[QUOTE=Warfish;4234455]With respect, that is a very RayRay-esque homer view of U.S. Millitary equipment IMO.
The U.S. fighting soldier was as good as they came, their equipment....well, you're the pro, but your opinion does nto agree with any of the History I've read on the subject over the years, and I've read alot.
In any event, when we open the "History Debate" forum, I will surely be enjoy reading it.:D[/QUOTE]
Whoa now. I'm not claiming to be George Patton's grandson here but what do you take issue with?
The Pershig tank at the end of WWII was better than the Tiger. Our aircraft were the best in the world. Our artillery was the best. Our subs were the best. Our aircraft carriers were the best - plus we had 100 of them. Even our battleships graded out better than the Japanese.
The M1 rifle was outstanding. Actually, Patton attributed it to be the deciding factor in Europe.
No country had anywhere near the different pieces of military equipmment as the U.S. An astounding number of items designed to provide safety to our men as well as killing enemies.
Our men handling sophisticated equipment were outstanding. Our regular Army troops were good- better than Germans? For the record though, our special forces types were very inferior to British commandos and in fact spent a great deal of times learning from the Brits in this area. Plus we wound up having lots of this type soldier and now have way more than any country ( Rangers, Special Forces, Seals, Delta Force etc.).