Why is the military a organization actually designed for war...

Why is the military a organization actually designed for war, far more competent at dealing with problems and not escalating them than the police?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Force_for_East_Timor
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Because they can just kill their problems and then make congress foot the bill. Remember that the federal government is allowed to go into debt whereas most states cannot.

Because killing your problems is easier than policing them.

That's also not to say the military isn't also full of incompetent shitpumps who have no idea what the fuck they're doing with their pathetic fuck up lives.

Because the niggers know if they are under the boot of the NG they will die in droves for every one they wound.

>the Iraq War never happened

>past tense
It's still going on. The American military is actually worse than the police. They have all but given up actually fighting anymore.

Because military has an expection that the people they meet are their enemy.

Cops expect the people they meet to follow the law

I wouldn't say the US Military is worse, you guys just can't fight Asymmetric Warfare in the 21st century, barely anyone can.

Because their job is to KILL. I say again KILL. The definition of a Infantry soldier role is to seek out and close with the enemy, to kill or capture him, to seize and hold ground, repel attack, by day or by night, regardless of season weather or terrain.

NOT deal with communal and civil problems with compassion and understanding and the correct use of use in a given situation.

The military is a problem solver for governments. When diplomacy has failed you send in the Army.

Correct use of FORCE*

Because the US military is run by the Fed, and as such is ACTUALLY overseen and regulated. Face it, States fuck up on a constant basis.

>Canada and Ausfail making fun of ANY military
I'm sorry, when have you guys ever contributed to making the world a better place?

Because we aren't able to use the effective, coldly rational techniques used by empires from time immemorial, and perfected by the British and French colonial empires. Guerilla warfare and insurgencies have been over-hyped into these invicible strategies that no standing, professional army could hope to defeat, which simply isn't the case.


The US military is actually a pretty competent institution as a whole, even if it could improve in many areas and cut a good deal of fat.

>role of inf
My RAR brethren.

>making fun

Jesus Christ, stop being an overly sensitive pussy and taking things so personally. I'm not bashing the US Military I'm saying Asymmetric Warfare is bullshit.

kys dumb ass.

because service members actually face consequences if they fuck up

Because the police is at best a scalpel, the military is a broadsword.

>more competent

>several million dead
>entire countries lost

WUT

>Asymmetric Warfare is bullshit.

lol, nope. If we wanted to kill them all we could, but you see there is something in our modern world called "Diplomacy" that stops us from just going HAM on our enemies.

French counter-insurgency tactics 101:

>walk into village
>if anyone looks at you crosseyed, drag them into the village center and execute them in front of everyone
>leave village
>return the next day
>if anyone looks at you crosseyed, execute everyone in the village and burn it down
>move on to the next village

Because the changes to the federal government have a very slow propagation rate for getting states to improve themselves in a similar manner. We have a militarized police force because of our revolutionary and libertarian cultural origins. I'd say more, but anything else is gonna sound like an endorsement of some kind and I don't trust the Jews to not warp anything I say.

Fuck you're retarded, that has nothing to do with anything.

Australia and Canada have small, but very professional armies. Both have excellent historical reputations given their limitations in size and scope.

This. I like the idea of states rights, but in practice it just lets retard states drag the rest of the union down. Federalism was a mistake

fuck off
slide this thread guys it's another
>1 post by this ID

>Both have excellent historical reputations given their limitations in size and scope.

Such as...? This?

Canadian special forces are actually pretty bad ass. Their Joint Task Force (JTF) has been involved in all the major US conflicts. In Afghanistan, the commander of US special operations forces said that JTF Force K-Bar was his first choice for direct action missions.

No Power of note has (superpower or otherwise) ever, successfully, beaten an asymmetric opponent.

because most police departments are full of fat losers who could never make it in the military.

>emu flag

HOLY SHIT
MYSTERY user WAS AN EMU THIS WHOLE TIME
FROM STRAYA NO LESS

Most are ex-"vets" actually. The quotes are used because servicemen don't deserve the veteran status anymore considering that all they do now is cower in their little bases and wait for Obongo's drones to kill the bad guys for them.

A little more complicated than that although there is a degree of truth there. The French in particular were absolutely ruthless, but I would read up on the Battle of Algiers. They absolutely crushed the FLN.

Assuming you aren't just trolling, the Canucks and Aussies were traditionally shock troops in both world wars, because both societies at the time produced very rugged, aggressive, and confident soldiers on account of them being frontier/pioneer societies.

So let me get this straight, a handful of SOOPER ELITE CALL OF DUTY PRESTIGE SPEKOPS is better than the huge, structured, organized, and technologically advanced US army?

lol ok.

The European colonial powers were, by definition, fighting successful asymmetric campaigns for generations.

After the Second World War you have the War in Algeria, the Malayan Emergency, the Mau Mau Uprising, FARC in Colombia, and Shining Path in Peru just off the top of my head.

I've re-read this entire thread three times now, and I have no fucking idea how you made this leap.

Maybe you should read it again

Because soldiers get held accountable and punished when they do wrong.

We don't get paid vacations.

I never said they were "better", not to mention it's inherently difficult to quantify that. They certainly aren't more capable because of their relatively small sizes (although the Australians are having a sizable military buildup in naval/air assets) but man-for-man they're of very high quality. Both tend to specialize in niche battlefields and military specialties (the Canadians in Arctic operations, the Australians in jungle and littoral warfare).

Don't get your panties in a wad.

It is a lot easier to sweep your fuckups under the run when they happen an ocean away. Generally, when those fuckups become public, they disappear after a week because nobody truly cares that some thirdworld shithole got accidentally bombed.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Force_for_East_Timor

The ADF isnt large enough to operate independently past Australia's backyard

International agression isn't our mandate, pal. Remember what the acronym "ADF" stands for. We help out our mates internationally because they ask for it and they like having us around. Having a blue with a good mate alongside strengthens the bond.

>what is leave

Reminder SEALS train our CQB doctrine for months in perth and our sasr was used exclusively for early long range reconnaissance patrols in afghan because Americans need exoskeletons to haul their packs. Marines and army have to worst discipline, field craft and weapons handling of any other country i have worked with