Is this the most overrated military force in history?

Yeah Wehrmacht was by all means a good fighting force but it is so fucking overrated.

It's only overrated by Wehraboos, I think. People who know something about history generally rate them correctly. They were pretty good, considering the odds against them and that they were mostly using horse transport and a bunch of heterogenous equipment from different German companies plus stuff looted from all over Europe - but they were no supermen. They had some nice weapons designs, but many of their most famous weapons had major flaws and broke down a lot. Also, nice tanks and guns and planes didn't really matter anyway, since the only thing that could have won them the war, realistically speaking, would have been to build nukes first - and they had almost no shot at that.

>Poles manage to hold them off for almost 2 months
Why lie on the internet?

>we won the war by running away
the absolute state of amerimutts

Who won the war? Oh that's right the Allies. Well theres your answer Europoors.

>America won the Vietnam War
I see the fine American public education system is still producing bright minds

We stopped the Northerners from taking the South. Not our fault they instantly broke the treaty after we left. We still got what we came for.

We're not even talking about that war. Stay mad Europoor.

It never fails to amaze me the lengths Americans will go to to try and convince themselves the Vietnam War is anything other than an embarrassing loss. In a decades time you'll be telling me Afghanistan was a roaring success story.

>Is this the most overrated military force in history?
We're talking about overall you dickhead.

>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Poor Amerimutt that 56% blood must make it hard for you to follow the thread.

No your wrong like always, read OPs post. Dumb Europoors at it again.

>Is this the most overrated military force in history?
Do you know what a question is mongrel?

...

>shifting goalposts
Fucking Eurangutang.

>OP replying towards pic related
HOLY SHIT, keep it coming haha. Saved.

Sad day when Europoors show this much stupidity.

>n-no M-Mr. White M-Man we w-won we w-won by r-running b-back home
No Hernandez Del Taco Rio that's not how the real world works.

>56% meme
>opinion discarded
Come back when you got a argument.

...

This could honestly be the most retarded thing anyone has ever written on this site.

THE LAND OF THE FREE
AND THE HOME OF THE 56%ER

>implying I don't have more than you
Who do you thinks posts those?
Europoor even put IS in the sentence to show OP IS implying towards pic related. Didn't even have the knowledge to change the wording to help his lies. Sad day!

...

>doubling down on his retardation
Post your skin color with timestamp. I'm willing to bet I know why you are mentally spastic

Any more non arguments? Or am I done here?

This was an interesting thread OP

>fleeing once asked to identify his race
As I expected. Well 50 IQ mongrel when you learn what a question is feel free to rejoin the board.

>this butthurt
>implying identifying my race pertains to this "argument"
I'm white by the way, but just because you asked I'm going to let you keep guessing. Keep embracing yourselves Europoors, the salt feeds me.

And to add onto that you insult yourself Europoor because you've just been shown up by a supposed 50 IQ mongrel HAHA!

>The US military is overrated

Horribly wrong. It’s supremely underrated if anything. People bring up stuff like Vietnam and the Iraq War as though it was a failure of US military strength instead of a failure of political leadership.

The initial invasion of Iraq was one of the single most beautifully conducted military operations in history. It literally couldn’t have been done any better than it was.

>I'm white by the way
I'm sure you are.
>keep embracing yourself
You are a fucking moron.

You don't know what a question mark means or the meaning or the word embracing. Be glad this is an anonymous board.

>It’s supremely underrated if anything
What wars has America fought and won on her own?

Are you implying that the Iraqi army was some kind of well honed war machine? Because it was both outmanned and outgunned by the US,not to mention the overwhelming air superiority.

Also I don't know why you discount the political agency for war, it is an extremely important factor. The Wehrmacht for all its operational faults did fight all the way to the very bitter end even when the odds were stacked against them.

All of them.

Nice, so you are done then?

>avoiding the question
We both know it's a very short and very embarrassing list.

>atleast they were willing to literally kill themselves
And their country got split in half for 50 years, what a victory

Longer than germany’s tho

Might as well be there's not much point talking to a 56%er who doesn't understand what a question is and thinks the word embracing is the same as embarrassing. Jog on Amerimutt.

user, I...

>fallacies
This made my day, saved. You'll see this in /pol/ haha!

>Are you implying that the Iraqi army was some kind of well honed war machine?

No? I remotely never implied that. There was never any doubt the US would win obviously. However even by the strictest standards, the Iraq invasion exceeded every possible expectation of how hard you could blow somebody out in modern war. The US military did it perfectly.

Jesus Christ this is actually fucking accurate
Driving over from Niagara Falls Ontario to Niagara Falls New York is disgusting

Sorry I’m not finding an argument in that post was it supposed to be?

>invading a county with a force insufficent to occupy said country properly
>firing all the people who point this out
>triggering a brutal civil war in said country
>perfectly

You gotta lay off the meth dude

>slaughter thousands of apathetic iraqi soldiers whose leader led them into a conflict way over their heads.
>terrorize the iraqi population by “strategic” bombing of their vital infrastructure, leading to huge economic damage that set the country back decades and made them more reliant on hussein than ever.
Yes so “””successful””””

>imagine being this BTFO

Whoa my dude you didn't find the argument in a post not offering an argument. How did you do it?

>we have to occupy the country
Nah senpai we were there to oust a dictator we only stayed because it was rude to hit and quit.
>being on the losing side
Sucks don’t it

By pointing out it wasn’t an argument, of course you silly goose.

If you judge wars solely by “were epic badasses we kicked those sandniggees asses XXXDD USA USA” then yes its quite the victory. By all other measures like keeping regional stability and setting an example through responsible use of force it wasna disaster

Again pointing out things that are a failure of political leadership, not a failure of military strength or strategy. The US military and it’s generals did it’s job as well as you could ask. You’re blaming a hammer for missing a nail.

>regional stability
The Middle East hasn’t been stable since the 1930’s and pretending otherwise is laughable.
>responsible use of force
So which European country were you a part of since you know we had a coalition of multinational militaries to occupy it. British? Check
French? Check
Polish? Check
If any of you had a problem with our use of force you should have raised those concerns
As it sat you were happy to fulfill nato obligations so we’d continue to allow you to blow less GPD on military spending

>country descends into brutal civil war
>thousands of american troops die in the fighting
>after a decade and billions of american dollars fighting stops
>during this time the countrys government has fallen completely under the influence if iran
>one of americas key strategic enemies
>lol we ousted a dictator so its a success

>try to occupy a county with roughly half the forces necessary
>not a failure of us military strength or strategy

Guys........ guys come on

>thousands of people die
Yes user people die in wars that is a thing you know that right?
>initial strategic goals were to oust a dictator and stop occupation of Kuwait
Both of those things happened, the rest were secondary humanitarian objectives.

>The Middle East hasn’t been stable since the 1930’s and pretending otherwise is laughable.
not really. it was stable as far as law and order prevailed in sovereign countries. Lebanon descended into chaos but it remained pretty much localized with some israeli and syrian meddling. but the iraqi descent into chaos has sucked in the whole region.

Ask yourself this: who could have done it better? Which country in the world could have possibly conducted the invasion of Iraq and subsequent occupation better than the US did?

Nobody. If you want to judge military competence, compare it to its contemporaries, not some magical non-existent standard of how you think they should perform.

Looking at these retards bashing the iraq war whilst knowing dick all about it.

Kids, you can critique the politics and the occupation but boy oh boy did the Amerifats pull off the invasion spectacularly

Uh, you really don’t know anything about the Middle East if you think it’s stable
You probably think the Balkans are stable since the last war ended before you were old enough to remember it

Let's see yours then, faggot.

>>responsible use of force
>So which European country were you a part of since you know we had a coalition of multinational militaries to occupy it.
So just because you have a lot of allies who support it makes it correct? That's fucking bullshit. We had a coalition to bomb Gaddafi into the stone age, and what has that done for the country? Responsible use of force is not about getting yes-men to approve your actions, but using force that has consequences with little or no bad effects on the ground. That is absolutely not what happened in Iraq or Libya for that matter.

>The Middle East hasn’t been stable since the 1930’s and pretending otherwise is laughable
Well except that other than the arab israeli wars and a handful of mostley low key revolutions its was a pretty quiet corner of the world until around the 80s and it took 40 odd years of destabilization to get in into the shit its in today, destabilization that was made drastically worse by the invasion of iraq

If the strategic withdraw ends with you losing your objective, yea. Real life isn't fucking Call of Duty.

>it’s another episode of an armchair humanitarian unable to understand that a military isn’t a police force and shouldn’t be treated as such
You have a military to kill things you want dead, if you have a military to police things you are by definition a Junta
If Europe had a problem the European forces shouldn’t have enjoyed their rights as occupiers just as much as the Americans did. In fact the only ones without major incidents would be the poles.

>Uh, you really don’t know anything about the Middle East if you think it’s stable
>It's
were not talking about the present day shithead. We're talking about historically. Historically, it was pretty much stable. Europe in the first half of the 20th century should not be regarded stable by your definition either because it descended into two brutal European wars and accompanying civil wars within those wars.

>You probably think the Balkans are stable
they are at the moment.

My post specified that the ME hadn’t been especially stable since the 1930s, please keep up.

>Africa
The memes are real

>except for all these events that highlighted how unstable and prone to violence the region was it was actually pretty stable
Yeah and Yugoslavia was pretty stable til it imploded
>they are at the moment
You literally just proved my point, child

>that a military isn’t a police force
yes because Saddam was a big bad meanie whose literally hitler, am i right?

> if you have a military to police things you are by definition a Junta
when have brainlets been in charge of making definitions as stupid as this?

>If Europe had a problem the European forces shouldn’t have enjoyed their rights as occupiers just as much as the Americans did.
what are you saying here? I already told you that Europeans joining in on the slaughter doesn't make use of force morally righteous.

How has no one said Rome yet.

The 2nd Punic war was a huge embarrassment to the strength of the roman military.

They lost 2 WHOLE ENTIRE ARMIES. Annihilated. In relation to percentage of men lost at those 2 battles to the total military it dwarfs the losses of Nazi Germany and USSR.

But muh Romans won the war? By literary no longer fighting physical battles against Carthage. They basically gave up.
Rome won because their people were more resiliant and had a more unified government and where better in pretty much all aspects.

>Saddam was literally Hitler
No, but he was someone we wanted dead? Where did you get hitler from?
>brainlets
I’m sorry, our military isn’t a police force and how it fares against insurrections highlights that.
>what am I saying
Your holier then thou attitude is hilarious all considering is what I’m saying.

So basically if thousands of american soldiers die for literally nothing thats a success in your opinion?
Oh yeah and youve totally outed yourself as knowing nohing about this, the liberation of kuwait and the ousting of saddam were two seperate wars, anyone on the street could tell you that, were talking about the invasion of iraq here dumbass, the objective of which was to destroy the wmds that saddam didnt have

>Who could have done it better?
Literally anyone by simply not starting a pointless war

>t the ME hadn’t been especially stable since the 1930s
It has been. Nothing in the 20th century is comparable to the situation we have now.

>except for all these events that highlighted how unstable and prone to violence the region was it was actually pretty stable
this is called teleological argument. your basically explaining events backwards and projecting into the past as though middle eastern stability was always meant to happen.

>You literally just proved my point, child
your point is retarded. your assuming that because your older than me that somehow gives you special insight into the past just by the very fact you experienced the balkan wars firsthand? (which you didn't you read about it through newspapers, if you even did that and aren't just now learning about it from shitposters on /int/)

instability*

There has never been a point in history where one country’s military so completely outclasses every other military on Earth more than the US does today, and has done since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Only an American would be stupid enough to give out his DNA to dodgy companies to prove he's white.

Actually said events were considered pretty normal by global stamdards at the time, and yugoslavia was actually pretty stable until the economic collapse of the early 90s

If American had done those wars 150 years sooner, we would have just genocided or displaced the populace to avoid the insurrection.
Americas only fault is being a super power at a time when your military actions are fighting 1 handed.

To say any country America has fought in the past 80 years has beaten us military is laughable. Look at the losses for fuck sucks.

Except farmers. Farmer master race.

>I will ignore all the times the Carthaginians suffered similar losses, like that reinforcement attempt that got obliterated off the coast of Sardinia.
>I will ignore how Hannibal got penned up off the toe of Italy and spent years doing jackshit.
>But they weren't fighting battles against Carthage.

Are you just incredibly stupid, or actually trying to push something?

>No, but he was someone we wanted dead?
umm...no? He was an ally in the 1980s. Then we turned on him when he allegedly became inexpedient to certain economic and political circles in the USA.
>Where did you get hitler from?
because that's EXACTLY how he was demonized at the time. as an evil dictator who wanted to destroy america. And its exactly this characterization made by the blood-lusting media of the time that demonstrates that the reasonings behind the war were very suspect. It wasn't about righteous use of force but a PR event to show american voters that America was still Great. It was a glorious little war meant to avenge the cuckery of Vietnam. It was basically equivalent to Tsar Nickie fighting Japan in the early 20th century to increase his prestige except in that instance the Russians seriously miscalculated.

>as though mid eastern stability was supposed to happen
But my argument is literally that it hasn’t happened not that it’s supposed to?
If a region was stable don’t you think it’d be a bit harder to destabilize it like what happened in the 40-60’s? Shit the 40’s-present day there’s been an upset or war literally every half decade. That’s not stable. Could you imagine having 3 local wars before you’re 20?
>he actually thinks the balkans are stable
You literally are an idiot and just admitted you were underage. Good job.

>Literally anyone by simply not starting a pointless war

Lol, alright. In this case the French military >>>>> German military in WW2. Doesn’t matter that Germany rolled over them like a fucking pancake, Germany’s military is worse because they started a pointless war.

Rome didnt beat Carthage militarily.
Simple as that.

Hannibal got boned in Italy because of his one strategic weakness and because of his total incompetence of his government.

Imagine if Hannibal was a Roman general during that war, it would be a footnote in history.

I dont have something to push besides Romes military skills are so overrated in pop history and in public it is annoying.
Rome was incredible in its logistics, and government structure, and lots of over civil feats.

>he was an ally 20 years ago!?!?
We were allies with Stalin in 1945 and preparing an iron curtain against him in 46
Politics aren’t simple if you haven’t noticed
>literally Hitler
So, you have a source for that big long paragraph? Shouldn’t be hard to scrounge up one of the American media’s pieces on him being literally Hitler, no? Hell the way you put it I’d expect no less than a headline from th NYT claiming he’s genociding Kurds

150 years ago iraq was ruled by the ottomans who would probably have easily repelled an american invasion given americas population at the time
Ameficas miliatary isnt fighting one handed, its just bad at fighting despite spending ridiculous amounts on weapons, so it has to come up with reasons to justify its failure and blames politicians

>the losses
I thought the whole k/d thing was a meme, are you aware that real war isnt a call of duty team deathmatch, success is based on achieving objectives not killing the enemy

>To say any country America has fought in the past 80 years has beaten us military is laughable. Look at the losses for fuck sucks.
war isn't about K/D ratio. To quote Clausewitz for the nth time, it is "politics by other means". In other words, if you don't fulfill your political objectives through the means of military force that means your military either 1) had shit objectives given to it (sort of like feeding data into a computer the military can't just be fed useless orders and somehow expect to make a victory) or 2) the army couldn't and wouldn't fulfill your objectives because it lacked the material and morale to do so or the enemy defeated it in one way or another regardless of its advantages on paper because the enemy's objectives were clearer and easier to fulfill.

>Rome didnt beat Carthage militarily.
Yes they did. They crushed every last Carthaginian army.

>Hannibal got boned in Italy because of his one strategic weakness and because of his total incompetence of his government.
Hannibal spent the last 4 years of his invasion cramped up on the toe of Italy and searching for a way out of the Roman enclosure, and only eventually giving up entirely and heading back to Africa because the Romans were closing in on it. That's a defeat.

It also ignores the fact that Rome went on the offensive all over the Western Mediterranean, overruning Carthaginian forces throughout what's now southern France, Spain, and a bunch of those islands.