America has the strongest military in history

>America has the strongest military in history

>America doesn't have the strongest military in history

>defeated by a bunch of rice and goat farmers

>1 million men equip with high tech weaponry and armor
>thousands of advanced tanks, AFVs, Humvees
>thousands of artillery pieces that are aimed using computers, can put a shell in your bedroom from 25 miles away
>hundreds of fighters, close air support planes, gunships all of which are state of the art.
>thousands of helicopters, which are also state of the art
>largest navy in the world by far
>2nd largest nuclear arsenal, best delivery systems
>backed by Jewish banks

How can anyone else compete?

*unsheates katana*
*slices ur entire country*
heh... nothing personell
*teleports back to finland*

>implying we didn't let them die on purpose

>never won a significant conflict by themselves

guerilla and asymmetrical warfare

Ayyliens bro

>defeat of imperial japan

>beating up the retarded kid

are you saying that North Vietnam had the strongest military in history?

>not achieving a long-term strategic objective means you can't have the strongest military in history

what did he mean by this?

In absolute terms it does, because it's the most powerful military today and it has an obvious technological advantage on any past military.

In relative terms it's certainly not the strongest military.

>what is Japan
>what is Spain
>what is Mexico
>what is the united kingdom x2

>Australia
>Canada
>New Zealand

>the retarded kid that beat up the other retarded kids aka the orient and yurop

>Japan
Bunch of Manlet low test Asians.

>Spain
Bunch of lazy spics

>Mexico
Look above

>UK

Lmao

I can think of no modern nations of significant power who can claim that they won a war on their own due to the fact that the wars powerful nations get involved in are highly likely to be global in scope and involve coalitions of nations simply by default.

Name a single nation of the last 500 years that won a significant conflict by itself

That's bad strategy. Never set out on a conflict on your own.

Manchu conquest of China, Mongolia, Tibet, and the Hue

Soviets played a big role in Japan's surrender and the British Empire and China helped tie them up also

"Vietnam has won wars"
>mongols
stupid slant-eyes, probably couldn't see the enemy anyway
>USA
retarded drug using conscripts. Doesn't count

This is how retarded you sound

>implying we didn't loose on purpose
>implying it wasn't a strategic plan
>implying we didn't play 539D chess with them
>implying we will ever admit defeat

spanish conquest of the aztecs

Rome got defeated by a bunch of forest hunters and gatherers, so what?

the Assyrians were probably the most dominant force in terms of how strong they were compared to others
Mongols would also be very high

China put up a pretty good fight

They had plenty of help from other natives who were tired of the Aztecs being bloodthirsty cunts.

My brain hurts just thinking about how stupid this statement is. It's as retarded as people looking up who won wars by looking at the k/d ratio as if it's Halo or something.

Seriously? The overwhelming majority of the conquering was done by disgruntled natives.

Yes. In their neck of the woods they are unbeatable.

>In their neck of the woods
So? How does this reflect on their relative status considering all aspects?