(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Entire British Military
Vs
USMC.

Britain:
Active personnel 188,440
Reserve personnel 195,300
Budget: £40billion

USMC
203,000 active
40,000 reserve (as of 2009)
Budget: $39billion (£26billion)


USMC has air, naval support included, because they do.


edit: this has turned into UK vs US military thread
You must login or register to view this content.

Wed ****ing dominate the UK, keep it to USMC vs the whole British military

Britain would win because, USA would just kill 3/5 of their troops with friendly fire and Im sure last year the US army had killed more of its own troops in friendly fire then they have killed anyone else! what a complete joke!

Were you being serious or were you kidding?

14-15 year olds online all seem to think the SAS can defeat the whole Russian Army, there all ****en brainwashed with shit from Call Of Duty and the news media

And I am Bill Gates.



It has been 41% friendly fire in Iraq and 14% friendly fire in Afghanistan. Have they told you the British friendly fire ratio? I think not.

Most friendly fire was from airstrikes gone horribly bad, which was probably aired on British television over, and over again.

Friendly fire happens in war, a lot more than you expect. I am sure if I pull up friendly fire from the British in WW2 it will come up with surprising statistics also.

So you're telling me that I have been growing a Cpt. Price beard for nothing?!?!?

But seriously, you're right. If all of the SAS were together they would maybe take out 500-1000 Russians with heavy losses to the SAS too. I'm not saying that they are that good, but are good, just like any other SF around. My guess is in a war against the USMC, they would go and try to destroy your radar stations or other valuable technology you would need, just like your SF would do to us. No way in hell would any SF win without the help of some sort of army, be it militia or an actual army. As your the friendly fire, I agree with you. British will have shot at their own troops. In fact 2 British soldiers died when 2 British Challenger tanks exchanged fire (not sure of the date though. I can't find much on the British stats as I can on the American but I did find this.

Originally posted by another user

And sixty years later the problem still happens with a lack of proper fire control by US troops.
Example the 4 dead and 8 wounded Canadian soldiers who were bombed by the USAF in 2001, in Afghanistan. Two F16 pilots attacked the Canadians as they were conducting a live fire range exercise. The pilots claimed that they were "under fire" from the ground. The aircraft were flying at 20,000 feet, and the ground fire was at ground targets, with small arms weapons, not anti-aircraft missiles. No infantry weapon can reach 20,000 feet of altitude.
The AWACS controller told the F16's to "hold your fire" but they didn't listen, and four young Canadians died as a result.
Just one modern example of how dangerous it is to be near U.S. army troops when you are a "friendly force".

Now that backs up everything H2O is saying about the USAF flying at high altitude and bombing things from that high.
Thing is, with a bigger army, the harder it is to control and communicate. A group of 10 men might to better than a group of 50 because of the ease of communication. Yeah, you will have headsets, but with a gun being shot next to your ear I'm guessing it will be hard to hear, where as 10 men in a little place can be easily controlled than 50.

Anyway, I found this which made me chuckle, mostly because I had an image of it happening.

You must login or register to view this content.

I rest my case.

Remember that war a while back when it was 100 guys vs your whole empire?

No wonder the staff fails. They have people like you. And last time I checked you guys begged to join WW1 and WW2. If US hadn't been in both of those wars, you would had your ass kicked by Hitler. So go **** your self

Bye Bye Garf you just got GARFED

If you're referring to the Revolutionary war (the only one I can think off) then yes I do. But you do realise that if that is the war you are talking about, America didn't win. Why you may ask is because America was not formed until AFTER the victory, in which case if America wasn't formed, then neither can Americans meaning that they can't win if they don't exist. That means that it was Britain, Spain, France and the Dutch against our whole Empire. Sorry, but if you get told you (America) won, you have been misinformed in your history lessons.

Look obviously by your reply you didnt come here to join in a debate, you came here to troll on me.

"No wonder the staff fails" "Go **** yourself"

Both comments have nothing to do with the debate. And we begged to join the WW1 and 2? LOL they was our wars which the Americans joined.

I wont abuse my Mod powers but trust me, as soon as you do the slighest thing wrong I will be here waiting, cos I am sad like that

There was also that other war you were getting your ass kicked... now what was that called i forgot. Heck i think it even happened twice.