mike2000 is back
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2015
- Messages
- 8,513
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
What do you mean by that?how much of iraq army stood their ground and fought back against U.S / U.K / West ?
how much of Iraq Army was intact at the time ?
The Iraqi military stood no real chance against the onslaught of western coalition military might back in 2003. To be honest, the result would have been the same for any other country in the middle east considering the massive imbalance of power.
So what I meant was that fighting rag tag rebel groups, militias, terror groups etc who use unconventional means to fight a superior enemy is far more difficult to handle than fighting a conventional army who uses more conventional means. For example the U. S war in Vietnam, the vietcong were smart by avoiding direct combat with a far superior adversary and opted to use hit and run tactics, ambushes, road side bombs etc to fight the U. S. This work for them perfectly well. They knew that fighting the U. S like a national conventional army would have meant total annihilation in a short period of time.
Same way Vietnamese military even today would stand little chance against the U.S if they decided to fight like a conventional army.
So the two are different. That was my point.
Huh..... But you haven't refuted any of my points. So why the name calling?Mike is only 17 years old. He knows fukk all. Please excuse him.