US Military Photos and Videos:

This is the prize of having the continent occupied by United States. I was hoping this to change with EU but happened exactly the opposite.
Either a sovereign revolution or a major economic disaster can save us from this. Speaking about economic disasters...

Werewolf wrote:

And it is always the US who pushes for the "Soviets were sending soldiers into thousands into meatgrinder so they just could gain a single meter on the battlefield."

But they are somehow proud of Normandy landings were they literally did the same thing and their soldiers threw themselves on machineguns. Thats heroic, but same thing is eastern front, nah it's just stupid human wave tactics. Or fighting in unimportant island clusters. In the jungle and against entrenched Jap soldiers... who rarely gave up. 
How hard is to understand that Wehrmacht was very effective fighting force up until it's last days. I simply see no other way how You could defeat such combat hardened enemy without massive losses. Wehrmacht was restricted strategically thanks to their idiot Hitler, but tactically they had no equals. Quality of their officers, their training, new concepts born on battlefield, equipment tailored exactly for specific warfare, high mobility. I dare to say it was first modern army. Soviets were caught with their pants down with half cooked army and insignificant officer corps and they had no chance. Even if Soviet tanks and planes were on par or better than German. They had to fight how they could and by the end of the war Red Army was strongest army in the world.

well, its what i always said as well about the eastern front. here in Europe they act like the Allies pretty much crushed all the crack-toops of the Nazi's single-handed.

but any idiot going trough an actual history book notices that germany deployed their combat-ready forces to the eastern front as "they" or hitler actually, because some officers like Rommel expected some kind of attack from the north sea. anyway, what was left in Europe where a bunch of old men and kids or injured.

and about Normandy, its a bit of a grey zone and i still end up in plenty discussions about it. it was a freaking tactical nightmare. the Tanks got stuck in their Barges during Landing on the banks just outside the beach. the troops where sitting ducks on the beaches.

where the guys that died that day heroes?. i think we have to look in a mirror at ourselves and say yes, its not like they had a choice but to charge into suicide. was their Command incompetent to send the second waves?. yes they certainly where, one beach was not going to make much difference as soon the Shermans rolled on the beaches elsewhere.

i know about the "human waves" the Red Army send against the Nazi's at the time with the motto "the guy with the rifle dies, then you pick up his rifle and its your lucky day!". its hardly effective use of manpower and tactical strategy. but those kids mostly still died, they deserve that title too in my opinion.

however as i stated what is my objection today  in "modern times" to this "needless sarcifice" of troops is that they are intentionally bred, selected for stupidity and indoctrination it seems. while there is no reason for it other than to satisfy the Pentagon Needs.

im not sure if Mike E or F-15E reads this, but this all is not meanth as a personal attack. but im willing to state openly here the U.S millitary has some serious problems with troop mentality and in extention Command and Control. and it just costs american lives that could have been avoided if common sense would prevail.

personally, ive stood at enough "ramp ceremony's". its how we call this "honour gaurd" saluting the dead that are loaded in the Plane. but take my word for it that when you see a coffin getting loaded up you do think about how he died, why he died, and who fucked up or if it was just "just combat". but more than once the leadership and training of troops where the guilty ones. and what propably irritates me still a lot is that back in the U.S it just get shoved under the carpet of "dying in the war against Terror" and no one asking second questions.

So one on one who you think is the best NATO army? Where would you rank USA etc?

Airbornewolf wrote:im not sure if Mike E or F-15E reads this, but this all is not meanth as a personal attack. but im willing to state openly here the U.S millitary has some serious problems with troop mentality and in extention Command and Control. and it just costs american lives that could have been avoided if common sense would prevail.

Uhh, I'm not exactly pro-US or anything even close to that... There is no reason for me (would be) to be offended...

Hannibal Barca wrote:So one on one who you think is the best NATO army? Where would you rank USA etc?

US is the obvious answer, they are by far the largest force and could destroy NATO software from the inside out (they develop most of what NATO uses).

By quality of their equipment, I'd say Germany...

Mike E wrote:By quality of their equipment, I'd say Germany...

I would like to nominate Israel, although Israel is not in NATO, but it is still a close ally of the U.S.

Israel has a great deal of experience in both conventional and unconventional warfare, and in both Russian and Western weapons.

Guys... this is a photos and videos thread...

Mike E wrote:

Airbornewolf wrote:im not sure if Mike E or F-15E reads this, but this all is not meanth as a personal attack. but im willing to state openly here the U.S millitary has some serious problems with troop mentality and in extention Command and Control. and it just costs american lives that could have been avoided if common sense would prevail.

Uhh, I'm not exactly pro-US or anything even close to that... There is no reason for me (would be) to be offended...

Hannibal Barca wrote:So one on one who you think is the best NATO army? Where would you rank USA etc?

US is the obvious answer, they are by far the largest force and could destroy NATO software from the inside out (they develop most of what NATO uses).

By quality of their equipment, I'd say Germany...

Sorry I meant with equal size and similar equipment. I used the mathematical definition of one-on-one not the conventional one

Iraq war.

F-15E wrote:

Wow

A moment of relax in a tense war...

some cool pics man!

F-15

M1A2s in Germany

Marines

F-15E wrote:M1A2s in Germany

How much M1 A2 were crunched and burnt by iraqi insurgents -with simple RPG- between 2003-2010 ? Proving the uselessness of this kind of hardware. US army is strong -if and only if US is helped by coalition including the half of the earth- only against poor, and defenseless nations.
It would be interresting to see what is the worth of this kind of hardware in real and fair conditions of war, where a tank like T-72 could confront M1 Abrams. We will be surprised by the results.
But, as usual Uncle Sam will decline this kind of fight, foreboding the catastrophic result.

No vehicle is perfect... if you misuse them they will become vulnerable... hardly something you can be critical of regarding the hardware...

GarryB wrote:No vehicle is perfect... if you misuse them they will become vulnerable... hardly something you can be critical of regarding the hardware...

Of course we already know that M1 Abrams is a strong and powerful MBT. But, f*ck it, the problem is that the crazy fans usually overestimated the power of M1 Abrams, something like M1 heroicly destroyed thousands of T-72 with little casualties, blah blah...

nemrod wrote:How much M1 A2 were crunched and burnt by iraqi insurgents -with simple RPG- between 2003-2010 ? Proving the uselessness of this kind of hardware.

I disagree. The nickname of RPG is God of Firepower and in many cases it means Dead for tanks and heavy AFVs. In an ambush there is a number weakpoints for RPG user to aim at. You know, the rear and the flanks of a tank is weaker than its frontal armour. So basically I believe that careless Russian tank users can suffer the same thing... like in Gronzy 199x.

nemrod wrote:It would be interresting to see what is the worth of this kind of hardware in real and fair conditions of war, where a tank like T-72 could confront M1 Abrams. We will be surprised by the results.

I suspect it will be a team of many weapons confront another team of similar sets of weapons... because, you know, something likes "combined arms" and there is no way MBT will be operated alone. And the results... unpredictable because both sides may have something which can give all of us a nasty surprise.

nemrod wrote:US army is strong -if and only if US is helped by coalition including the half of the earth- only against poor, and defenseless nations.

This part I partly agree.

After bullying the weak and small nations... the F-teen meet India in a military training... and F-teen were defeated by Su-30s and MiG-21s.

People said something about "impenetrable fortress" of B-52... and in December 1972, at least 15 B-52 were destroyed by Hanoi.

People said something about the first stealth aircraft named F-117... and F-117 was locked by Yugoslavian radar, that event shattered all the reputation of this aircraft.

People said about revolutionary, impressive design of AR-15 and M16... but in fact, the fathers of AR-15, Stoner and Armalite, even rejected this design and went on with completely different AR-18 and Stoner 63... Meanwhile, the M16 went into history as the most hated assault rifle in the globe. All the Europe nation rejected the design of M16, you can see in the design of European assault rifles there is no DI, no spring in the buttstock, no cylindrical receiver chamber, these are the three legendary stupid points of M16 design which no one in the world can accept.

something like M1 heroicly destroyed thousands of T-72 with little casualties, blah blah...

Hahahaha... yeah, the M1 didn't meet thousands of T-72s in battle... most were dug in and were destroyed by air power. the vast majority of Iraqi tanks were T-54/55s, so it is little wonder the US forces didn't have too much problem fighting them at night at 2km range.

How much M1 A2 were crunched and burnt by iraqi insurgents -with simple RPG- between 2003-2010 ?

There are not many simple RPGs... most of them are very capable and powerful, though the ones in Afghanistan and Iraq were not as powerful as the ones available to the terrorists in Grozny...

you can see in the design of European assault rifles there is no DI, no spring in the buttstock, no cylindrical receiver chamber, these are the three legendary stupid points of M16 design which no one in the world can accept.

Not strictly true... my SLR (FN FAL) has the recoil spring in the buttstock, though it is a battle rifle rather than a proper assault rifle. But then technically my M4 is also a battle rifle as it is semi auto only.

Heres a pic of me, back a few years ago. If anyone else wants me to post some more pics or a some vids lemme know.

Is that an LVTP-7?

Yes, I was an AAV operator and a vehicle commander.