Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
213,518
edits
Yanks With Tanks: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
m (cleanup {{Useful Notes}}) |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 1:
{{Useful Notes}}[[File:F15E_Strike_Eagle.jpg|frame|[[Death From Above]] has never been so stylish.]]▼
<!--
▲<!-- %%ATTENTION EDITORS: Please DO NOT add conversational edits, ESPECIALLY any where you plan to attempt refuting something said in the article with your own comment. REWRITE THE EXAMPLE INSTEAD. DO NOT REPLY TO IT. Read the articles "Repair Dont Respond," "Thread Mode," "Conversation in the Main Page," and "This Troper" for the reasons as to why you should not do this. There are plenty of other places on TV Tropes where you can squabble over your personal opinions about the topic here. -->
▲[[File:F15E_Strike_Eagle.jpg|frame|[[Death From Above]] has never been so stylish.]]
{{quote|"''Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.''"|[[Theodore Roosevelt]]}}
The United States military is the strongest and most effective military on the planet. This is partially because America pours a lot of money into its armed forces, more than its top ten closest competitors combined. Partially it's because this large R&D budget allows American soldiers to stay on the
=== The American military has six component branches: ===
Line 121 ⟶ 117:
* The '''Bell AH-1 Cobra''' was America's first true attack helicopter. It was introduced during Vietnam and provided vital close air support, assisted ground forces, and secured landing zones. Not quite as cool, or as powerful as its successor the Apache--but it's still one heck of a capable aircraft, and don't break down nearly as much as the AH-64. The US Marines still use them, as well as their descendants the AH-1W SuperCobra and AH-1Z Viper.
* The '''Boeing AH-64 Apache''', as noted above, is the successor to the AH-1 Cobra. It's one of the best in the world. They were so feared in the first Iraq War, that Iraqi soldiers would literally surrender at the sight of one.
<!--
Line 263 ⟶ 259:
=== Friendly Fire ===
Since the [[War On Terror]], the United States military (particularly the Air Force) has unfortunately become synonymous with "[[Friend or Foe|friendly fire]]" in world public opinion. If you ask the average citizen of an allied nation who has killed more of their own country's soldiers, they are likely to say "the Americans" over "terrorists." This response is often indicative of what they think of [[Eagle Land|Americans as a whole]] (hint: Flavor #2). It's also apparently backed up by statistics: The [[wikipedia:List of friendly fire incidents|Wikipedia list of friendly fire incidents]] lists 198 incidents in the last four centuries, 57 of which were caused by American fire - and the page does not list all of the known incidents in the Vietnam War.
The stereotype is nothing new; as far back as [[World War II]], there were rumors that the US Army Air Corps bombed friendly targets as often as not. There's a number of reasons why this stereotype has become so prevalent, though:
Line 272 ⟶ 268:
* '''Advances in technology.''' In the Information Age, everything is meticulously recorded and tracked. The modern battlefield allows such precision control of ''everything'' that it has done much to actually reduce the amount of friendly fire incidents. Even worse, modern weapons are so lethal that the margin of error is approaching the Planck Length; you'd better just pray you were aiming in the right spot when you hit the trigger, because once the weapon is released, ''someone'' is going to die.
* '''Media coverage.''' News outlets focus on covering friendly-fire incidents rather than successful missions simply because [[If It Bleeds, It Leads|they draw more attention]]... and, as mentioned, now it's much easier to trace where the misplaced 500-pound smart bomb came from. (Spoiler: [[The Butler Did It]].)
* '''Confirmation bias.''' Foreigners who believe that Americans are "rightly" to blame for all friendly fire cases [[Never My Fault|pointedly ignore]] that friendly fire incidents [http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/3774/ can and do happen in their own armed forces]. Friendly fire has been a problem throughout history, and not just for Americans. For example, the Falklands War saw some spectacular cases of British-on-British friendly fire -- with no Americans around to blame. It should surprise ''no one'' that non-American friendly fire persists in the [[War On Terror]], [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3070875.ece with] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/mar/26/iraq.rorymccarthy1 plenty] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/10/friendly-fire-incident-in_n_111972.html of] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/21/military-police-friendly-fire-death examples].
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Forces With Firepower]]
[[Category:Useful Notes/The United States]]
[[Category:
| |||