Russia is a weak country militarily, as shown by the Battle of Khasham, where 40 US troops fought against an entire armored division of Russian "mercenaries" (actually Russian army soldiers), and the US forces emerged without so much as a paper cut while the Russian side received 100% casualties (every soldier either wounded or killed) and all but 2 of the Russian vehicles were destroyed.
One is a ex-Communist nation still suffering the aftereffects of those decades of corruption and economic rot, while the other is a Communist nation still reeling from their own failed social-engineering policies while their "army" hasn't fought against any non-Chinese-citizen target since Nixon and/or Carter were in the White House.
Couldn't the same be said about our army since we barley use any of it in the Middle East? Neither side has an army with experience fighting a true modern day war with drones, missiles, and other new weapons. Fighting terrorists is in no way comparable to fighting a fully prepared army.
I just showed you how our two largest enemies, Russia and China, are both completely incapable of fighting with America's armed forces (the Battle of Khasham only happened in FEBRUARY 2018, about 2.5 years ago). Even if we faced them in battle, their weak morale (from either "having such a massive defeat in their recent history" or "being spoiled rotten") means that they wouldn't last long under a heavy assault.
There is plenty of evidence in Syria that Russia was helping various Syrian terrorist groups as part of an effort to prop up Assad while undermining the US forces in the area, so we already have extensive experience combating both their weapons and their tactics, as well as thorough experience defeating their troops.
Many of the next-largest armies (such as India, Japan, the Gulf Cooperation Council, Britain, etc.) are our allies, often with long histories opposing Russia and/or China.
Our troops don't need to all directly experience combat if we can have the combat veterans share their knowledge with the rest of the army, letting us get rid of what doesn't work and focus on what does.
And all that's not even mentioning the "Third Revolution in Military Affairs", or "3RMA", that the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) has developed over the past few decades, and shared with us within the last ~3-4 years (as shown by the Marine Corps ditching their tank division for smaller Special-Ops teams that are more universally-capable), and shared with our other allies at some unknown time (as shown by India following a similar change in tactics to the GCC and the USA).
Russia is a weak country militarily, as shown by the Battle of Khasham, where 40 US troops fought against an entire armored division of Russian "mercenaries" (actually Russian army soldiers), and the US forces emerged without so much as a paper cut while the Russian side received 100% casualties (every soldier either wounded or killed) and all but 2 of the Russian vehicles were destroyed.
Meanwhile, China is still suffering from their One Child policy under Mao, with most of their troops being single-children who were spoiled rotten by their parents, turning them into "wimps, sissies, and little emperors", and the entire army as a whole having no combat experience since a brief foray into the Vietnam War in the 1970s.
One is a ex-Communist nation still suffering the aftereffects of those decades of corruption and economic rot, while the other is a Communist nation still reeling from their own failed social-engineering policies while their "army" hasn't fought against any non-Chinese-citizen target since Nixon and/or Carter were in the White House.
Couldn't the same be said about our army since we barley use any of it in the Middle East? Neither side has an army with experience fighting a true modern day war with drones, missiles, and other new weapons. Fighting terrorists is in no way comparable to fighting a fully prepared army.
What "fully prepared army" are we fighting?
I just showed you how our two largest enemies, Russia and China, are both completely incapable of fighting with America's armed forces (the Battle of Khasham only happened in FEBRUARY 2018, about 2.5 years ago). Even if we faced them in battle, their weak morale (from either "having such a massive defeat in their recent history" or "being spoiled rotten") means that they wouldn't last long under a heavy assault.
There is plenty of evidence in Syria that Russia was helping various Syrian terrorist groups as part of an effort to prop up Assad while undermining the US forces in the area, so we already have extensive experience combating both their weapons and their tactics, as well as thorough experience defeating their troops.
Many of the next-largest armies (such as India, Japan, the Gulf Cooperation Council, Britain, etc.) are our allies, often with long histories opposing Russia and/or China.
Our troops don't need to all directly experience combat if we can have the combat veterans share their knowledge with the rest of the army, letting us get rid of what doesn't work and focus on what does.
And all that's not even mentioning the "Third Revolution in Military Affairs", or "3RMA", that the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) has developed over the past few decades, and shared with us within the last ~3-4 years (as shown by the Marine Corps ditching their tank division for smaller Special-Ops teams that are more universally-capable), and shared with our other allies at some unknown time (as shown by India following a similar change in tactics to the GCC and the USA).