Why are Americans so good at killing schoolchildren but not malnourished rice farmers?

Why are Americans so good at killing schoolchildren but not malnourished rice farmers?

Other urls found in this thread:

militaryaerospace.com/articles/2017/02/ah-1z-attack-helicopters-avionics.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Yet we still beat you

Didn’t beat us mate the French beat us. Aren’t you ashamed to have your country be saved by the cowardly french? Plus we were fighting twenty other more important wars you were just for fun desu

You were beaten by a bunch of malnourished farmers

Restraint and a concern for non-combatants has consequences
If we wanted to vaporize every living person in a given area, we have the ability to do so

well vietnamese had
>better lay of the land
>better at guerrilla warfare
>american demoralisation at home
>fanatical devotion to nationalism (communism was the vehicle for it the primary reason they fought was for nationalism)
>sick of being subject to foreign rule for centuries (france was trying to fuck them before the amerilards came along
it was almost inevitable they won by pure conviction, I mean they probably woulda fought to the last gook if necessary for self determination.

Not as ashamed as you are at having lost to the French, I'm sure.

The absolute state of English education

Yeah we and the british used to hate each others i guess. That's why it took them so long to use the metric system.

It was a war of attrition. The Vietnamese were being BTFO in terms of numbers (Vietnamese lost millions, Americans less than 60k) and the Americans would have eventually won if they kept fighting, but they lost the fight to the communists at home, and had to leave.

We're getting revenge by colonising the south of France now though Pierre. Every other property owner in Perpignan is a rich brit

they didn't have f22s or abrams, or those apaches... fucking christ normies get your shit straight

they had their 1970s equivalents though

i dunno why are brits so good at swallowing massive nigger dong yet gag and bitch and whine about getting the head of my little pecker past their lips?

>whiter than you, achmed. wall will keep out the inferior mexicans. what daca amnesty?

yeah such as the f-4 and m48s and bell huey, and im pretty sure they actually did have the uss enterprise and chinooks

I sense a lot of repressed anger and sadness in this post. Sexually abused at a young age perhaps?

I don't really want to defend the mutts here but this meme is fucking retarded. The vietnam war wasn't a military loss but a political one for the americans,the vietchinks got fucking slaughtered.

We killed way more farmers

Pretty sure the AH-1 Cobra was more formidable on the 1970s battlefield than an Apache is on today's

It's not who fights the war it's how you fight the war you retarded faggot.

they still use that thing, don't they?

>muh KD ratio

Doesn't matter, they still had run away and let communism take over just as we had to run away from the USA in 1776.

Clearly you don't know it... it was more than just a few Yankee militants against the british. Besides the Brits were spread thin by time the American revolution started. It was a losing battle from day one. If the English had concentrated their efforts on the Americas only the world would be a little different now.

USA doesn't, 3rd world countries like Pakistan and South Korea still use it though

kek

...

Your post specifically said that the Americans were bad at killing the malnourished rice farmers. They weren't. They killed millions.

The Americans were bad at fighting the political war against the communists at home, though, partly due to shipping all of their actual men away to fight in the war, and leaving only women and soyboys back home to subvert everything.

Jesus christ you make us look like idiots the vietnamese weren't using outdated weapons they were using soviet ak47s which at the time were top of the line

The Apache is a fucking monster, but yes, it probably has less battlefield impact, mostly due to the decreased role of helicopters in modern warfare. Drones are much more effective in most situations against today's enemies.

To be fair they were bad at killing them. 10,000 rounds of ammunition were expended for every NVA/VC fighter killed

That's how wars work, retard. Historically speaking, wars have always worked this way, and especially modern wars. When you have helicopters that dump thousands of rounds into wooded areas to kill hidden enemies, you aren't really aiming to kill someone with every shot.

In terms of small-arms fire, you do realize that shooting has more uses than JUST killing an enemy, right? You realize that suppressing fire is extremely important, for example?

usa uses an upgraded version

>militaryaerospace.com/articles/2017/02/ah-1z-attack-helicopters-avionics.html
>Bell prepares to build 27 new Marine Corps AH-1Z attack helicopters in $49.1 million contract

leftist sabotage

...

Americans are LITERALLY taught that they BTFOd the entire British Empire with a few farmers. When in reality we had a small proportion of our troops in North America whilst the rest were busy dealing with the immediate threats in Europe and the rest of the colonies. Not to mention you used sandnog tier guerilla sniping tactics whilst we still fought honorably in rank and file. Kys!

...

This sounds very similar to the arguments that you were just dismissing about the Americans in Vietnam. Hmm...

are you fucking retarded? Sorry for asking of course you are

There aren't rules in warfare
GET A LOAD OF THIS PAKI
AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAA

Why are there so many threads like this? This place has become unbearable. You can't find decent threads anymore. SAGE.

We killed 10 of them for every soldier lost. Seems like we are pretty good at it. Issue is sub-China population can sustain those losses.

>Didn't even name the french, their eternal enemy and friend

>his country lost to the cowardly French

Ouch

schoolchildren are fat and cant run away, like the typical Burger
Rice farmers on the other Hand walk the whole day, very mobile, hard to hit

>what is surpressing fire

In the current wars it's more like 150,000 rounds for every goat fucker killed.

what's your point though? this type of warfare just drains wealth from a nation extremely quickly with no guarantee of a win.

>250.000

insurgent forces are the hardest thing to fight against. It's like saying why can't cops arrest all criminals? They're not a criminal until they commit a crime, similar to how an insurgent isn't an insurgent(to troops) until they open fire. There's no uniform they wear, there's nothing that tells troops that it is an insurgent(apart from a gun). It's the reason almost every single war against insurgents and towel heads has been a loss. They simply blend in with civilians.

Kek brit, u made me laugh.

>150M native americans.
That number grows by the month.

None of that matters compared to 6 million Jews.
Germany wins.

P sure that's including training
the guys who are serious about it shoot every day

and tyrannical governments isn't a good enough reason to keep our outdated ARs and bolt action 270s and fucking pump action shot guns and croatian/austrian made hand guns.
>muh drones

We lost nam.... Like big time. We slunk out like bitches then the north came down and those of us that were left ran the fuck away...

Too bad we didn't have agent orange back then.... Oh wait..

Reminder -. The USA lost in war against Canada

Why couldn't the Soviets defeat a bunch of goat fuckers wearing pajamas in the wide open desert?