should be the most efficient in the world!!!
> 
> It's true it's true.
> 
> ...



 O' Canada...


----------



## Hunter368 (May 2, 2007)

You know it Matt.........fear Canada!


----------



## mkloby (May 2, 2007)

Hunter368 said:


> You know it Matt.........fear Canada!





Everything's all good Lucky. Now - you guys just need to USE your military. You know what happens when you don't use something... it falls off...


----------



## Lucky13 (May 3, 2007)

Indeed mkloby.... Next round is on me.


----------



## trackend (May 3, 2007)

Efficient and armed forces are words that dont tend to go together very well as waste is notorious with all armed services.
As for Effectiveness at the moment and the forseable future it has to be the USA but as with all major world powers eventually another nation will take the lead.
I would say next would be the Swiss. How would you fancy going hand to hand with a guy wearing a skirt and yellow pom poms just to get to the Pope.


----------



## comiso90 (May 3, 2007)

Hunter368 said:


> You know it Matt.........fear Canada!



Gotta say... I have traveled more than most...
Canada is super cool. Montreal, Windsor, Vitoria, Toronto have all tasted my brain cells.

The women have been educated... 



The only fear I have of Canada is that they belay the inevitable and resist the "American" Womb.

*North American Hemispheric Alliance!*

Brothers Unite and prepare the smite on lesser fiends!

Canada is beyond super most, extra - cool!


----------



## Hunter368 (May 3, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> Gotta say... I have traveled more than most...
> Canada is super cool. Montreal, Windsor, Vitoria, Toronto have all tasted my brain cells.
> 
> The women have been educated...
> ...



NEVER!!!!


----------



## Matt308 (May 3, 2007)

I agree Hunter. Can't intermingle with us US mutts.

I say, "Canada and Ontario... Unite!!"


----------



## comiso90 (May 3, 2007)

Hunter368 said:


> NEVER!!!!



It is already too late!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Joe2 (May 3, 2007)

Well I think its not the US as they keep blowing up their allies...


----------



## Hunter368 (May 3, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> It is already too late!!!!!!!!!!!!



Grrrrrr bastard Americans!!!! Noooooooooooo


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 3, 2007)

Joe2 said:


> Well I think its not the US as they keep blowing up their allies...



That is a very ignorant and dumb remark...

You have now recieved todays Dumb Post Award!


----------



## Hunter368 (May 3, 2007)

Joe2 said:


> Well I think its not the US as they keep blowing up their allies...



I agree with Chris, I am Canadian we have lost troops to US friendly fire......but that rude and dumb statment dude.

Everyone one that has stepped onto a battle field for any amount of time knows that friendly fire happens......it's a fact of war.


----------



## pbfoot (May 3, 2007)

mkloby said:


> Everything's all good Lucky. Now - you guys just need to USE your military. You know what happens when you don't use something... it falls off...


Were holding our end in Afghanistan .
It may have changed now but when I did my time we always thought that the US Forces were to specialized with such trades or MOC's as Panel remover or prop guy and one guy for air systems and one for Hydraulics it may have changed but those trades are encompassed by Fitter and Rigger or Airframe and Air Engine up here . Maybe it was just bravado but we tended to think our aircraft were better maintained . We don't have a MOC of Crew Chief or at least didn't


----------



## Joe2 (May 6, 2007)

Well.....I just dont like America


----------



## mkloby (May 6, 2007)

Joe2 said:


> Well.....I just dont like America



You come off as extremely intelligent, bud. A senior officer told me once, "Never miss an opportunity to shut up rather than say something stupid and make an jacka** of yourself." I'm going to pass that tip on to you, as you seem to be able to benefit from it.

This is a thread on the most effective and efficient army, not on whether or not Joe2 likes America. Also, if you do in fact dislike America, why don't you bring it up in an appropriate thread and discuss your issues rather than simply making a foolish statement and looking like a toolbox.


----------



## Lucky13 (May 6, 2007)

mkloby said:


> Everything's all good Lucky. Now - you guys just need to USE your military. You know what happens when you don't use something... it falls off...



Or you grow back to a virgin.....


----------



## Lucky13 (May 6, 2007)

There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army 


Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share. 
Ned Dolan 


The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. Lord, how they could fight!
MGen. Frank E. Lowe, USA; Korea, 26 January 1952 


Marines know how to use their bayonets. Army bayonets may as well be paper-weights. 
Navy Times; November 1994 


Why in hell can't the Army do it if the Marines can. They are the same kind of men; why can't they be like Marines. 
Gen. John J. "Black Jack" Pershing, USA; 12 February 1918 


The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years. 
James Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy; 23 February 1945 
(the flag-raising on Iwo Jima had been immortalized in a photograph by Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal) 


I have just returned from visiting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world! 
General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur; Korea, 21 September 1950 


We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of this island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwestern corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on? 
Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman of the the Joint Chiefs of Staff
during the assault on Grenada, 1983 


The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps! 
Eleanor Roosevelt, First Lady of the United States, 1945 


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. 
RAdm. "Jay" R. Stark, USN; 10 November 1995 


For over 221 years our Corps has done two things for this great Nation. We make Marines, and we win battles. 
Gen. Charles C. Krulak, USMC (CMC); 5 May 1997 


Come on, you sons of bitches! Do you want to live forever? 
GySgt. Daniel J. "Dan" Daly, USMC
near Lucy-`le-Bocage as he led the 5th Marines' attack into Belleau Wood, 6 June 1918 


Gone to Florida to fight the Indians. Will be back when the war is over. 
Colonel Commandant Archibald Henderson, USMC
in a note pinned to his office door, 1836 


Don't you forget that you're First Marines! Not all the communists in Hell can overrun you! 
Col. Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller, USMC
rallying his First Marine Regiment near Chosin Reservoir, Korea, December 1950 

You'll never get a Purple Heart hiding in a foxhole! Follow me! 
Capt. Henry P. Crowe, USMC; Guadalcanal, 13 January 1943 


We are United States Marines, and for two and a quarter centuries we have defined the standards of courage, esprit, and military prowess. 
Gen. James L. Jones, USMC (CMC); 10 November 2000 


There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army 


Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share. 
Ned Dolan 


I love the Corps for those intangible possessions that cannot be issued: pride, honor, integrity, and being able to carry on the traditions for generations of warriors past. 
Cpl. Jeff Sornig, USMC; in Navy Times, November 1994 


I have only two men out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold. 
1stLt. Clifton B. Cates, USMC
in Belleau Wood, 19 July 1918 


Courage is endurance for one moment more… 
Unknown Marine Second Lieutenant in Vietnam 


My only answer as to why the Marines get the toughest jobs is because the average Leatherneck is a much better fighter. He has far more guts, courage, and better officers... These boys out here have a pride in the Marine Corps and will fight to the end no matter what the cost. 
2nd Lt. Richard C. Kennard, Peleliu, World War II 


A Marine should be sworn to the patient endurance of hardships, like the ancient knights; and it is not the least of these necessary hardships to have to serve with sailors. 
Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery 



This was the first time that the Marines of the two nations had fought side by side since the defence of the Peking Legations in 1900. Let it be said that the admiration of all ranks of 41 Commando for their brothers in arms was and is unbounded. They fought like tigers and their morale and esprit de corps is second to none. 
Lt Col. D.B. Drysdale, Commanding 
41 Commando, Chosen Reservoir, on the 1st Marine Division Division 


You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth- and the amusing thing about it is that they are. 
Father Kevin Keaney
1st Marine Division Chaplain
Korean War 


By their victory, the 3rd, 4th and 5th Marine Divisions and other units of the Fifth Amphibious Corps have made an accounting to their country which only history will be able to value fully. Among the Americans who served on Iwo Island, uncommon valor was a common virtue. 
Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, U.S. Navy 


I am convinced that there is no smarter, handier, or more adaptable body of troops in the world. 
Prime Minister of Britain, Sir Winston Churchhill 


The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle. 
Gen. John "Black Jack" Pershing, U.S. Army
Commander of American Forces in World War I 


Do not attack the First Marine Division. Leave the yellowlegs alone. Strike the American Army. 
Orders given to Communist troops in the Korean War;
shortly afterward, the Marines were ordered
to not wear their khaki leggings. 


The American Marines have it [pride], and benefit from it. They are tough, cocky, sure of themselves and their buddies. They can fight and they know it. 
General Mark Clark, U.S. Army 


Every Marine is, first and foremost, a rifleman. All other conditions are secondary. 
Gen. A. M. Gray, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps 


A Ship without Marines is like a coat without buttons. 
Adm. Farragut 


If I had one more division like this First Marine Division I could win this war. 
General of the Armies Douglas McArthur in Korea,
overheard and reported by Marine Staff Sergeant Bill Houghton, Weapons/2/5


Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking!
FERDINAND FOCH 


I want you boys to hurry up and whip these Germans so we can get out to the Pacific to kick the s**t out of the purple-pissing Japanese, before the Godda**ed MARINES get all the credit!
Lt General George Patton, US Army 1945 


Teufelhunde! (Devil Dogs)
GERMAN SOLDIERS, WW1 at BELLEAU WOOD 


So they've got us surrounded, good! Now we can fire in any direction, those b*****ds won't get away this time!
CHESTY PULLER, USMC 


WE STOLE THE EAGLE FROM THE AIR FORCE, THE ANCHOR FROM THE NAVY AND THE ROPE FROM THE ARMY. 
ON THE SEVENTH DAY WHILE GOD RESTED, WE OVERRAN HIS PERIMETER, STOLE THE GLOBE AND WE'VE BEEN RUNNING THE WHOLE SHOW EVER SINCE. 


WE LIVE LIKE SOLDIERS, TALK LIKE SAILORS, AND SLAP THE HELL OUT OF BOTH OF THEM. 


WARRIORS BY DAY, LOVERS BY NIGHT, PROFESSIONALS BY CHOICE, AND MARINES BY THE GRACE OF GOD.


----------



## renrich (May 6, 2007)

I think this thread is about the most effective, efficient modern military. On balance the US military is far ahead of any other military. As someone said it may not be the most efficient since bigness breeds inefficiency but it's effectiveness overcomes it's flaws. The US Army is well trained and equipped and it's NCOs are very professional. The US Air Force is the same. The hole card for the US is the US Navy and the US Marine Corps. They can project power to almost any spot in the world and no other world power can interfere. They not only can project power but they can supply troops in most places in the world and they can interdict the the enemy supply lines. Of course in a nuclear war the US has a big edge with the Air Force and Navy.


----------



## plan_D (May 6, 2007)

I'm not sure that quote from Winston Churchill was about the USMC. But the best quote about the USMC is from _Full Metal Jacket_

_"God loves the Marines because they kill everything they see!"_ 

The debate on this thread is almost always going to be, the country you're from has the most efficient military. I don't know all the facts of efficiency, and none of you do, so I'm not going to even bother. But I will say that the U.S has the most powerful military in the world. Israel has been fighting pathetic arab countries all these decades, it proves nothing. Marching is an important part to company disicpline, hence the reason the British military loves it so much, and small numbers does not mean efficiency. And the U.S NCO corps maybe fine, but the British NCOs are just as good if not better trained than U.S counter-parts. And British pilots are still known to be some of the best in the world; I've heard plenty of compliments from U.S pilots toward the RAF and FAA from World War II onwards.


----------



## Lucky13 (May 6, 2007)

Whoever is the most effective or efficient, I don't really care about. All those that serve in any force, fighting the evil wherever and whatever it might be in the world, will always have my undying gratitude and admiration....


----------



## plan_D (May 6, 2007)

Ace ... and same for me ... since the British and U.S are allies ... f*ck you all...we're the best alliance known in history...and we'll kill you all...


----------



## renrich (May 7, 2007)

One other factor to consider. The US military is the most experienced in the world. Think who else has been involved in more war fighting and more operational experience since WW2.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 7, 2007)

Joe2 said:


> Well.....I just dont like America



That is fine, you dont have to but atleast have a fricken clue before you make stupid comments.

Oh and since you dont like America then dont use anything American either. Dont eat at McDonnalds, dont wear Levis Jeans, Dont wear Nikes, dont listen to American music, dont watch American TV shows, etc...


----------



## plan_D (May 7, 2007)

_"One other factor to consider. *The US military is the most experienced in the world.* Think who else has been involved in more war fighting and more operational experience since WW2."_

That is a stupid comment, sorry, especially the bold part. The British military is the most experienced in the world, especially the navy - since it's the oldest. And the only extra "war" America has over Britain since World War II is Vietnam. But since Britain was, and is, already well versed in jungle fighting - it makes NO difference whatsoever. And counter-insurgency, Britain holds the gold, followed by Russia (who just use sheer brutality) ...the U.S didn't touch enmasse insurgency until Afghanistan. Vietnam had some, but you still had uniformed soldiers to fight.


----------



## Wildcat (May 7, 2007)

plan_D said:


> _"One other factor to consider. *The US military is the most experienced in the world.* Think who else has been involved in more war fighting and more operational experience since WW2."_
> 
> That is a stupid comment, sorry, especially the bold part. The British military is the most experienced in the world, especially the navy - since it's the oldest. And the only extra "war" America has over Britain since World War II is Vietnam. But since Britain was, and is, already well versed in jungle fighting - it makes NO difference whatsoever. And counter-insurgency, Britain holds the gold, followed by Russia (who just use sheer brutality) ...the U.S didn't touch enmasse insurgency until Afghanistan. Vietnam had some, but you still had uniformed soldiers to fight.



And just to add, the Australian Military has fought with the US in pretty much every war since WWII.


----------



## comiso90 (May 7, 2007)

Joe2 said:


> Well.....I just dont like America




Anybody who categorically remarks “I don’t like a country” without any explanation sounds ignorant, spiteful or jealous. There are plenty of reasons to like or dislike but to arrogantly and simply state “ I don’t like America” Is an uneducated and childish comment.

Start a new thread and enumerate your reasons.


*PLEASE!*


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 7, 2007)

Its funny though, he states that but I am sure as he was posting that he was was wearing Levi Jeans, playing an american video game, listening to an American band on the stereo and had eaten McDonalds in the past week.


----------



## renrich (May 7, 2007)

With out getting personal about it, I hardly think that because the Royal Navy is older that it qualifies as the most effective navy. Experience gained in 1916 doesn't help in modern warfare. How many operational aircraft carriers does the RN have and what type of a/c do they operate and how much operational experience have they. I seem to recollect that when the RN sent carriers to the Pacific in WW2 they had difficulty operating with the USN because they had not the means or experience to replenish at sea. In fact, I recently read that on a website about the Fleet Air Arm. During that war the majority of aircraft embarked on RN carriers were of US manufacture. The British sent token forces to Korea but the US bore by far the brunt of the combat both in the air and sea and land. It would seem to me that in Viet Nam, the VC which had been called the Viet Minh during the insurgency against France were a true insurgent force and the US had at least 10 years experience in that. Once again in the first Gulf War and this second one the British participation has been heartily appreciated but certainly has not been close to the US in terms of numbers and type of weapons and men involved. There a large number of officers and NCOs in all of the US military today that have had OJT in war fighting and I don't believe any other country can approach their numbers.


----------



## apocaliptic (Aug 7, 2010)

well, you must put it into proportion, if everyone had an army of the same size, who would win?


my answer is israel. they have the most technologically advanced army, and the best airforce and the merkava mark 5 tanks which are extreemly deadly. and they are getting f35 lightining v2. definetley with the best training and experience.

they also have nukes and ways to defend against them, so basically they are invunrable to rockets.


----------



## apocaliptic (Aug 7, 2010)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You pit the IDF agianst the US and it would not stand a chance. Fortunatly it would not happen.




of course it will. 

an invadign force of the US will not be very large. israli pilots outfly US pilots 3-1. (( its PROVEN)) israel has nukes, and so does the US but israel has the arrow v3 missile that blows the nuke up before hitting israel. 

3rd** USA ships will not reach israel because of its stealth subs and airforce, and rocketships.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 7, 2010)

apocaliptic said:


> of course it will.
> 
> an invadign force of the US will not be very large. israli pilots outfly US pilots 3-1. (( its PROVEN)) israel has nukes, and so does the US but israel has the arrow v3 missile that blows the nuke up before hitting israel.
> 
> 3rd** USA ships will not reach israel because of its stealth subs and airforce, and rocketships.



Okay...


----------



## Glider (Aug 7, 2010)

Can I have some of what he is on please


----------



## B-17engineer (Aug 7, 2010)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Okay...


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 8, 2010)

Did I miss something?


----------



## Ferdinand Foch (Aug 8, 2010)

Lucky13 said:


> Did I miss something?



Well, if you want my opinion Lucky, I think somebody's making a concise statement without checking the research first. 


Personally, I would have to say the U.S. Military. Not just becuase I'm American, but because we have the largest professional army in the world. There are plenty of other nations out there with far larger armies-i.e. China- but they cannot compete with the U.S. in terms of technological advancement. A lot of Western Allies are also technologically advanced-like Canada, Great Britain, France, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, etc.- but they do not have the numbers like the United States does. That's my general statement, anyway. 

That being said, I have nothing but respect to the militaries of our allies. Each army is rich in tradition and history, and shows that tradition to this day. Even though that I believe that we have the most efficient modern army in the world, I do feel a lot better knowing that a lot of Western armies are out with us on the field, whether it be the Royal Marines, the PPCLL, the ADF or the NZDF, the IDF, and the even the French-the Foreign Legion, the Chasseur Alpins, and the French paratroopers notwithstanding. 
Heck, I even told a friend of mine when she said that America's foreign policy is losing friends of our worldwide that's making it us go it alone, I said that as long as we have England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc., then that's all the Allies will ever need. 

Ok, that was my rant for the night. Feel free to commen and/or criticize.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Aug 8, 2010)

Ok, who spiked the Kool Aid??????


----------



## michaelmaltby (Aug 9, 2010)

".... The simple fact is the US military is the most efficient and finest fighting force the world has ever seen."



Roman Legions at their finest would give your views a run.

MM


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 9, 2010)

....and maybe the Spartans!  

Question though.....

Can an army, any nations army here, become too technologically dependent?


----------



## parsifal (Aug 9, 2010)

Ive served alongside British, Canadian, New Zealanders ,US, British, PNG and Indonesian forces. With the exception of the Indonesians I have no problems serving alongside of any of them. If there are any differences, they are minute, 

However, for me, the best soldiers in the world, only from what I have read, would have to be the Gurkhas. These plucky little guys would fight till they are all dead, and never flinch. Handy guys to have around IMO


----------



## mikewint (Aug 9, 2010)

OK, my opinion is obvious, no nations armed forces can stand for long against the US. we have the best equipted trained and motivated soldiers in the world backed by a massive manufacturing and tecnology capability. Obviously sheer massed numbers count. it would be difficult to stand against the Chinese or N. Koreans on the ground using conventional weapons. I've experienced a few "human wave" assaults and they are VERY difficult to stop.
Lucky13, to answer your question, Yes. look at the Germans in WWII. their tanks took out the shermans 10:1 and sometimes more but for every tiger they made we made 30 shermans.
the only thing the US armed forces cannot withstand are the gutless politicians at home and our own news media. imagine walter cronkite reporting the "battle of the bulge" in the same manner he reported Tet in vietnam


----------



## Loiner (Aug 19, 2010)

We often hear that the British Army is the best trained in the world (whether it's true or not I couldn't say) but they certainly aren't the best equiped. The prolonged service in the middle east has produced a whole host of tales of British servicemen having to beg ,borrow or buy essential equipment, even the welfare facilities and rations have been reportedly looked on the US in envy. As for small arms, not sure if the SA80 is the best rifle but I suppose compares reasonably well with the M4, and most western countries have a form of the FN SAW and GPMG.

I voted for IDF, as I think their experience and motivation of fighting for survival over the past half century has honed them into a very effective if fairly low budget fighting force. Not sure how their new Tavor matches up against the M16/M4 or if they are all being replaced, but with their experience they should know what's best for them. For big kit, they also have amongst the best armour in the world with their Merkavas, and they went straight in for the Apache atack helicopters - good choice. I also like the way the upgrade old kit like old M113s and M60s into far more effective new armoured vehicles, excellant intiative and resourcefulnes.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 19, 2010)

I was thinking of this thread for quite some time and I decided to look back on my experiences in the US Army and I have decided that the US military is not the most efficient in the world. Of course this goes against what I said earlier.

Why?

No military of that size can be efficient. When I think of the logistics and what goes into sustaining (including what is wasted by the military) then it certainly can not be the most efficient. This goes for any military this size however.

I still stand by my opinion that the US military is the most effective however. It simply is the most powerful, advanced and capable military in the world. I believe in this because the US military in my opinion is the best trained and best led (especially in the NCO corps). Also the combined capabilities of the joint services (Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force) make it the most effective.


----------



## mikewint (Aug 19, 2010)

Eagle, i suppose that depends on the meaning of efficiency. armed fores destroy materiel their own and the enemies. in one sense that is their job. in some cases the ratio is important in others, not so much IF the destroyed material is replaced at the same rate or better. consider the german tigers vs the sherman
soldiers can also be considered in the same light. in vietnam US losses were 58,000+ while the NVA have recently admitted that their losses were 2 Million+. almost 35:1. now if we are talking about soldiers used as cannon fodder they had better not be your best and most trained. consider japan and germany in term of trained pilots and tankers as the war neared its end.
in short i not so sure in what context to take the term efficient except in terms of the end result which is simple: no nation can stand against the US military


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 19, 2010)

mikewint said:


> Eagle, i suppose that depends on the meaning of efficiency. armed fores destroy materiel their own and the enemies. in one sense that is their job. in some cases the ratio is important in others, not so much IF the destroyed material is replaced at the same rate or better. consider the german tigers vs the sherman
> soldiers can also be considered in the same light. in vietnam US losses were 58,000+ while the NVA have recently admitted that their losses were 2 Million+. almost 35:1. now if we are talking about soldiers used as cannon fodder they had better not be your best and most trained. consider japan and germany in term of trained pilots and tankers as the war neared its end.
> in short i not so sure in what context to take the term efficient except in terms of the end result which is simple: no nation can stand against the US military



We are both looking at efficiency as something totally different. As I already stated, the US military is the most *effective*. Most effective does not always mean most efficient. The money, manpower and supplies are not always used best or in the most *efficient* manner by the US military. That is fact...


----------



## parsifal (Aug 19, 2010)

I see the US military as having strengths and weaknesses, like any mililtary organization. Towards the end of WWII, it developed what is known as the "unit principle" which allows task groups to be formwed for a particular task as t hand. This gave the US army great flexibility in tailoring its force structure to a particular purpose. However, the concept pre-supposes that the military are trained with precise uniformity....that personnel unused to working with another unit will immediately know how that unit will react, because the training tells them that their new buddies will react in a certain way. This does not always work that way. Training and efficiency in the US army is not always uniform, and units behave differently in a given situation. This has a tendency to to affect esprit de Corps and makes people somewahat cautious because they dont exactly know how thir colleagues are going to react. 

There are two things that I see as very important in modern military, and one of those qualioties is as old as dust. The first one, which the US does better than just about anybody, is adapt...The US can tailor their force structures, embrace new ideas, technology and new situations, better than just about anybody. Conversely, the US dont work as well as some in team building and working so closely with other units that the reactions are almost instinctive. Parhaps things have chnged since I worked with them, but that at least was my observation of them from 25 years ago


----------



## mikewint (Aug 19, 2010)

Eagle, OK agreed. your point is well taken. we did a LOT of humping up a hill to kill everything on the hill. then we heloed out leaving the hill to the very forces we just kicked out. not efficient in any sense.
Parsifal, second point well taken. any ORPLAN had to be signed off on by any one who might be involved. if the ORPLAN look promising everyone had to add his 2 cents so they could take credit if everything went well and interservice rivalry was unbelievable. at times over a month would pass before all parties were happy with the operation then layer in Saigon and Field Marshall Sulivan's political agenda
it's a wonder we're effictive at all


----------

