The US is the """"""strongest"""""" military in the world,
But just tell ME RIGHT NOW,
how did they lose to rice farmers and goat fuckers?
these men were merely peasants tending to their crops and harem of goats and the US rocks up to fuck their shit up and in the end you see the US backpedaling, limping from the flogging they just took?
HOW DO YOU LOSE THIS BAD WITH ALL THE EQUIPMENT THE US HAVE?
Other urls found in this thread:
Tell me now, how does a military lose to fucking emus
Literally everyone has lost in Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Soviets
China
France
UK
You fucking name it
have you ever had to hotswap your gravity shackle during combat while in a helicopter? no? then don't speak
USA has no jungles to train in. Brazils Amazonian Guerrilla fighting force wouls fair alot better against vietcong
Also it wasn't a military defeat. The amount the US military lost compared to it's enemies is astronomical. It's all political defeats.
>They retreated in the last minute, obviously.
There was a peace treaty signed between North Vietnam and USA years before they invaded South Vietnam
And USA is still in Afghanistan so I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
Yeah... ok John Kerry
Wew
These wars were not worth the continued time and resources so just like your dad should have done we pulled out.
>be american
>literally retreated from iraq a few years ago
is it too soon? do the wounds still hurt? how did you lose to goat fuckers?
Americans are still in Iraq, and the Iraqi government pulled its shit together and is currently liberating its own country from ISIS.
>harem of goats
mate.
>be australian
>lose a war to emus
>How to trigger americans 101
>how to arouse sweeds
Why did the us invade Iraq?
your average american is regarded as retard level by most europeans, so imagine the average america soldier. its a stupidy hard to comprehend.
You have piss on your flag.
>how did they lose to rice farmers and goat fuckers?
Because we weren't willing to slaughter the civilian population to root out the insurgents.
Pic related. How Americans win against pests.
>I don't understand the difference between a military loss and a political loss
The Vietcong were actually extremely effective/dangerous warriors and the yanks were also fighting the actual North Vietnamese army at the same time. How the fuck did they lose to the goat-fuckers? you're talking out of your ass on that one.
They couldn't beat the rice people cos the jungles were too dense and hid their enemy.
They couldn't defeat the sand people cos the open deserts made finding their enemy difficult.
Next time they start a war they should chose a country with the correct amount of foliage to avoid further embarrassment.
I oughta fuckin kill you for doing that to our Stars n Stripes Crocodile Dundee
Because they weren't allowed to go in, kill anyone and everyone, and conquer like the old days. There supposed to be "good guys" and thus fought insurgents and had to play by the "rules".
The emus know how to get rid of pests too.
US is the stronges military in the world
It's hard to get anybody excited about some war on the other side of the planet. When no real threat.
>The Vietcong were actually extremely effective/dangerous warriors
No, they weren't. The North Vietnamese didn't win a single battle against the Americans, and had something like a 20:1 casualty ratio against them.
el oh el
you ever been in a road war?
they lost because stinking liberals didn't aprove nukes
> how did they lose to rice farmers and goat fuckers?
They didn't? There was truce couple years between north and south but once Nixon resigned, they knew that there was no political power ready to defend south so they attacked.
Mosul still doesnt look good.
So do the Brits.
Fucking yuppies won't let us nuke the shit out of them.
LBJ was strategically fucking up. He didn't want to finish the war, or even be in the war.
the west is retarded. they have a shit approach. they don't know the people they're fighting or funding and thus unable to get the population to support them, which is necessary when taking over a country.
that's why they lost in vietnam, iraq, syria.
that's why they're going to losing in yemen.
that's why they will lose in bahrain.
russia is smart. iran is smart. the west is not.
>start a war against rice farmers
>get btfo
>pretend to go to the moon
>say you wont invade cambodia but then invade cambodia and get btfo there too
>pretend to go to the moon
>get btfo some more
>pretend to go to the moon
>murder a fuck load of women and children on camera
>pretend to go to the moon
>keep getting btfo by rice famers
>pretend to go to the moon again
this is how easy it is to fool retards
PR.
We could roll over them if we just went in to kill them without regard to civilians or the like but the media is very predatory about our military. Look at their coverage of Syria, imagine that but every single day because they have more access to our military than the Syrian military.
Then on the other side you've the aforementioned goat fuckers and the like who've no issue with killing civilians, it's like looking for a needle in a haystack using a leaf blower on as low a setting as you possibly can before said needle blows himself up and everyone on every side blames you for the ensuing mess so you've then got ten more needles in ten more haystacks to look through on a leaf blower which has been heavily modified to have an even lower setting.
>how did they lose to rice farmers and goat fuckers?
why don't you tell us since you were there too.
Austria's only achievment worthy of note is raising Hitler.
>Iranian intellectual
Aussies only have 59 tanks for the whole country....59 TANKS
wtf? that's like a large class room, but instead of students, tanks.
*inserts rarest of pepes*
>50:1 kdr
>occupy their countries for decades
>we "lost"
you'd think limp dicked faggots who needed us to sail 10,000km to rescue them from japs would be a little more grateful
Great job beating Iraq, an army the USA crushed in 3 weeks.
Because a war is not an occupation
Das Rite, Goy. Remembah, Iran wants to n00k izrael.
Bad organization obviously and no interest in doing actual democracy, just mercenary emotions. War ain't Lego constructions.
fpbp
implying the west lost in vietnam, iraq, syria
not implying we pulled out just to cum on each of their faces
> Your bitch starts arguing with you and even though you win on most fronts she just won't stop and you feel this shit ain't worth it anymore so you gtfo and never return
just in case the emus come back
That's because you can't win in Afghanistan, land destroyed multiple times, where there is nothing, just minerals and oil, then some unpredictable people come along and start killing, but is that really war or just daily life?
Baby Boomer scum, mate.
Also:
>losing a war to emus
>having a right to say that shit
:^)
Muslim scum are even worse than kikes which you wouldn't think is possible but there are 1.8 billion "people" that prove otherwise.
were still sitting on them I think.
it was a bit more difficult when usa and soviet union and every other country on earth was arming saddam.
then when america comes in after iraq had been at war with iran for a decade, they bomb retreating convoys and claim victory.
then after a decade of sanctions they return, destabilize the country, and get chased out by an insurgency.
na we just got tired of being there. And we trained them, equipped them, what could go wrong?
Neither were conventional military conflicts. Both were however heavily influenced by media coverage and restricted by international laws and conventions.
This restricted the ability of the military to fully utilize it's most powerful weapons and tactics, forcing them into positions that made them easy targets.
In regards to Vietnam there was plenty of political turmoil, which led to the eventual withdrawal.
The French Foreign Legion had been fighting communist forces on the Chinese border for years, prior to the US mobilizing against Vietnam.
However the US hierarchy ignored tactical information that was passed to them by the Legion.
This involved in depth tactical information that would have allowed troops to identify the communist peasant military procedures, as well as allowing them to employ effective countermeasures.
Instead the information was ignored, leaving US troops to face the exact same situations that the Foreign Legion had just about got to grips with.
To be fair the Soviets, and Israelis for that matter, were arming both sides during the war
Afghanistan is top 3 poorest countries on planet. The fact that fairy tale terrorist stories work there is because they can't say their own opinion, since they have no media power. Hey, lets just pick some farmers and call them terrorists who have advanced massive destructive weapons. Hey, lets blame them and go there, where no law exist so they surely must be breaking international law.
Yup, 1972 Paris Peace Accords.
Over the course of about a year and a half, the US withdraw from Vietnam and Nixon gets removed from office.
NVA broke the treaty and attacked the Republic of Vietnam. The military wanted to go back in as it was their duty according to the agreement but Congress refused.
The "loss" in Vietnam wasn't because of the military but Congress, which was a house and senate majority of Democrats.
So thank the Dems for supporting communists and tarnishing the reputation of the United States military, as if that's surprising at all.
Are you people actually retarded? The Vietnam war wasn't meant to be won by America. They purposely refrained from invading with a full force and conquering the north, because China (and possibly the Soviets) would get involved, something that would result in WW3. The US military was mostly there to hold the line, bomb the north and assist the south while they armed and trained them. They never actually lost a battle, and most of the battles were fought against NA forces that crossed into Southern Vietnam via Cambodia or Laos. It wasn't a frontline war, where they tried to capture enemy territory.
Ironically, Nixon was close to destroying the Cambodian supply lines and strangling the north, but then Watergate put an abrupt end to that, which allowed the north to recover.
Unfortunately for the US, the South Vietnamese were incompetent, corrupt fucks who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag, so it ended up as a two decade long stalemate. The communist propaganda that hippies, the media and liberal celebrities spread that portrayed the genocidal North Vietnamese as innocent freedom fighters, and Americans are oppressive invaders turned the people against the war, which is why the US eventually withdrew.
For a board full of people who claim to be redpilled, you faggots sure have a penchant for believing in left-wing bullshit, rather than actually looking things up and finding things out for yourself.
Kinda hard to fight a war when politicians tie your hands and tell you win hearts and mind AND kill them at the same time.
Godammit we're the military, not the world police, our mission is to locate, close with and destroy the enemy, not build their nation for them.
too many excuses.
the west lost, plain and simple.
Russia is somehow magically able to overcome all these imaginary obstacles that hindered america and their coalition in these conflicts.
>It's another US lost vietnam thread
Fuck off.
As soon as Nixon gave the joint chiefs the go-ahead to start bombing actual strategic targets (bombing ports, mining their harbours, hitting targets in Hanoi that were previous off-limits), they forced the Vietnamese into a truce within months.
North and South came to a peace and the US pulled out, then the North invaded once it became clear that the US didn't plan on coming back.
The South lost, USA didn't.
Australia fought in that war too, mate. We didn't win either.
yeah, I'm sure it will work out fine. lol
>Americans are oppressive invaders
certainly seems accurate enough.
When trump gives a redpill ?
Too bitter since ever
You do realize that the Soviets failed in Afghanistan, right? And unlike the western forces, they never had to worry about human rights or rules of engagement.
See: Soviet withdrawal of Afghanistan
For almost the exact same reasons as stated prior.
Soviets and USA armed Iraq too and USA beat them just fine.
>win hearts and mind AND kill them at the same time
and again, russia manages to do this.
you should watch the celebrations after the full liberation of Aleppo.
>hurr durr wot is Afghanistan
Good one.
You used to be adventurous like us, but then you took a stingray to the heart
And British withdraw of Afghanistan, for basically the same reason as well.
Holy shit somebody who didn't learn about Vietnam from a fucking movie.
Hats off to you.
Because they weren't trying to win. It's all about spending money. If we beat everyone then they wouldn't have an excuse to spend half our tax money on military shit anymore.
that was after iraq fought a decade long war. iraq essentially surrendered instead of trying to fight off america.
>how did you lose to goat fuckers
When did this happen?
Also
>Vietnam
You were there too koala fucker.
Couldn't say the same for Iran because unlike against the USA, Iraq stood a chance against Iran.
yes, soviet union lost in afghanistan. but they don't try to dance around that fact and make a million bullshit excuses like deluded ameritards.
>w-w-we weren't TRYING to win, g-guys
Russia gets to do what they want, they don't have the bullshit ROEs we had because our politicians valued some dirty hajis over us.
I hope we have a joint operation with Russia so we can finally get those cucks in congress off our ass
apparently op doesn't know Australia also invaded iraq
>iran is smart
hardly. they had a ton of support from soviets and americans and every other country, but they were banking on getting the arabs and sunnis in iran to side with saddam. this didn't happen and the occupiers were met with resistance they couldn't handle.
like always, if you want to conquer a country you need to understand its people.
>lose
more excuses.
there's plenty videos and documentation of americans and their allies murdering and raping civilians.
well they fought against a bunch of trainees of theres. SO basically they showed people that they can actually do a good job
Yep, political and media interventions effectively cripple modern military's. It's a fucking joke.
Sounds like I could get a lot of laughs out of reading an Iranian history book.
Literally the only reason they withdrew from vietnam was modern journalism. Suddenly you had war coverage like never before, people saw and heard about veterans and warfare through interviews, even news footage.
Otherwise the US would have continued firebombing everything like in Korea (which was probably more bloody than Vietnam)
south vietnam fell to communism
that was the objective
deal with it
Allah was on your side what went wrong?
Also Iraq was still in good enough shape after your shit war to invade and occupy Kuwait and think it could defy an international coalition. You should be thankful for USA, look how many Iranian Window-makers they annihilated as they were running away with their tails between their legs.
>like always, if you want to conquer a country you need to understand its people.
There are a couple ways of going about this. USA has been doing it wrong. You can conquer a country through 'hearts and minds' and maybe you'll get somewhere. Or you will completely destroy it and everyone who resists you as you do it, as they did at the beginning of the century. That's much more effective.
We've fought an enemy like the gooks and hajis before, we know we're capable of beating them.
I don't know what you're getting at, are you saying that the infantry and military itself isn't capable of fighting and raping an enemy to submission of are you saying the general staff and politicians are incapable of fielding an effective strategy in asymmetrical warfare or in warfare in general?