3 ms·
Ok, but they still are more powerful. That’s what the discussion was about. Having a disadvantage and losing doesn’t mean it’s not the most powerful military th
by echoangle 2y ago
Ok, but they still are more powerful. That’s what the discussion was about. Having a disadvantage and losing doesn’t mean it’s not the most powerful military that ever existed.
- croes 2y agoBut it a useless measure if the results aren’t as expected. That’s like saying I have the most expensive car in Formula 1. Powerful is associated with winning that’s the whole point of pointing it out.
- echoangle 2y agoNo, it's like doing a drag race with a formula 1 car against a mini but the mini is on a street and the formula 1 car is on a dirt strip. If you want to compare military power, you would have to look at "Who would win in equal situations", not "Who won a 1 vs 1 with different starting situations". If you had to perform a military action and had to pick either the taliban or the US military to be your military to use, would you ever pick the taliban? The only reason they had a chance was because of external factors, not the power of the military itself.