Anon

MRE= Meal Ready to Eat.

lemontree

Thank you. The point I was trying to emphasis is that MRE rations in place of 'hot meals' are O.K for emergencies or short periods. In the long run its detremental to good moral of the troops. If you remember your army days, after a 20km or 30km route march, a cup of hot chocolate is much appreciated than a can of coke.
How long does it take for one to get sick of MREs? I would say the first day itself.
An infanteer that can sustain high moral, which inturn reflects good training, command and administration will always win the day.

__________________

Cheers!...on the rocks!!

bull

i will laugh..excuse me pls

__________________
What's the difference between people who pray in church and those who pray in casinos?
The ones in the casinos are serious.

dave angel

Meals Rejected by Ethiopians...

__________________
before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.................... then when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

Chino

The Vietcong were not all guerilla fighters i.e. farmer by day terrorist by night.

Just like their predecessors the Viet Minh who defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu, there were full-time Vietcong units. They are organised and regimented just like infantry battalions anywhere.

If you doubt their effectiveness as a fighting force - it might be due to their lack of firepower, support etc. But as individual riflemen, they're much better motivated, more prepared for sacrifice and better suited to being infantry soldiers than were the average American conscript at the time.

Their lack of weapons and logistics have turned them into the most resourceful soldiers of the 20th century. Their booby trap methods are still being taught at jungle fighting schools all over the world.

Aryaramnaes

I think the Singapore Armed Forces... Infantry deserve to be mentioned here...

Officer of Engineers

As a regular infanteer? I doubt it. Their casualty rates ain't nothing to brag about, even when they have superior firepower as they did at DBP. All you telling me here is that they have good leaders who knew how to use canon fodder.

Only live infanteers can be good infanteers.

__________________
Chimo

Recon_sgt

A plague on all your houses (please ignore the drama ) .
A disscussion on the 5 best trained infy in the world and me and my pals are no where to be found shock gasp (insert sobs here).
I will however On a serious note say that in 2003 the Irish army ranger wing (clap now) won 3rd place at its 2nd year in the wordl special forces war games and team conference in Bonn (hi JG73).Cant remember what the lads got durin the last 2 years was payin more attention to the lads who came back from Belize(they went on a Jungle course with the Brits an a bundle of others, great war stories ). will add pics later lads.
So please i think we deserve to be mentioned (oh wait I just did)

__________________
they have us surrounded, the poor bastards.

Chino

Thank you thank you from me and my former mates of 173 SIR (Singapore Infantry Regiment).

But, no, we are nowhere near being good enough to be considered one of the world's top infantry fighting men.

Furthermore, Singapore's armed forces hasn't yet fought a war (not since playing a small part in the Confrontation with indonesia during the early sixties).

And I hope we have peace forever.

Officer of Engineers

Mighty damned fine whiskey there, Sgt.

TheGreenSmoke

Does the United States have the capabilities and power to invade Iran and defeat their military?

giggs88

I'm guessing yes.

leib10

The US has the capabilities to defeat any nation on earth, through conventional or unconventional means. However, politicians often limit those capabilities so that smaller, less well-equipped armies may defeat us, not on the battlefield, but in Washington (Vietnam).

__________________
"The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world. So wake up, Mr. Freeman. Wake up and smell the ashes." G-Man

Selective

The title of the thread is "best trained".

Chino

The Vietnam War was ended by Washington because the war ain't being won on the battlefield in Vietnam. If everything was hunkydory and the NVA was on their knees, you think public opinion would be swayed against the war?

America had noble intentions in Vietnam but they were not winning miitarily. That's why Americans got tired and said "let's get the hell out".

They may have killed a lot of VC and NVA but people forgot to tell the VC and NVA that because so many of them are dead, technically they should be the one losing the war. Bodycount don't mean much as for every VC NVA killed, there's 10 more waiting to take his place.

The Australians, especially, were very critical of how the Americans conducted the war in Vietnam. The Aussies had a different view of things and recognised that it was counter revolutionary warfare. The US believe they were fighting WW2 all over again.

This was the same case in Korea. America was not able to defeat China and there really was no restraint on the use of military force on the battlefield in Korea. Americans bombed, shelled and napalmed the hell out of the PLA and NKPA without any restraint. Yet, the commies stood.

So the answer is "NO". America is not capable of defeating anyone they please.