The Greatest Armed Services Ever

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.

Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.

It is best to keep one’s own state intact; to crush the enemy’s state is only second best.

–Sun Tzu

Oddly enough, I don’t get “the army that kicks the most ass is best” from any of these passages.

They have guarded the Vatican since the 15th century. This made it difficult to not be neutral without bringing in the Vatican or deserting their posts during times of war.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.

Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.

It is best to keep one’s own state intact; to crush the enemy’s state is only second best.

–Sun Tzu

Oddly enough, I don’t get “the army that kicks the most ass is best” from any of these passages.[/quote]

The man had a brilliant mind.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.

Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.

It is best to keep one’s own state intact; to crush the enemy’s state is only second best.

–Sun Tzu

Oddly enough, I don’t get “the army that kicks the most ass is best” from any of these passages.[/quote]
Hes totallly saying the army that kicks so much ass the battle is won before it even starts is the best. But english is my first language.

[quote]Chushin wrote:
rainjack wrote:

Uh…who’s deifying ANYTHING over here? I know it fits well with your opinion - but let’s try to stay at least partially factual here.

C’mon RJ, show a little compassion!

The guy’s experience with life in the US is limited to a weekend with Wiki; how factual could he be expected to be?[/quote]

I never had, or have, sexual relations with this young viking, Wiki…

So how many tens of millions of people has the Swiss Army freed from horrific oppression and dictatorship? How much does the freedom enjoyed by so many around so much of the world owe to the Swiss Army?

Oh wait, is the answer none and not any?

Doesn’t sound like true greatness to me.

But to an ingrate who doesn’t want to admit he owes his personal freedom to the armed services of the United States of America, of course it makes sense that the Swiss Army is allegedly greater. Not only makes sense, but is probably psychologically necessary.

How much of Switzerlands success in maintaining it’s neutrality stems from it’s military? It seems to me it’s mostly the geography, economists and diplomats who manage to keep the dogs at bay.

Which would point to the Swiss army as being… irrelevant.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
So how many tens of millions of people has the Swiss Army freed from horrific oppression and dictatorship? How much does the freedom enjoyed by so many around so much of the world owe to the Swiss Army?

Oh wait, is the answer none and not any?

Doesn’t sound like true greatness to me.
[/quote]

Is that the job of an army? To free other people from oppression and dictatorship? Now even if I agreed for discussions sake that any army ever did more harm than good trying to achieve that, how is that not a form of welfare and how could we possibly hope that a government can make that work in another country when it fails to do so in its own?

[quote]
But to an ingrate who doesn’t want to admit he owes his personal freedom to the armed services of the United States of America, of course it makes sense that the Swiss Army is allegedly greater. Not only makes sense, but is probably psychologically necessary.[/quote]

Well the very army that laid the groundwork for several revolutions during and after WWI helped us deal with the consequences afterwards.

I would indeed have preferred to achieve the exact same situation we have now without Hitler, Stalin and WWII, so yes, thank your grandfather for putting out the fires his father poured gas into.

But maybe it is psychologically necessary for you to believe that the history of American involvement in European affairs started ca 1944?

[quote]Otep wrote:
How much of Switzerlands success in maintaining it’s neutrality stems from it’s military? It seems to me it’s mostly the geography, economists and diplomats who manage to keep the dogs at bay.

Which would point to the Swiss army as being… irrelevant. [/quote]

As the saying goes, strategy is geography.

As well as the UK and the US have the oceans, Russia has her enormous plains, Switzerland has her mountains. I see nothing wrong with working what you got.

[quote]Scrotus wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.

Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.

It is best to keep one’s own state intact; to crush the enemy’s state is only second best.

–Sun Tzu

Oddly enough, I don’t get “the army that kicks the most ass is best” from any of these passages.
Hes totallly saying the army that kicks so much ass the battle is won before it even starts is the best. But english is my first language.

[/quote]

And here I thought it means the army that never needs to kick any ass is best.

But then, English is not my first language.

An army that never needs to kick ass, doesn’t get the credit.

[quote]orion wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
So how many tens of millions of people has the Swiss Army freed from horrific oppression and dictatorship? How much does the freedom enjoyed by so many around so much of the world owe to the Swiss Army?

Oh wait, is the answer none and not any?

Doesn’t sound like true greatness to me.

Is that the job of an army? To free other people from oppression and dictatorship? Now even if I agreed for discussions sake that any army ever did more harm than good trying to achieve that, how is that not a form of welfare and how could we possibly hope that a government can make that work in another country when it fails to do so in its own?

But to an ingrate who doesn’t want to admit he owes his personal freedom to the armed services of the United States of America, of course it makes sense that the Swiss Army is allegedly greater. Not only makes sense, but is probably psychologically necessary.

Well the very army that laid the groundwork for several revolutions during and after WWI helped us deal with the consequences afterwards.

I would indeed have preferred to achieve the exact same situation we have now without Hitler, Stalin and WWII, so yes, thank your grandfather for putting out the fires his father poured gas into.

But maybe it is psychologically necessary for you to believe that the history of American involvement in European affairs started ca 1944?[/quote]

Europes problems were created by Europeans. Unfortunately for the rest of the world they lacked the ability or character to fix them. The Americans had to do it for them and now they resent it since they have lived in a relative era of peace. This attitude is particularly pronounced on the continent and Orion is simply a product of that upbringing. To this day Europe still cannot stand on it’s own militarily and most of it’s armies are hollow or make work programs. Other then Britian most Euro armies would be hard presed to but a division in the field even if they had the desire to do so. That division would last about two weeks before running out of supplies if the US didn’t provide airlift capability.

As to the greatest Military ever. The Swiss Armey isn’t even under consideration. This is merely a mindless point Orion seeks to make so he can spew his rhetoric. Arguing military affairs with Orion is pointless. He is too one dimensional to make it interesting and he assumes his opinion to be fact.

The Swiss Army is small. It cannot project it’s power or manuever with any degree of speed. It is vulnerable to blockade or isolation. In other words it can simply be ignored and isolated. Since the Swiss have a history or diplomacy they would no doubt seek terms if faced with starvation. Those terms would be dicated by the aggressor.
If your military can only fight a holding action while you seek surrender terms, you are not the “Greatest Military Ever” Hardly in the same ranks as the US, Britian, Australia, Russia and China…the only worthy competitors for that title in modern times.

Our mistake was in using our military to police the globe. Most of the world doesn’t want that. They want war and chaos. Bombing and invading each other is their sport.

Bombing and invading to crush oppressors or to stop them from killing each other just makes both sides your enemy. Witness Iraq.

Let them all kill each other, as long as they leave us the hell alone.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
An army that never needs to kick ass, doesn’t get the credit.[/quote]

So you would say that an army faces the constant temptation to kick some ass to “get credit”?

Is that comparable to other bureaucrats who need to justify their existence regularly?

[quote]hedo wrote:
orion wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
So how many tens of millions of people has the Swiss Army freed from horrific oppression and dictatorship? How much does the freedom enjoyed by so many around so much of the world owe to the Swiss Army?

Oh wait, is the answer none and not any?

Doesn’t sound like true greatness to me.

Is that the job of an army? To free other people from oppression and dictatorship? Now even if I agreed for discussions sake that any army ever did more harm than good trying to achieve that, how is that not a form of welfare and how could we possibly hope that a government can make that work in another country when it fails to do so in its own?

But to an ingrate who doesn’t want to admit he owes his personal freedom to the armed services of the United States of America, of course it makes sense that the Swiss Army is allegedly greater. Not only makes sense, but is probably psychologically necessary.

Well the very army that laid the groundwork for several revolutions during and after WWI helped us deal with the consequences afterwards.

I would indeed have preferred to achieve the exact same situation we have now without Hitler, Stalin and WWII, so yes, thank your grandfather for putting out the fires his father poured gas into.

But maybe it is psychologically necessary for you to believe that the history of American involvement in European affairs started ca 1944?

Europes problems were created by Europeans. Unfortunately for the rest of the world they lacked the ability or character to fix them. The Americans had to do it for them and now they resent it since they have lived in a relative era of peace. This attitude is particularly pronounced on the continent and Orion is simply a product of that upbringing. To this day Europe still cannot stand on it’s own militarily and most of it’s armies are hollow or make work programs. Other then Britian most Euro armies would be hard presed to but a division in the field even if they had the desire to do so. That division would last about two weeks before running out of supplies if the US didn’t provide airlift capability.

As to the greatest Military ever. The Swiss Armey isn’t even under consideration. This is merely a mindless point Orion seeks to make so he can spew his rhetoric. Arguing military affairs with Orion is pointless. He is too one dimensional to make it interesting and he assumes his opinion to be fact.

The Swiss Army is small. It cannot project it’s power or manuever with any degree of speed. It is vulnerable to blockade or isolation. In other words it can simply be ignored and isolated. Since the Swiss have a history or diplomacy they would no doubt seek terms if faced with starvation. Those terms would be dicated by the aggressor.
If your military can only fight a holding action while you seek surrender terms, you are not the “Greatest Military Ever” Hardly in the same ranks as the US, Britian, Australia, Russia and China…the only worthy competitors for that title in modern times.

[/quote]

No Hitler without Versailles, no Versailles with the US.

So, US involvement was undoubtedly a conditio sine qua non for Hitler´s rise.

That does not put the blame on the US, but it shows that government actions tend to have unintended consequences. If an American conservative like you fails to see that the minute the American armed forces are involved it is probably a result of your upbringing?

Then, your idea of “greatness” when it comes to a military is a military that is able to reach out and make other people bow to its will, merely successfully keeping the homeland safe does not seem to be enough.

That however is an army that is more fitting for an empire, not a republic and I think the founders of your republic agree with me.

May we also count the Jews that were turned away from your and Americas shores?

[/quote]

There was not many jewish people trying to get into our country during the war as it was a world away. When they did we let them (to fight the yellow peril).

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Our mistake was in using our military to police the globe. Most of the world doesn’t want that. They want war and chaos. Bombing and invading each other is their sport.

Bombing and invading to crush oppressors or to stop them from killing each other just makes both sides your enemy. Witness Iraq.

Let them all kill each other, as long as they leave us the hell alone.[/quote]

That once was the American attitude, back then when your state quota was 2,5%.

[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
An army that never needs to kick ass, doesn’t get the credit.

So you would say that an army faces the constant temptation to kick some ass to “get credit”?

Is that comparable to other bureaucrats who need to justify their existence regularly?
[/quote]

  1. No. I would say the army gets credit if it has the proper training, militrary culture, and equipment, to kick the ass of enemies at home, or on the enemies on turf. Politicians and the people (through whatever influence they have) are responisble for when, if ever, an ass kicking army needs to lace up it’s ass kickers for…well, some ass kicking.
  2. No. Reality and history justify the need for an army.