Welcome to the Official Redemption® Message Board!
Quote from: Colin Michael on June 11, 2009, 12:15:37 AMQuote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 12:07:14 AMhaha yes, planting nail bombs in pubs sure is 'mechanical'.the comparison between assault rifles was also misjudged; many experts would agree an ak47 owns an ar15...reliability wins ANYDAY (i find it comical they arrived at the reverse decision despite the ar15 jamming up). most of the stuff they cover is accurate, but they make some glaring mistakes as well (gb vs spet: a shooting knife beats the entrenching tool? WHAT? for one, who wants to lose their close range weapon, and two, the entrenching tool can cut a mans skull IN HALF. and sure, the spets can roll around and shoot from unorthodox positions, but like the gb said while the russian was doing all that jazzy rolling around, he'd just put a round in him).The Russians were better fighters completely. Did you see the handgun thing? so hold on, you're guaging the effectiveness of an entire military division based on handgun marksmanship alone? so? the show failed to mention the m9 beretta carries TWICE as many rounds as the makarov. also, according to the show we have better snipers (which we do...the dragonov is a joke compared alongside the m24, although they misrepresented the fire rate on the show...the m24 is bolt action). the only edge i can honestly give the spets was with their saiga shotgun...its a very, very, very sick shotgun...however i have no idea why the gb used the mossberg in favor of the semi-automatic benelli...even so, both the spets and gb's have completely different battle tactics...the spets rely more on the individual alone rather than the entire squad, while the gb's general philosophy is to rely on squad tactics and combined firepower. and to put it simply, if you're outmanned and outgunned, you're pretty much screwed. russians 'completely better fighters'? not even close. tell you what, you take your makarov and i'll take the m24 at 300 yards, and we'll see what happens...
Quote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 12:07:14 AMhaha yes, planting nail bombs in pubs sure is 'mechanical'.the comparison between assault rifles was also misjudged; many experts would agree an ak47 owns an ar15...reliability wins ANYDAY (i find it comical they arrived at the reverse decision despite the ar15 jamming up). most of the stuff they cover is accurate, but they make some glaring mistakes as well (gb vs spet: a shooting knife beats the entrenching tool? WHAT? for one, who wants to lose their close range weapon, and two, the entrenching tool can cut a mans skull IN HALF. and sure, the spets can roll around and shoot from unorthodox positions, but like the gb said while the russian was doing all that jazzy rolling around, he'd just put a round in him).The Russians were better fighters completely. Did you see the handgun thing?
haha yes, planting nail bombs in pubs sure is 'mechanical'.the comparison between assault rifles was also misjudged; many experts would agree an ak47 owns an ar15...reliability wins ANYDAY (i find it comical they arrived at the reverse decision despite the ar15 jamming up). most of the stuff they cover is accurate, but they make some glaring mistakes as well (gb vs spet: a shooting knife beats the entrenching tool? WHAT? for one, who wants to lose their close range weapon, and two, the entrenching tool can cut a mans skull IN HALF. and sure, the spets can roll around and shoot from unorthodox positions, but like the gb said while the russian was doing all that jazzy rolling around, he'd just put a round in him).
...what does that have to do with anything? how old is the ak47 and how long has it been in use? 50-60 years old and STILL going strong. your point has no validity...if both sides have the same arms and firepower, then you must compare battle tactics. again, you do your fancy little rolling around jig, we'll put a slug in you. again, the battle tactics between the two are tremendously different. the spets, although highly trained, their methods are not based on the team reliance and strategy like that of the gb's. and yeah, the spets are highly trained in pain resistance, but thats alot of training time spent on tactics that only become primarily useful if you're captured. in hand to hand, you usually die from a puncture force or blunt trauma at some point, so this type of training is a complete waste of time...almost utterly useless in modern warfare. if the weapons are similiar, or even in some cases inferior, the team that wins the most are the ones that work together and use their mind. gb's will on average win this battle hands down.
Quote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 01:22:10 AM...what does that have to do with anything? how old is the ak47 and how long has it been in use? 50-60 years old and STILL going strong. your point has no validity...if both sides have the same arms and firepower, then you must compare battle tactics. again, you do your fancy little rolling around jig, we'll put a slug in you. again, the battle tactics between the two are tremendously different. the spets, although highly trained, their methods are not based on the team reliance and strategy like that of the gb's. and yeah, the spets are highly trained in pain resistance, but thats alot of training time spent on tactics that only become primarily useful if you're captured. in hand to hand, you usually die from a puncture force or blunt trauma at some point, so this type of training is a complete waste of time...almost utterly useless in modern warfare. if the weapons are similiar, or even in some cases inferior, the team that wins the most are the ones that work together and use their mind. gb's will on average win this battle hands down.No way at all. GB's aren't psychopaths, they're cocky Americans. Also, a team of GB's is only as strong as their weakest link. The Russians are all able to independently function by themselves.
Quote from: Colin Michael on June 11, 2009, 01:27:19 AMQuote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 01:22:10 AM...what does that have to do with anything? how old is the ak47 and how long has it been in use? 50-60 years old and STILL going strong. your point has no validity...if both sides have the same arms and firepower, then you must compare battle tactics. again, you do your fancy little rolling around jig, we'll put a slug in you. again, the battle tactics between the two are tremendously different. the spets, although highly trained, their methods are not based on the team reliance and strategy like that of the gb's. and yeah, the spets are highly trained in pain resistance, but thats alot of training time spent on tactics that only become primarily useful if you're captured. in hand to hand, you usually die from a puncture force or blunt trauma at some point, so this type of training is a complete waste of time...almost utterly useless in modern warfare. if the weapons are similiar, or even in some cases inferior, the team that wins the most are the ones that work together and use their mind. gb's will on average win this battle hands down.No way at all. GB's aren't psychopaths, they're cocky Americans. Also, a team of GB's is only as strong as their weakest link. The Russians are all able to independently function by themselves. gb's have no 'weak link'; they're the best of the best. funny you mention 'cocky', seeing as how spets seem to always want to do things on their own. who cares if they're independent...a squad of highly trained soldiers can easily overcome a renegade rambo wannabe.
Quote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 01:33:21 AMQuote from: Colin Michael on June 11, 2009, 01:27:19 AMQuote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 01:22:10 AM...what does that have to do with anything? how old is the ak47 and how long has it been in use? 50-60 years old and STILL going strong. your point has no validity...if both sides have the same arms and firepower, then you must compare battle tactics. again, you do your fancy little rolling around jig, we'll put a slug in you. again, the battle tactics between the two are tremendously different. the spets, although highly trained, their methods are not based on the team reliance and strategy like that of the gb's. and yeah, the spets are highly trained in pain resistance, but thats alot of training time spent on tactics that only become primarily useful if you're captured. in hand to hand, you usually die from a puncture force or blunt trauma at some point, so this type of training is a complete waste of time...almost utterly useless in modern warfare. if the weapons are similiar, or even in some cases inferior, the team that wins the most are the ones that work together and use their mind. gb's will on average win this battle hands down.No way at all. GB's aren't psychopaths, they're cocky Americans. Also, a team of GB's is only as strong as their weakest link. The Russians are all able to independently function by themselves. gb's have no 'weak link'; they're the best of the best. funny you mention 'cocky', seeing as how spets seem to always want to do things on their own. who cares if they're independent...a squad of highly trained soldiers can easily overcome a renegade rambo wannabe.According to trained experts, they can't.And yes, a squad of crappy American soldiers could maybe be an even match for a Russian (which is what you said).
Quote from: Colin Michael on June 11, 2009, 01:35:06 AMQuote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 01:33:21 AMQuote from: Colin Michael on June 11, 2009, 01:27:19 AMQuote from: Master KChief on June 11, 2009, 01:22:10 AM...what does that have to do with anything? how old is the ak47 and how long has it been in use? 50-60 years old and STILL going strong. your point has no validity...if both sides have the same arms and firepower, then you must compare battle tactics. again, you do your fancy little rolling around jig, we'll put a slug in you. again, the battle tactics between the two are tremendously different. the spets, although highly trained, their methods are not based on the team reliance and strategy like that of the gb's. and yeah, the spets are highly trained in pain resistance, but thats alot of training time spent on tactics that only become primarily useful if you're captured. in hand to hand, you usually die from a puncture force or blunt trauma at some point, so this type of training is a complete waste of time...almost utterly useless in modern warfare. if the weapons are similiar, or even in some cases inferior, the team that wins the most are the ones that work together and use their mind. gb's will on average win this battle hands down.No way at all. GB's aren't psychopaths, they're cocky Americans. Also, a team of GB's is only as strong as their weakest link. The Russians are all able to independently function by themselves. gb's have no 'weak link'; they're the best of the best. funny you mention 'cocky', seeing as how spets seem to always want to do things on their own. who cares if they're independent...a squad of highly trained soldiers can easily overcome a renegade rambo wannabe.According to trained experts, they can't.And yes, a squad of crappy American soldiers could maybe be an even match for a Russian (which is what you said).trained experts? somewhat. i've already pointed out many glaring mistakes and flaws. the show is primarily for entertainment value.A (denoting singularity, one, lone, independent) russian soldier will die easily to a TEAM (denoting plurality, more than one, not alone) of gb's. i suggest picking up some simple rts' or even fps' to learn simple warfare strategy as such.
if you're trained to fight independently, how can you possibly fight as a team? i find it amusing how loosely you use the term 'squad' in regards to the spets.
i have a problem with losing my close range weapon after just one use. its seriously one of the most useless weapons i've seen on the show.
... Russians are far more intelligent than Americans genetically ...
Quote... Russians are far more intelligent than Americans genetically ...And the proof of that is?
All professional experts agree with me.
QuoteAll professional experts agree with me.Quoted for lies.
Quote from: CMO Falcon on June 15, 2009, 08:28:01 PMQuoteAll professional experts agree with me.Quoted for lies.quoted for truth.
genetically superior? it amazes me how ignorant people truly can be.
Quote from: Master KChief on June 15, 2009, 11:16:29 PMgenetically superior? it amazes me how ignorant people truly can be.Ignorant of what? Nice appeal to modesty, by the way.
Quote from: Colin Michael on June 15, 2009, 11:39:42 PMQuote from: Master KChief on June 15, 2009, 11:16:29 PMgenetically superior? it amazes me how ignorant people truly can be.Ignorant of what? Nice appeal to modesty, by the way.ignorant to pretty much everything? i've provided countless specifics and facts on why the gb would literally tear apart the spets, and the best you can ever provide is 'nuh uh, no way, no they cant' with no substantiating evidence WHATSOEVER and this completey asinine claim to 'genetic superiority'. you've been outsmarted and outclassed in nearly EVERY aspect regarding this subject (not just by me, but by others as well), and your feeble attempts at constructing anything even REMOTELY valid is just further hurting your credibility. seriously, just give it up while you're not ahead.
Author
Topic: The Deadliest Warrior (Read 11604 times)
