Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

Sorry. It did read as though you had invaded Iraq and overthrew the Saddam single handed.

I am even more confused by 'you' . Turkish Cypriots did not invade Iraq!! Or is there something that I am not aware of.

[Get Real!]

Sorry. It did read as though you had invaded Iraq and overthrew the Saddam single handed.

I am even more confused by 'you' . Turkish Cypriots did not invade Iraq!! Or is there something that I am not aware of.

I have reasons to suspect that the Elite Teletubbies were the first to be sent into Iraq in an attempt to cause Sadam Housein a heart attack while dancing around him…

[BOF]

After constantly hearing about how invincible Turkey is, I am interested in seeing who forumers believe has the best military on a pro rata basis. This is not just about difference in numbers. It is about technology, training, bravery, experience etc etc.

I cannot reconcile bravery with military technology.

Remember the 'Brave' USA navy shelling Beirut from 100's of miles away?

Wrong poll.

Go back to the Korean war, and excluding the USAF, the ground forces were the brave ones. Among the bravest and the most heroic were the (numerically small) contingents from Turkey and Greece. (not from Turkish sources). Nowadays who can tell. How far away are the 'commanders' from the battlefield?

But then again what about the stand of the gloucester regiment in Korea?
Now forever known as the glorious Gloucesters..their bravery in fighting when surrounded should not be forgotten.
Forget Americans as ground forces - they simply rely on firepower and as history has shown everytime they encounter a well armed organised enemy they are in trouble. And forget the USAF. in the first iraq war those bloody cowboys killed more British troops that the enemy did, and tried just as hard in the second...a fact that has never been forgotten in the UK.

BOF

[michalis5354]

Can the UK alone attack Syria or Iran? Iraq needed the coalition of 10 or more countries to suceed and still it took almost a long time until the mission was accomplished.

Accomplished what exactly?

If their mission was to capture Saddam Hussein and to replace the government then this was accomplished but with remarkable losess on both sides.

According to 2007 CIA estimates, the UK has the second largest military expenditure in the world, after the United States. It is also the second largest spender on military science, engineering and technology.[41] Despite Britain's wide ranging capabilities, recent defence policy has a stated assumption that any large operation would be undertaken as part of a coalition. Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq (Granby, Desert Fox and Telic) may all be taken as precedent – indeed the last large scale military action in which the British armed forces fought alone was the Falklands War of 1982.

With all this military spending still it depends on others as a form of coalition to win a major battle.


Compare this to Japan that has a special article in the constitution that renounce war in any form:

Article 9

Constitution of JapanIn theory, Japan's rearmament is thoroughly prohibited by Article 9 of the Japanese constitution which not only states, "The Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes", but also declares, "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained." In practice, however, the Diet (or Parliament) which Article 41 of the Constitution defines as "the highest organ of the state power", established the Self-Defense Forces in 1954. Due to such a constitutional tension concerning the Forces' status, any attempt at enhancing the Forces' capabilities and budget tends to be politically controversial. Thus the JSDF has very limited capabilities to operate overseas, lacks long range offensive capabilities such as long-range surface-to-surface missiles, air-refueling (as of 2004), marines, amphibious units, or large caches of ammunitions. The Rules of Engagement are strictly defined by the Self-Defence Forces Act 1954.

Japan leads by example .

Two Western countries with 2 different policies.

[denizaksulu]

After constantly hearing about how invincible Turkey is, I am interested in seeing who forumers believe has the best military on a pro rata basis. This is not just about difference in numbers. It is about technology, training, bravery, experience etc etc.

I cannot reconcile bravery with military technology.

Remember the 'Brave' USA navy shelling Beirut from 100's of miles away?

Wrong poll.

Go back to the Korean war, and excluding the USAF, the ground forces were the brave ones. Among the bravest and the most heroic were the (numerically small) contingents from Turkey and Greece. (not from Turkish sources). Nowadays who can tell. How far away are the 'commanders' from the battlefield?

But then again what about the stand of the gloucester regiment in Korea?
Now forever known as the glorious Gloucesters..their bravery in fighting when surrounded should not be forgotten.
Forget Americans as ground forces - they simply rely on firepower and as history has shown everytime they encounter a well armed organised enemy they are in trouble. And forget the USAF. in the first iraq war those bloody cowboys killed more British troops that the enemy did, and tried just as hard in the second...a fact that has never been forgotten in the UK.

BOF

I do not mean to belittle any land forces of the Korean war. Just the two I mention as interested parties.

The British army in the field has proved its worth many a time. As a student of the Battle of Waterloo, I have admiration for the Infantry divisions all across the board. 'Bravery' was mentioned at the beginning of the thread, thats why I get a bit picky with 'warfare' and 'bravery'..

In Turkish the saying goes ' silah icad olundu, mertlik bozuldu'. Trans,'firearms are invented and 'heroism' is vanquished.

Now we are all talking modern technological warfare.

[denizaksulu]

Can the UK alone attack Syria or Iran? Iraq needed the coalition of 10 or more countries to suceed and still it took almost a long time until the mission was accomplished.

Accomplished what exactly?

If their mission was to capture Saddam Hussein and to replace the government then this was accomplished but with remarkable losess on both sides.

According to 2007 CIA estimates, the UK has the second largest military expenditure in the world, after the United States. It is also the second largest spender on military science, engineering and technology.[41] Despite Britain's wide ranging capabilities, recent defence policy has a stated assumption that any large operation would be undertaken as part of a coalition. Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq (Granby, Desert Fox and Telic) may all be taken as precedent – indeed the last large scale military action in which the British armed forces fought alone was the Falklands War of 1982.

With all this military spending still it depends on others as a form of coalition to win a major battle.


Compare this to Japan that has a special article in the constitution that renounce war in any form:

Article 9

Constitution of JapanIn theory, Japan's rearmament is thoroughly prohibited by Article 9 of the Japanese constitution which not only states, "The Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes", but also declares, "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained." In practice, however, the Diet (or Parliament) which Article 41 of the Constitution defines as "the highest organ of the state power", established the Self-Defense Forces in 1954. Due to such a constitutional tension concerning the Forces' status, any attempt at enhancing the Forces' capabilities and budget tends to be politically controversial. Thus the JSDF has very limited capabilities to operate overseas, lacks long range offensive capabilities such as long-range surface-to-surface missiles, air-refueling (as of 2004), marines, amphibious units, or large caches of ammunitions. The Rules of Engagement are strictly defined by the Self-Defence Forces Act 1954.

Japan leads by example .

Two Western countries with 2 different policies.

Thanks,but my reply was meant to indicate that the'war' is still on. Body bags are still flying home. All this just to get Hussein? They should have sent in 'Rambo' GR. That would have saved millions of lives.

[purdey]

A fun question, but proof of who is better has no real significance.
Armies ar made up of brave men and women who are prepared to sacrifice their lives for what they believe.
Technology has still not replaced the face to face combat that is still needed for an overall victory, and these men and women although ridiculed in some quarters as lacking intelligence or been misguided in their beliefs still stand fast regardless of thought for life.
I like to think of all armies and their soldiers as brave individuals who have taken it upon themselves to stand up and be counted. I respect all those who have fought, lived or died for others to live in peace.
I am not a fan of war films, media reports, war games, or the opinions of armchair warriors. If they want to experience war put on a uniform...

[Paphitis]

A fun question, but proof of who is better has no real significance.
Armies ar made up of brave men and women who are prepared to sacrifice their lives for what they believe.
Technology has still not replaced the face to face combat that is still needed for an overall victory, and these men and women although ridiculed in some quarters as lacking intelligence or been misguided in their beliefs still stand fast regardless of thought for life.
I like to think of all armies and their soldiers as brave individuals who have taken it upon themselves to stand up and be counted. I respect all those who have fought, lived or died for others to live in peace.
I am not a fan of war films, media reports, war games, or the opinions of armchair warriors. If they want to experience war put on a uniform...

Who did you serve? What was your rank?

[purdey]

Royal Marines, Corporal.

[Paphitis]

Royal Marines, Corporal.

OK. Respect