Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Who can the british army NOT beat in a war

Chalky said:
Ventress said:
Liberty, especially if they deploy that Chakrabarti trout as the Comd in Chief.

I had dinner with her a few months ago and she really is that self-righteous.

That's what happens when our government is filled with lawyers - it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy where rich lawyers attack other rich lawyers on a pretence of opposing policies and they all get even richer. She used to be a Home Office lawyer and now she's a self-publicising and annoying gobshiite pretending to be an altruistic Joan of Arc.

I bet she'll be in the House of Lords within 3 years.
 
combatintman said:
Chances of beating Iran are dead good I reckon - we've got them surrounded!! (Iraq and Afghanistan)

That was clearly the US intent early on - beat Iraq and Afghanistan, install sympathetic governments then slaughter Iran.

Worked out pretty badly though. :(
 
SelfLoadingRifle said:
The shooting clubs would form an instant nucleus of old and bold under arms.

Looking around our local shooting clubs, that would be quite a small (and shrinking) nucleus, of the very old and bold....

...not to worry, if the enemy stand very still within 100yds, with a black circle on a white background pinned to their chests, then they're in deep sh*t.

There's a much better chance of a laugh if you'd suggested giving real guns to the airsoft clubs :) :)
 
[/quote]Looking around our local shooting clubs, that would be quite a small (and shrinking) nucleus, of the very old and bold....

...not to worry, if the enemy stand very still within 100yds, with a black circle on a white background pinned to their chests, then they're in deep sh*t.

I think I'll allow myself to be corrected on this one... Basically, it would be "Dad's Army" all over again. and every bit as useless. However "nucleus" is the key word here. I think that I'm right in saying that in real life ie WW2, The Home Guard evolved from a rag arrsed Walmington on Sea style group of Local Defence Volunteers into a force of over a million equipped and trained men. If it actually had come to the crunch, they would have probably been as effective in action as their German equivalents the Volksturm.

Whether or not we would have the time to train and equip sufficient men - (both regs and home guard) if threatened with invasion is a very moot point... especially if this incompetent New Labour lot were still in office. Airsoft Walts would certainly play their part in the new Home Guard. Each unit would have at least triple the number of Pte Pikes in the ranks as their WW2 forebears had to put up with. I would fall squarely into the medically downgraded L/Cpl Jones category.

"Hande hoch, hande hoch... get those handys hoch" :D

SLR
 
Skinn_Full said:
Im gonna say the Chinese, in terms of numbers and the fact that you say we are defending, the attrition rate would favour the Chinese, they would be able to take massive losses and just keep coming. Also like many East asian troops (Vietnamese, Gurkha, Japanese) they just dont give up, ever!! However quality and not quantity could defninately be the order of the day, and there is no finer Army than the British and we have some half-decent kit. Maybe we wouldn't lose after all......

Cheers Easy!
I agree, take a look at these!

http://www.funlol.com/funpages/chinese-military-women.html
 
Don't forgot the everyday British public - not as an enemy but as a strategic defensive asset. Such a lean, hard-working and intelligent body of men and women, of great physical and mental stature, would no doubt answer the clarion call to defend the motherland...
 
Dogface Wrote

Equip with what firearms? In early WW2 the UK begged the US citizentry for privately owned firearms. After the war, those donated arms were destroyed rather than being ether safeguarded or returned. That fact isn't lost to history or memory. What would the UK do if such a need arose anew?


Killings Rise As 3 Million Illegal Guns Flood Britain.


Police are concerned that the amnesty after the massacre of schoolchildren in Dunblane in 1996, which led to 200,000 weapons being handed in, has failed to dent the underworld's supply of pistols and revolvers. Criminals have maintained a steady flow of smuggled guns from eastern Europe, exhibition weapons reactivated in illegal "factories" run by underworld dealers, and guns stolen from private collections.

The estimate that 3m guns are illegally held in the UK - made by researchers collecting evidence for a parliamentary inquiry into the gun trade - is far higher than previously thought.

http://www.mcsm.org/britsban2.html
 
Surely your not suggesting that the knee jerk firearms ban in this country doesnt work??!!
Shows that the septics can get something right, though it was a while ago.
The reason they have the right to bare arms is so that they can unite to overthrow an unpopular government.
Lieblair must be sh1tting themselves if they think the country is about to come after them with a screwdriver.
 
well in my mind you would have America coz of the numbers alone they would were us done in the end.
also the china for the same reson as above (but they would loose have the people as America coz they are gun happy and would loose at least 10 of there own to 1 of ours)
and basicly any other country in the world less France coz as soon as they hit our shore they would give up and then start a rebelion that would last about 4min
 
TopBadger said:
Realistically, it comes down to how much ammo we've got stockpiled.

Government penny pinching would lead me to believe that we'd run out of bullets, and therefore loose, against any country with a population of over 1M.

Thats why Iran is laughing, we couldn't possibly take them on.

TB
~


Sadly quite true. Take money from the military and give it to the dole sucking hobos.
 
Dogface said:
stanley_bomb_squad said:
The reason they have the right to bare arms is so that they can unite to overthrow an unpopular government.


That was but only a single reason delineated by the founders of the USA. Others are national/regional defense, self defense, hunting, and sport.

But it is in there, isnt it.
 

New posts

Top