To Walle

[Splinter26]

You suck dude, we all know you drool when you see or hear about the toys U.S. military has to offer, your previous post was nothing but pure jealousy, and don't deny it, we know it so face it. No one cares what you're interested in, you don't care about the SEALs and guess what, they don't care about you. It's you that stinks and not M-16, and stick would be all you get to fight with, you're a clown if you're comparing AK47 to M-16 by burying them both in the ground, go ahead and ask any U.S. soldier how many times in war they were in situation where they had to bury their rifle and dig it back out after a week. Make sense? Yea you're pathetic. When I read the part about tieing M-16 to APC and driving it through the forrest for 5km, I wanted to give you a sandwich in the mouth dude, do you really believe professionals do that?. How stupid you gotta be to actually test weapons like that? Sounds like your IQ isn't necessarily reaching double digits, same with Swedish army, that's just sad man. It's a fact U.S. got the best stuff so accept it, from tanks to helicopters, from ships to submarines, jets and bombers, we own so don't hate just cuz you don't got the toys we have. Kid with a broken plastic fire truck will be always jealous of a kid with a roller coaster and a bike, so it's ok. But if you're so sick and tired of it then I suggest you look for another forum where someone will be actually interested in what Swedish military has to offer. p-)

PS

God Bless America, England, Australia, Poland.

[seventy6er]

i'm not with walle either, but testing a weapon like the swedes did for their latest assault rifle is standard within NATO. these torture tests are harsh. the weapons have to comply with "NATO AC-225 Military Specification Standards" (how does the weapon react in "hostile" environment like mud, salt-water, very hot and very low temperatures eg).


Other less destructive tests reveal much about USP reliability and durability. Function testing a wide selection of ammunition types, one test gun fired more than 10,000 rounds without a single malfunction. That means no stove-pipes, no failures to feed o r eject; no jams! Endurance firings of test samples has passed 20,000 rounds of high performance .40 S&W ammo without any parts failures. Sever temperature tests required the USP to be frozen at -44 degrees F (-42 degrees C) and then fired, frozen again a nd quickly heated to 153 degrees F (67 degrees C), and then fired again. These temperature spectrum tests were continually repeated, and with no adverse effects on the USP.

Demanding NATO Mil-Spec mud and rain tests were conducted, again with the USP passing without difficulty. Water immersion and salt spray also presented no problems to the USP. Outside metal surfaces of the USP are covered with an extremely hard nitro-gas carburized and black oxidized finish.

All internal metal parts, including springs, are coated with a special Dow-Corning process that reduces friction and wear. Both the internal and external finishes have proved to be especially corrosion resistant. For more than two years, German Navy comba t divers have used the same process on weapons parts without any signs of rust.



fore more info, you might want to check a report about a torture test of HK USP HERE (http://www.impactsites2000.com/site3/hktest.htm)

[duck]

Weren't there reports that several of the 507th maintenace assault rifles malfunctioned? So, maybe no need to even bury them for a week, just not cleaning or oiling often enough can get you killed.

[Splinter26]

Someone give me a good reason why would you want to bury your rifle for a week during battle lol

[Smintjes]

That's not the point Splinter. The point is that if the rifle still fires after having been buried for a week, it can stand a hell of a lot of abuse.

[Pakrat]

You know what a torture test is? Listening to the garbage these clowns come up with.Don't be jealous because the US Military is cutting edge,and hey we share.

[swestres]

[...]It's a fact U.S. got the best stuff so accept it, from tanks to helicopters, from ships to submarines, jets and bombers, we own so don't hate just cuz you don't got the toys we have. Kid with a broken plastic fire truck will be always jealous of a kid with a roller coaster and a bike, so it's ok. But if you're so sick and tired of it then I suggest you look for another forum where someone will be actually interested in what Swedish military has to offer.

This is a little bit OT but...
I whould say U.S. got fine equipment for their millitary forces, but I whouldn't say that Abrams work better then Strv 121/122 (leopard 2) in Swedish enviroment. The kalasjnikov can take more damage then the
M-16, but with that I don't think that AK-47, AKM or other kalasjnikovs works better then M-16 just because the kalasjnikov is can take more damage... No gun/tank/airplane/submarine is The Best. It depends on the enviroment, the crew, the enemy and so on...
U.S. didn't win the Vietnam war even if they had "the best stuff". The Vietkong had more expirience, and knew their territory better.
And wasn't U.S. impressed on our stealth sub, so impressed that they required classified information about it via Australia? I think so.
And yes, I'm swedish...

[Beowulf]

Vietnam....how do you determine a victory? Casualties? Withdrawal?

The withdrawal was political, American casualties were too high for the American people involved in a war they didn't understand.


In a discussion about weapons and soldier skill the question isn't about the political endstate but about casualties inflicted on the enemy which is the only quantifiable means of determining combat effectiveness:

http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html

[Splinter26]

Swestres I don't see what you are trying to prove by bringing up Vietnam, I never said US can win any war anywhere, I said US military does have the best war toys so why don't you swedish people accept it and get over the fact. I think if we fought in Vietnam again with all the technology that we have now, outcome could be the same as before because of the terrain, fighting guerilla is tough, we could win it if we decided to burn the entire country along with civilians with few bombers, but we don't do that. Anyway, remaining fact is that United States can do far more better job in a war then Sweden in ANY ENVIRONMENT, no one was impressed by your stealth fishing boat and Abrams own your tank, so quit the jealousy and lets get along.

[GLax]

then again if u ask a Vietnam vet, they didnt lose the war, the government wouldnt allow them to win it... my uncle was in Vietnam, he's told me about the rediculous amount of blood that was needlessly spilled (mostly by the VC and NVA) and how he thinks it could of been avoided if the government would of allowed the military to win the war...

on burying guns in the ground> come on, this is stupid, know why Americans dont do these tests? simply because we have a professional military, Soldiers and Marines to cleaning their rifles is part of their job. as far as i'm concerned, if your military needs a rifle that can be buried in the sand and dragged behind a tank then you cant call yourself professionals...

[duck]

http://www.modelhistoricships.com/vasa.htm

The swedish military, an epithome of professionality since the 16th century.

[swestres]

First of all, victory comes when the purpose of the war is reached, that didn't happened in Vietnam. Second of all, my fault bringin' up Nam, I should have understood that it was a sensitive subject. I'm sorry. We can take Mogadishu instead. The terrain, the warlord system and so on. No matter how good suff U.S. had there, it was a faliure.

and "US military does have the best war toys"...
Like I said, it isn't about the "best war toys", because no weapon system is universal, no weaponsystem is The supreme system. Some system works better in the dessert, while some work better in artic terrain, and others in the dessert... I have never said that the U.S. millitary can be knocked out by swedish armed forces, and I've never said that our forces are better than yours. I didn't said the opposite either...
I was just saying that your (Splinter26) opinions about different weaponsystems is totaly wrong. I think the people testing the systems know better than you, and you shouldn't critisise them for their metods. And all of your equipment isn't "native american" stuff.
The minimi is from Fabrice Nationale and your new assult rifle XM8/XM25 is built on german tecnology (H&K G36). If US armed forces thought like you then you could say goodbye to many good weaponsystems who saved many american lives. M9, M11, M136, M240, M249, none of them are american (I can be wrong, errare humanum est you know) , but I think they saved many american soldiers lives.

Once again sorry for taking Vietnam for an example...

[swestres]

And I whould like to know what Wasa got to do with our millitary today...

[ibstolidude]

Somolia was a politcal failure not a military one...

The events that took place called for a premature withdrawal of US forces based on political decisions...like decisions also played a part the manner operations would be conducted..

As far as raids being a failure..I don't think there is any question of the successes. - Maybe the fact that you watched a movie is affecting your head a little too much. The only claim for failure you may have is that farah adid was not captured...again that can be carried back to a political decision. You are delusional if you think the US Military walked out of Somalia by it's own choosing.

considering the number of succesful of raids conducted by that size of a task force..I think that the low WIA/KIA rate is a testiment to the training of those individuals and their teams/squads.

Go broader and consider the number of raids conducted by the US military across the world since 93...and again the low number KIA/WIA during the conducts of such operations is overwhelmingly positive.

[swestres]

Somolia was a politcal failure not a military one...

The events that took place called for a premature withdrawal of US forces based on political decisions...like decisions also played a part the manner operations would be conducted..

As far as raids being a failure..I don't think there is any question of the successes. - Maybe the fact that you watched a movie is affecting your head a little too much. The only claim for failure you may have is that farah adid was not captured...again that can be carried back to a political decision. You are delusional if you think the US Military walked out of Somalia by it's own choosing.

considering the number of succesful of raids conducted by that size of a task force..I think that the low WIA/KIA rate is a testiment to the training of those individuals and their teams/squads.

Go broader and consider the number of raids conducted by the US military across the world since 93...and again the low number KIA/WIA during the conducts of such operations is overwhelmingly positive.

Faliure like faliure, you didn't reach the goal, too bad, ni victory... Millitary or political, they walk hand by hand...
Don't make asumptions of what I'm writing, I've wrote that *Mogadishu* was a *faliure*. I didn't write that *Somalia* was a *Millitary faliure*...
There's a big difference... And it was just an example prooving that how much guns you have got and how good they might be, you can still fail... You said something like that yourself.

The only claim for failure you may have is that farah adid was not captured...
So now that we've agreed that Mogadishu (not somalia) was a faliure (millitary or political doesn't matter, but the millitary actions built the ground for the politicians decisions) we can go back to what I've said before in thit thread... how much guns you have got and how good they are, you can still fail... And also, that your american patrioism shouldn't choose the guns for you...

I never said US can win any war anywhere, I said US military does have the best war toys so why don't you swedish people accept it and get over the fact.
And my opinion about this? you can't compare weaponsystems like you (splinter26) do... And the way your doing it makes me sick... But hey, America can soon be a sweedish colony if you get your whole contry to think like that ;) (This last part from "But hey" and so on shouldn't be taken seriosly bu anyone)

[swestres]

I've whould like to "förtydliga" (my english isn't that good) a little bit...
Every weaponsystem have somthing good and something bad... You can use this to your advantage, and if you do so, you can take out a superimportant factory with an old typhoon from WW2 just because the Raytheon HAWK SAM system can't lock on that plane, just because it's too old. I don't say that it's a good method, but it may work...

[Seiyuuki]

And my opinion about this? you can't compare weaponsystems like you (splinter26) do... And the way your doing it makes me sick... But hey, America can soon be a sweedish colony if you get your whole contry to think like that ;) (This last part from "But hey" and so on shouldn't be taken seriosly bu anyone)

Before the US become a Sweedish colony, we nuke every inch of land in the US, then we'll nuke every inch of land in Sweeden, then we officially formally become your colony. p-)

You guys are arguing mostly about guns!!! Granted it's an important integral in the the US arm forces, but it's another small minute aspect of the ENTIRE US ARSENALS!!! Expand on the discussion, involve the planes, the ships, the ground vehicles, the missiles, the shells, the torpedoes, the bomb, the satellites, the men, the training, the shades, the shoes, the clothes, the bases, the knife, the helmet, the sock, the BDU, the food, the tent, the tire, the engine, the radio, the radar, the jammer, the binocular, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

[swestres]

You guys are arguing mostly about guns!!! Granted it's an important integral in the the US arm forces, but it's another small minute aspect of the ENTIRE US ARSENALS!!! Expand on the discussion, involve the planes, the ships, the ground vehicles, the missiles, the shells, the torpedoes, the bomb, the satellites, the men, the training, the shades, the shoes, the clothes, the bases, the knife, the helmet, the sock, the BDU, the food, the tent, the tire, the engine, the radio, the radar, the jammer, the binocular, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Right, I've forgot them, but it's the same thing there... You know, Sweden was the first "non US contry" country who targeted an SR-71 blackbird over the baltic sea with an JAS 39 Gripen, or was it the AJ 37 Viggen? I've forgot...

[Seiyuuki]

You guys are arguing mostly about guns!!! Granted it's an important integral in the the US arm forces, but it's another small minute aspect of the ENTIRE US ARSENALS!!! Expand on the discussion, involve the planes, the ships, the ground vehicles, the missiles, the shells, the torpedoes, the bomb, the satellites, the men, the training, the shades, the shoes, the clothes, the bases, the knife, the helmet, the sock, the BDU, the food, the tent, the tire, the engine, the radio, the radar, the jammer, the binocular, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Right, I've forgot them, but it's the same thing there... You know, Sweden was the first "non US contry" country who targeted an SR-71 blackbird over the baltic sea with an JAS 39 Gripen, or was it the AJ 37 Viggen? I've forgot...

"targeted," but were you fast enough to tracked it. I don't think the SR-71 was built to be completely untrackable, it was "targeted" many times throughout its career, but as always, its speed was its main advantage.

[warchild1/27scout]

somalia-1000+dead usa-18dead. there had been people say we broke thier backs on that operation and were at the tipping point and clinton could'nt take the political pressure and pull them out. and if you dispute that i think it was a carreer diplomat who said that who was far from hawkish.

[Chet Mystery]

More fun about Somolia-

Adid was killed suring hostilities with rival clans several years after the US operation. Had we captured him, he would still be alive today (albiet in prison)

So in a way, mission accomplished, sucker woot


Also, His son has moved to the US and become an itregal part of the Big-brothers Big sisters of America program, trying to do some good after his father did so much bad. p-)

[Seiyuuki]

Adid's son was in Somalia when we try to capture his father, as a US Marines.

Last time I checked, which was a long while back, he was back in Somalia replacing his dead father as the head of the clan.

So is he really back in the States?

[ibstolidude]

SMINT - nice try at a recovery

and don't put words in my mouth - I and the facts are in complete DISAGREEMENT with you comment that Mog was a failure..

You proved your ignorance of the facts again when you stated that:
"So now that we've agreed that Mogadishu (not somalia) was a failure (military or political doesn't matter, but the military actions built the ground for the politicians decisions) we can go back to what I've said before in thit thread"

The facts point to the opposite of your statement.. the political decisions drove the military operations.. the US military had requested further support and armored vehicles and were declined as sources have repeatedly stated political pressure drove the pace, timing and ROE for the operations in Somalia (and MOg)..but I guess facts don't matter.

And I stated " The only claim for failure you may have is that farah adid was not captured...again that can be carried back to a political decision. " -
That you may have not me... I do not believe that the military success of that mission was hinged solely on the capture of one individual.
Certainly the US government decided that the gains were not outweighed by the risks..exlain how that constitutes failure..that is nothing more than an intelligent realization and judgment. If in your delusions you think that the US Military walked out of Somalia and did not feel that they could have gone back in there and completed all tasks at hand you are kidding yourself. incidentally
What were the US objectives in Somalia? Then how about in Mogadishu?
You don't know do you?
1) were you deployed as part of the contingency operations in Somalia? NO
2) have you received the operations order form the operations in Somalia? NO
3) did you perhaps review the After Action Report of operations in somalia? NO


You also stated: "how much guns you have got and how good they are, you can still fail... And also, that your american patrioism shouldn't choose the guns for you..."
-NO WHERE in this thread had you stated the above statement prior to your reply to me. PERIOD mean what you say, say what you mean..prior to my reply the ONLY thing you had done was complain about the US weapons (who cares) and second guess operations you have little knowledge of with information that is incorrect/false/incomplete.

I don't care what weapons you like, or what you think of US weapons (of which incidentally the military uses VERY few)....but the facts are the facts and the comments I replied to were based on "other" than fact.

[specialairservice]

GLax wrote

on burying guns in the ground> come on, this is stupid, know why Americans dont do these tests? simply because we have a professional military, Soldiers and Marines to cleaning their rifles is part of their job.

Actually if you did your research before gobbing off about how great your soldiers and marines are you would know that your "professional military" also do this test. I know for a fact that they "America" buried the m249 SAW when they were testing it and proberbly many other weapons as well.

GLax wrote

as far as i'm concerned, if your military needs a rifle that can be buried in the sand and dragged behind a tank then you cant call yourself professionals...

So when you have weapons that stop working because you haven't tested them, it dosen't matter to american marines and soldiers because there professionals.... I don't think so.

If you weren't so bigheaded and knew what you were talking about, you would understand that the reason America has the best equipment is because they test them to the extremes.

[Zach R.]

The Mog is in no way compared to Nam. First off, we had no tanks, we had no AC-130 gunships, we had 8 BlackHawks, 4 littlebirds with guns, 4 without, and 160 of the best soldiers on earth. We in no way lost that war, it was just like Vietnam, we were'nt ALLOWED to. Clinton pulled em out before we could finish the job. And after that fight, it would have been mighty easy. Their RPG stash was deminished by an estimated 67%. Not to mention we also brought in another Delta squadron and another Ranger company. And after the fight, we brought in tanks, battleships cruisers, and a whole bunch of other stuff that I don't have the slightest clue on. Not only did we defeat Aidid's army, we mauled em'. Every last one of those guys were ready to go back in and finish the job. But, unfortunately, we were'nt allowed to. And I quote "If we had our way, we would have stayed. We would have fought until all of Mogadishu was leveled, until Aidid was hiding under a table in the open. Hey, we gotcha, now we can go home." Keni Thomas, 75th Ranger Regiment.

[spier]

The Mog is in no way compared to Nam. First off, we had no tanks, we had no AC-130 gunships, we had 8 BlackHawks, 4 littlebirds with guns, 4 without, and 160 of the best soldiers on earth. We in no way lost that war, it was just like Vietnam, we were'nt ALLOWED to. Clinton pulled em out before we could finish the job. And after that fight, it would have been mighty easy. Their RPG stash was deminished by an estimated 67%. Not to mention we also brought in another Delta squadron and another Ranger company. And after the fight, we brought in tanks, battleships cruisers, and a whole bunch of other stuff that I don't have the slightest clue on. Not only did we defeat Aidid's army, we mauled em'. Every last one of those guys were ready to go back in and finish the job. But, unfortunately, we were'nt allowed to. And I quote "If we had our way, we would have stayed. We would have fought until all of Mogadishu was leveled, until Aidid was hiding under a table in the open. Hey, we gotcha, now we can go home." Keni Thomas, 75th Ranger Regiment.Vietnam and Somalia were both failures; you won a few battles, but you lost the war. Yes, a lot of enemies were killed, but the objective wasn't to kill people, it was to take control, something which you obviously failed to achieve in both cases.

[Beowulf]

Perhaps, but the discusison seemed to be focused upon the effectiveness of US soldiers and their weapon systems. The effectiveness of which can only be determined through combat, and more specifically in causing enemy casualties.

The political machinations and ultimate outcome of any conflict exists beyind the soldiers and their weapons. Clearly, victory in a battle is different than victory in a war.

If the discussion is primarily concerned with how soldeirs and their weapon systems perform, (and not how politicians do their jobs), then any points beyond the sphere of casualties inflicted(and received) in combat is a non sequitur in terms of the effectiveness of a military.

[Duke]

I tire of hearing of people who claim we lost the Vietnam War. In proper context, Vietnam was a battleground between the Marxists and the Free World. Involved were forces that included more than Giap, the VC, NVA, Ho Chi Minh, Chinese and Soviets who offered technical and material support; we opposed each other on idealogy not military grounds.
They, the Communists, wanted a world structure governed by the "STATE", while the free world simply wanted that--a "FREE" world.
Now fast forward to today. The Soviet Union exists only in text books. The Chinese have embraced free market economics, although not democratic principles(Tinenamen Square).
AND VIETNAM has moved, as well, to free market economics and basic political rights. For example, CPVN allowed several commerical treaties with numerous states including the US. With all the reforms Vietnam has undergone of late, most notably politically, they move ever closer to the ideals the Free World fought for during the war.
So, have we lost the Vietnam War? No since they have conciously trying to become less Communistic and more Laissez Faire.

[Splinter26]

Swestres who are you to say Mogadishu was a failure punk? You should be shot in the head for calling what we tried to do in Somalia a failure, your statements are clearly based on a movie, because during that 2 days 18 American soldiers died in a fierce battle doesn't mean we've lost it. Huge mistake was made when they were sent in without proper armor like tanks or APC's, and despite that our soldiers performed like real professionals and team players. I think it was more big of a disaster for Somalis to lose so many people in 1 day from hands of soldiers who greatly outnumbered than for Rangers and Delta. Some countries you just can't be fix, and I think some of them are not even worth trying, but this is what U.S. does, it tries to put a stop to all kinds of regimes and civil wars, which Sweden wouldn't do. And see, what really highlights your stupidity, is that you are telling me that my opinions are wrong, a litte lesson now - there is no good or wrong opinion, everyone has their own opinion, and they shouldn't be critisized, one likes a blonde with tanned skin and blue eyes, and the other likes a a pale brunette with brown eyes and big breats, that ring a bell? Plus I'm pushing your buttons to get you all red faced when I brag about what US military has and that you don't have it, and that you can't have, there is very little interest in Swedish military, and whole lot interest in US military, now that isn't an opinion, that's a fact, because we do have better war toys, lot more capable than your own. Back to Mogadishu for a sec I forgot to say this, if we had couple tanks there on the raid we'd bring Aidid and his puppets on a silver plate, so much for our technology. It was a bad choice from Clinton to pull these guys out and not letting them finish what they were going to finish, and they were going to finish it, if Clinton was a bit tougher. I read an article where a US Ranger that fought in Mogadishu on October 3rd said that he was disappointed that they were going home because so many lives have already been lost for a purpose that was not reached because of Clinton's decision, (the raid in Mogadishu to capture 2 lieutenants was successful). American soldier feels pain, he sweats, he gets tired, he gets hungry, he get thirsty, he fears, he is not a robot, and most important, he is mortal, and because we are exposed to casualties doesn't give your Swedish mouth right to open itself and critisize us on Vietnam or Mogadishu. I'd like to see your people get their ass up and do something about the situation, but you won't cuz you don't have desire to, you don't have people to do it, and you don't have equipment to do it, so you stink. I think American military performs outstanding in any war, and one thing is certain - that they do a better job then Swedish, not that Swedish do anything but eat popcorn and drink american soda anyway... but the point is, keep your mouth shut Swes, your people wouldn't be able to handle what we can handle against the enemy, plain and simple, we own Sweden.

PS

Swestres, Sweden was the first country to have a privilege to watch a blackbird fly over and admire the plane of your dreams, so be thankful, and don't be stupid trying to talk down on USAF, you know we can turn you to ashes before our bombers appear on your lil radar.

PPS

Should you talk about Vietnam and Mogadishu some more or where we failed, I suggest you take a turn and read up about US victories, I hope you like reading tho because it's a lot of goddamn material to look at p-)

[Splinter26]

America has the best equipment is because they test them to the extremes.


Thank you.

[Seiyuuki]

AND VIETNAM has moved, as well, to free market economics and basic political rights. For example, CPVN allowed several commerical treaties with numerous states including the US. With all the reforms Vietnam has undergone of late, most notably politically, they move ever closer to the ideals the Free World fought for during the war.
So, have we lost the Vietnam War? No since they have conciously trying to become less Communistic and more Laissez Faire.

I was born and raised in Vietnam for 9 years and my parents been there much longer. I been back there three times since immigrating over the U.S. As far as political reforms go, it's nothing more than a smoke screen to lure investors to help lift the failing economy over there. It's the same everytime I go back. For Vietnamese returning to the country, we still got to slipped in a few dollars with our passport or risk being hassle by the securities. Everytime we're back there, we always get a visit...no matter how nicely they euphamize it...it's still a visit from the local "political officer," and yes...we gave him a few packs of cigarette and a buy him a glass of coffee, "making friend and all." The South is still look down and subjugate by the North. Catholic priests, Buddhist monks or anyone for that matter who speak out against the government are still jailed, or simply "house arrest." Much like Iraq under Saddam's rule, where power and resources from other cities are siphon to support Badghad, the same it here in Vietnam. Every night in Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City, no mater what, it was, it is, and will always be Saigon) and other cities, water and electricity is unavailable to many in those cities while Hanoi is always regarded as a nice and beautiful city. As for everything else, well, to put it in perspective, my aunt is a retire teacher who earn less than $10 a year in retirement pay while the government somehow manage to buy new Su-27 from the Russian and build a top class international airport in Hanoi and local government officials somehow have enough money to sent their children to school in the U.S., and attending school in Washington, I met a few of them, while people back there starve and work their ass off for what little they could earn, these spoil brats get a few hundreds and sometimes thousands of U.S. dollars for allowances!!! My aunt has only manage to survive by what little we could send home each month...and even that it's not secure, yes, once in awhile, the money we sent home somehow mysterious "disappear," so we try to send the money home with someone going back as much as possible, it's not fast, but more secure. Vietnam is far from political reforms toward a democracy.

[usa320]

As was stated earlier, SR-71's have been painted before, but they cannot be engaged, as their speed makes most aircraft and missiles ineffective against them.

Anyway, chances are if over sweeden the thing was low and slow to gas up anyway.

[usa320]

oh and i forgot- walle, you do suck, and your own poll proved that...usually when making a political poll, you should only do it if you think it will support what you believe.

rofl rofl rofl

[GLax]

specialairservice>
wow, easy killer, no need to be such an ass, if u want to correct me feel free but u dont have to be a big tough guy on the internet and use such hurtful words...
anway, my point was that cleaning your rifle is part of the job plain and simple its the same way for everybody and dont get all pissy at me, i didnt say the US forces are the next best thing to Jesus Christ so calm urself down man...

GLax wrote
Quote:
as far as i'm concerned, if your military needs a rifle that can be buried in the sand and dragged behind a tank then you cant call yourself professionals...

So when you have weapons that stop working because you haven't tested them, it dosen't matter to american marines and soldiers because there professionals.... I don't think so.


i'd like for you to point out in this statement where i said we dont test our weapons.

[General_Makabe]

Admitting that the mission of Task Force Ranger was ultimately a failure does nothing to belittle the bravery and skill of those fine soldiers. There is but no doubt that the mission undertaken by TFR on Oct. 3, 1993 was a success; it was, however, a costly success.

Task Force Ranger had a Primary objective: the capture of Mohamed Farrah Aidid. Their secondary objective was to dismantle the leadership of Aidid's clan- the Habr Gidr. We know from interviews with former Delta officers, such as Lee Van Arsdale, that Delta C squadron's leadership believed that the primary goal was unrealistic in the short-term. It would be far to easy for Aidid to use his fiercely loyal clan in order to effectively hide. Obviously, this is not to say that they weren't looking for Aidid, simply that they were more confident in their ability to achieve the secondary objective.

Quite simply, TFR never achieved either of its goals. Certainly there were many captures of important Habr Gidr clan leaders, but neither Aidid nor his command structure were disabled by TFR. In this regard, TFR mission was a failure. However, it is also important to state, as others have, that it was not a Military loss. There is strong evidence that, had Military operations continued, it would have become evident that the battle of Oct. 3 greatly impacted the ability of Aidid's forces to fight in the short-term. Eventually more weapons would have surely been smuggled in; still, during the ensuing weeks, a reinforced Task Force Ranger would have surely made quite an impression on Aidid.

It is worth remembering Gen. Garrison's accurate prediction of the action that would occur on and following Oct. 3. He had wriiten just a few weeks before that if TFR went into the vicinity of the Bakara Market, that " there is no question we'll win the gunfight, but we might just lose the war."

It looks like Gen. Garrison hit the nail right on the head

[martinexsquaddie]

as von Clausewitz wrote many moons ago War is a continuation of politics (or policy) by other means.
There is no other reasons to get guys on the Ground with rifles than to impose your policy on the other side.
Unfortunatly Somalia due to its Clan Politics was never going to return to civillisation no matter how much firepower was deployed.
You can have all the high tec gear you like But unless you have a clear objective in mind you might as well not bother to turn up.
Vietnam from what I read was lost as soon as Laos was put out of bounds giving the enemy a safe harbour area though the South vietnam goverment did'nt help much.
But look at the IRA they were offered Peace talks in 1974 but belived somehow the British were about to surrender so the peace talks failed there followed another 20 odd years of violence until the good friday agrement which is similar to what was on offer in 1974.
As much as they hate to admit it there armed struggle failed and is not likely to start up again.

[swestres]

Lots of reading here... Once again I have to appologise for what I've wrote... It's making more sence to me if you say that "the political decisions drove the military operations"... But I still claim that Mogadishu and vietnam war was a faliure. You didn't reached the goals for the operations. Enough about that.


You don't know do you?
1) were you deployed as part of the contingency operations in Somalia? NO
2) have you received the operations order form the operations in Somalia? NO
3) did you perhaps review the After Action Report of operations in somalia? NO
Well, this isn't the only ways to know about what happened there... But you're right in your assumptions there...



You also stated: "how much guns you have got and how good they are, you can still fail... And also, that your american patrioism shouldn't choose the guns for you..."
-NO WHERE in this thread had you stated the above statement prior to your reply to me. PERIOD mean what you say, say what you mean..prior to my reply the ONLY thing you had done was complain about the US weapons (who cares) and second guess operations you have little knowledge of with information that is incorrect/false/incomplete.

I didn't complain about your equipment or/and weaponsystems, did I?
I wrote:

I whould say U.S. got fine equipment for their millitary forces, but I whouldn't say that Abrams work better then Strv 121/122 (leopard 2) in Swedish enviroment. The kalasjnikov can take more damage then the
M-16, but with that I don't think that AK-47, AKM or other kalasjnikovs works better then M-16 just because the kalasjnikov is can take more damage... No gun/tank/airplane/submarine is The Best. It depends on the enviroment, the crew, the enemy and so on...

This is based on fact. I don't se any complaining about US army/navy/airforce there...
And about the SR-71 blackbird? I don't know if targeted was the right word, but whe could have shot it down, you know why? None of you who claimed whe couldn't doesn't know why... Engine problems, it wasn't running at full speed and not as high up in the air that it can go... But you didn't know that, so you assumed that whe couldn't... And no, we whould never shoot down a SR-71 blackbird as long as America is our friends, even if they're not our allies...


somalia-1000+dead usa-18dead. there had been people say we broke thier backs on that operation and were at the tipping point and clinton could'nt take the political pressure and pull them out. and if you dispute that i think it was a carreer diplomat who said that who was far from hawkish.
And those of you who claim that those who got the highest casulties number loose, you probably think that Russia is a part of "the Reich" and that they're saying "Achtung achtung bitte bitte". Because Russia (or the Sovjet Union) had far more killed than the Germans during World War 2, but thanks to the allies (including US), the third reich and the fürher are parts of the history... Do I make more sence now? Or do I annoy you even more?
Oh, I have to comment this to!

I don't care what weapons you like, or what you think of US weapons (of which incidentally the military uses VERY few)....
I never said that I like ANY weapons at all... And I never said what i think about US weapons, I'f what "I think" is my personal opinion.

[duck]

During the cold war there was a secret agreement between Sweden and NATO ( USA ) on the USAF and other NATO forces using several swedish airfields in a conflict situation. So much for shooting down SR-71:s.

[General_Makabe]

as von Clausewitz wrote many moons ago War is a continuation of politics (or policy) by other means.
There is no other reasons to get guys on the Ground with rifles than to impose your policy on the other side.
Unfortunatly Somalia due to its Clan Politics was never going to return to civillisation no matter how much firepower was deployed.
You can have all the high tec gear you like But unless you have a clear objective in mind you might as well not bother to turn up.
Vietnam from what I read was lost as soon as Laos was put out of bounds giving the enemy a safe harbour area though the South vietnam goverment did'nt help much.
But look at the IRA they were offered Peace talks in 1974 but belived somehow the British were about to surrender so the peace talks failed there followed another 20 odd years of violence until the good friday agrement which is similar to what was on offer in 1974.
As much as they hate to admit it there armed struggle failed and is not likely to start up again.


Outstanding post Martin. von Clausewitz was absolutely correct, which is ofcourse the reason that he is so fundamental to an understanding of International Relations. In Somalia, the clan violence existed as a tool of nagotiations in a very crude way. I think that the United Nations truly believed that Nation building was possible in that case. All of the clans, except the Habr Gidr were backing the ceasefire and supported the idea of a coalition government made up of the leadership of all of the clans. What both the UN and the United States failed to notice is that the reason most of those clans were cooperating was because the Habr Gidr had become too powerful. They had everything to gain...not only would they not be defeated, but they would actually get a hand in controling the Gov't of Somalia. The reason that the Habr Gidr was not interested is quite simple- why settle for a slice when you can have the entire pie?

This problem is seen all over the landscape of what is commonly referred to as the Third world. People do not want peace so much as they want victory. In war-torn nation after war-torn nation, the population will state that they are exhausted by war and want peace, but when asked if they are willing to pay for the peace by sharing power or resources with another tribe, clan, religious group, etc. they will often act indignant. "How can they be expected to share power with those fools/murderers/criminals/etc.", thus the war goes on.

Ultimately, this is as much about economics as it is about politics. People will only give up war when war is too costly. The reason that Politics is far more stable in the developed world is that we have far too much to lose if internal politics breaks down into warfare. In the end, human life has to become more valuable in Africa ; this is the only hope to end the bloodshed.

The example of the IRA was superb. In the 1970's, when the IRA believed that peace was achievable, its members were willing to lose life in a struggle for complete control. After many more years of costly violence, and the realization that Britain was not going to give up, peace came back to the table. Like the famous example states: what is the point in fighting for the whole pie, if in winning the pie, it becomes destroyed. This requires a recognition that full victory is often very hollow...a lesson that many nations in the undeveloped world would be well-served to learn.

[swestres]

During the cold war there was a secret agreement between Sweden and NATO ( USA ) on the USAF and other NATO forces using several swedish airfields in a conflict situation. So much for shooting down SR-71:s.

So? What does that have to do with it? Did you read what i wrote?
And as far as I can see, No one here is discussing the main subject of my first thread, and I wonder why... So, if we skip the whole Somalian thing for a while, what do you think about what i first wrote?


I whould say U.S. got fine equipment for their millitary forces, but I whouldn't say that Abrams work better then Strv 121/122 (leopard 2) in Swedish enviroment. The kalasjnikov can take more damage then the
M-16, but with that I don't think that AK-47, AKM or other kalasjnikovs works better then M-16 just because the kalasjnikov is can take more damage... No gun/tank/airplane/submarine is The Best. It depends on the enviroment, the crew, the enemy and so on...


I don't force you to discuss this, but I whould like your opinion about it... That was the whole purpose of writing my first thread... And again, with big letters... I'M NOT CLAIMING THAT US MILLITARY SUCKS!!! okey?





America has the best equipment is because they test them to the extremes.
Thank you.
Didn't you, splinter26 claimed that it was idiotic to bury a gun in the ground and so on? now your're saying that you think the same as specialairservice do? It doesn't make sence, because I think the whole buring and driving thing was extreme... And once again, but this time with small letters, I never claimed that US millitary sucks...

[duck]

Why did you take up the whole targeting thing in the first place? Or did you mean to imply the swedish air "force" has got-gasp-radars at their disposal?

[swestres]

I wrote the whole targeting thing because I wanted to see if you checked the information I was giving, which you prooved you didn't, and I also wanted to prove to some of you that different kinds of weaponsystems can do different kinds of stuff. Even if the SR-71 was damaged, it's very hard to get a lock on a Blackbird.
And if you wrote your last message as a "cover-up" for your not so clever question, you don't need to read this...

And I just have to bring this up to, your AT-4 that you love so much, it's made by Bofors...

So face it, those of you who believe that american stuff is the best, better than all the rest, you should consider the facts that not all of your weapons are american... And to The Question, do you really think that your gear can win the war for you???
And again, I'm not throing **** at the US millitary forces, just asking some questions, questions wich no one so far answered...

[Splinter26]

Sweshoe I'm so bored with you I don't even care to read what you reply with anymore, you keep on coming up with the same crap you're really boring me lol

PS

I know you know US owns Sweden so just get over it and accept it.