User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:16:06 PM EDT
[#1]
85 would lose
Munitions guidance Armor capability Rotary wing aircraft Aiming systems That's just Army |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:16:49 PM EDT
[#2]
10 Army divisions versus 5 now. Not many Combat vets Versus a metric Fuckton of combat vets.
Too close to call. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:19:10 PM EDT
[#3]
If you mean infantry vs infantry with no air or artillery support, 85 would destroy us. In any other conventional scenario, we would wipe them out in the first few hours.
Nuclear? No winners. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:20:51 PM EDT
[#4]
I still had my 1911A1 in 1985, the new guys are SOL.
I miss that old no finish left gal. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:22:11 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
85 would lose Munitions guidance Armor capability Rotary wing aircraft Aiming systems That's just Army Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:22:35 PM EDT
[#6]
In 1985 we would have opened up an unapologetic can of whoop ass. Now our commander in chief would apologize to 1985 and probably bow while at it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:26:09 PM EDT
[#7]
I'm pretty sure that in a nuclear conflict 1985 US nil would kick our ass
more bombers, more ICBMs, more SLBMs, and we still had IRBMs and GLCMs Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:26:18 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In 1985 we would have opened up an unapologetic can of whoop ass. Now our commander in chief would apologize to 1985 and probably bow while at it. No. You're wrong. The 1985 Army was under Reagan. Urkel would go against everything he holds dear and fight. TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:26:29 PM EDT
[#9]
1985 would probably deploy 1 Marine for regular war. If nukes were invoked I'd think two Marines, one to jump on the nuke and the other to finish the fight.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:26:33 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
10 Army divisions versus 5 now. Not many Combat vets Versus a metric Fuckton of combat vets. Too close to call. There were probably closer to 20 divisions in 1985 with nearly all senior NCOs and officers Vietnam veterans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:27:47 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
85 would lose Munitions guidance Armor capability Rotary wing aircraft Aiming systems That's just Army Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. This. Bradley/Chelsea Manning would get a battlefield commission and be a Company Conmander receiving the DSC for "meritorious" achievement in the highest traditions of the Army.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:28:32 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
85 would lose Munitions guidance Armor capability Rotary wing aircraft Aiming systems That's just Army Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. Winner! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:30:21 PM EDT
[#13]
Today's Military: New technology, better understanding of supply and better ways to get things to where they need to go (amateurs study tactics, masters study logistics) and a force that has been at war for the longest in our nations history. Also, the medical knowledge has drastically increased survivability and returns people to the war effort. Not even a question about it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:32:30 PM EDT
[#14]
It would be interesting.
Our (1985) way to clear a building was to turn the fucking thing inside out with HE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:35:23 PM EDT
[#15]
It all comes down to the commander and chief.....
Which would you rather have? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:35:47 PM EDT
[#16]
I'm waiting, waiting for an F14 Tomcat vs XXXXX post. Do it someone.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:35:56 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Today's Military: New technology, better understanding of supply and better ways to get things to where they need to go (amateurs study tactics, masters study logistics) and a force that has been at war for the longest in our nations history. Also, the medical knowledge has drastically increased survivability and returns people to the war effort. Not even a question about it. Also, night vision and body armor are common now. The 1985 guys would get smoked in the dark. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:38:29 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 85 would lose Munitions guidance Armor capability Rotary wing aircraft Aiming systems That's just Army Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. BOOM! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:42:24 PM EDT
[#19]
1985 Mmmm dehydrated pork patty FTW!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:44:59 PM EDT
[#20]
The Abrams had thermal in 1985 correct? M60 TTS as well
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:47:49 PM EDT
[#21]
I'd be a savage if the USMC didn't have powerpoint.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:51:19 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Abrams had thermal in 1985 correct? M60 TTS as well Pretty easy targets for some guys with Javelins. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:51:20 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It all comes down to the commander and chief.....
Which would you rather have? I would rather have Reagan......but zero has killed more people as c in c. Just sayin.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:52:19 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 85 would lose Munitions guidance Armor capability Rotary wing aircraft Aiming systems That's just Army  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:52:26 PM EDT
[#25]
1985 WINS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:54:58 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KC-130 FLT ENG:
I would rather have Reagan......but zero has killed more people as c in c. Just sayin.. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KC-130 FLT ENG:
Quoted:
It all comes down to the commander and chief.....
Which would you rather have? I would rather have Reagan......but zero has killed more people as c in c. Just sayin.. If Reagan where the C&C now what would that stat be? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:55:28 PM EDT
[#27]
85 would win.
they knew how to fight an MCO. Air Force today is broken fighting ISIS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 8:56:18 PM EDT
[#28]
85 didn't have powerpoint
my $ is on 85 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:02:41 PM EDT
[#29]
1985 Military - we not only had a lot more nukes, bigger navy, bigger army, bigger marines, bigger air force...
we had RONALD Fucking Reagan as president. And that guy did not take shit from anybody, unlike our current pussy in chief. So yeah...even though today's weapon systems are far more powerful and sophisticated... our Commander in Chief was better. And dare I say it: our Military Top Brass weren't politically correct.... There's more to a Military than just technology...there's numbers AND there is Quality of Personnel Granted if the Technology is hopelessly out of date....such a force is going to lose...but numbers especially large enough numbers of assets have a quality all of their own. To give you a Historical Example: Germany had Jet fighters, U-Boats, V-2 Rockets, Far better Tanks, and better Generals when taken all together. Yet Germany lost. Germany was overwhelmed during Tank Battles. The US Army typically would have a 3-5:1 advantage over the Germans. In terms of Air Power...we had so many Bombers and Fighter Escorts...Germany just didn't have enough fighters to intercept and knock out our bomber fleets during raids. Uboats - The Type XX! U-Boat was decades ahead of its time. However there were very few of them AND even though the Germans had great Encryption. It was broken. The Germans didn't change the Encryption Key, and Admiral Donitz insisted the U-Boats report their position daily. So we knew where the wolf packs were and would steer convoys around them. And then send in aircraft and destroyers to knock out the U-Boats A Superior Military has many different factors not just a few Whiz Bang Weapons To fight you need good Logistics, (you need to protect your supply chains), for a drawn out conflict you need to have sufficient production capacity. With Nukes...its a different story...60 minutes and both sides made the first exchange. For a second strike exchange another 60 minutes...and then except for Bombers, Cruise Missiles and Tactical Nukes its pretty much over. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:06:57 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also, night vision and body armor are common now. The 1985 guys would get smoked in the dark. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Today's Military: New technology, better understanding of supply and better ways to get things to where they need to go (amateurs study tactics, masters study logistics) and a force that has been at war for the longest in our nations history. Also, the medical knowledge has drastically increased survivability and returns people to the war effort. Not even a question about it. Also, night vision and body armor are common now. The 1985 guys would get smoked in the dark. Hardly. All the 1985 guys would have to do is aim at the reflective belts to find the enemy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:12:29 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also, night vision and body armor are common now. The 1985 guys would get smoked in the dark. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Today's Military: New technology, better understanding of supply and better ways to get things to where they need to go (amateurs study tactics, masters study logistics) and a force that has been at war for the longest in our nations history. Also, the medical knowledge has drastically increased survivability and returns people to the war effort. Not even a question about it. Also, night vision and body armor are common now. The 1985 guys would get smoked in the dark. The modern army would be hamstrung by technobukkake and lawyers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:30:21 PM EDT
[#32]
When I was in during the 80's we did so much chemical warfare training it was crazy.
I was in the "Wing" I worked with pilots that were trained to deliver some pretty cool stuff from their A-4's, from chemicals and some trained to deliver nukes. Also know some F-4 drivers that had some stories. Have total respect for the new crew, but we were bad assed in the day and were cut loose. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:33:50 PM EDT
[#33]
1985 we had TAC with how many thousand attack aircraft?
Not to mention the quantity of heavy units the Army could put into the field... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:37:27 PM EDT
[#34]
1985 Army here.
We'd put a Woodland ass-whipping on you punks today! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:41:06 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1985 we had TAC with how many thousand attack aircraft?
Not to mention the quantity of heavy units the Army could put into the field... The USAF had a SAC back then too Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:44:49 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you mean infantry vs infantry with no air or artillery support, 85 would destroy us. In any other conventional scenario, we would wipe them out in the first few hours. Nuclear? No winners. Nuclear might not have winners, but 1985 USA would pack a LOT more nuclear wallop. If 1985 is allowed a chance at a surprise first strike, she could probably do a damn good job. Knows where to look for important sites. Knows where to hit the bombers. Knows a LOT about finding our boomers... Plus our political leadership is a bunch of incompetents and denialists. 1985 just might pull a clean first strike off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:53:01 PM EDT
[#37]
In 85 civilian's would not be targeted, but if they got in the way too bad. Today holy hell would reign down if one civilian got a scratch.
In 85 Run into a Mosque to hide, no problem turning it in rubble. Today well do nothing for about 10 hours to get permission to do anything. Straight up equal sized infantry units from both era's, us old fucks would be screwed. The equipment and training is much better today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:53:39 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nuclear might not have winners, but 1985 USA would pack a LOT more nuclear wallop. If 1985 is allowed a chance at a surprise first strike, she could probably do a damn good job. Knows where to look for important sites. Knows where to hit the bombers. Knows a LOT about finding our boomers... Plus our political leadership is a bunch of incompetents and denialists. 1985 just might pull a clean first strike off. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If you mean infantry vs infantry with no air or artillery support, 85 would destroy us. In any other conventional scenario, we would wipe them out in the first few hours. Nuclear? No winners. Nuclear might not have winners, but 1985 USA would pack a LOT more nuclear wallop. If 1985 is allowed a chance at a surprise first strike, she could probably do a damn good job. Knows where to look for important sites. Knows where to hit the bombers. Knows a LOT about finding our boomers... Plus our political leadership is a bunch of incompetents and denialists. 1985 just might pull a clean first strike off. Again, we had alot more options back in the day. And alot less "handcuffs" |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:53:57 PM EDT
[#39]
I'm pretty sure in 85' they focused more on combat training than sexual harassment or equal opportunity. Also, much larger military. Sure, no stealth technology and superior radar now... Also better NVG's now. But otherwise...? As a member of the present armed forces, I'd say 1985 wins. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:54:32 PM EDT
[#40]
I've thought about this before and I believe the US Military peaked in it's power near the end of the Cold War.
We had quantity and quality. I'll take 1985 FTW. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:55:39 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
85 would lose Munitions guidance Armor capability Rotary wing aircraft Aiming systems That's just Army Current military would lose because they would be too busy going to sexual harassment and EEOC and cultural sensitivity lectures to fight. This |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:59:56 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm pretty sure in 85' they focused more on combat training than sexual harassment or equal opportunity. Also, much larger military. Sure, no stealth technology and superior radar now... Also better NVG's now. But otherwise...? As a member of the present armed forces, I'd say 1985 wins. The F117 was operational in 1983. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:02:45 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1985 Army here. We'd put a Woodland ass-whipping on you punks today! Awesome post. I assume this fight takes place at either the driftwood or tar heels in Jacksonville. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:06:40 PM EDT
[#44]
in 1985 this was our sexual harassment training... LEAVE THOSE DISEASE RIDDIN FUCKING WHORES ALONE!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:13:19 PM EDT
[#45]
I believe we had 18 Active Army divisions (6 armored!) and 10 ARNG divisions.
US Navy was at nearly 600 ships (including battleships!) vs less than 300 today. US Air Force over 80 fighter squadrons vs 30 something today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:18:54 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you mean infantry vs infantry with no air or artillery support, 85 would destroy us. In any other conventional scenario, we would wipe them out in the first few hours. Nuclear? No winners. This is my take on it as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:20:35 PM EDT
[#47]
Circa 1985, I don't think I ever saw a roly-poly soldier. 2014? Holy crap.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:25:11 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I still had my 1911A1 in 1985, the new guys are SOL.
I miss that old no finish left gal. Around '87 I had a .38 revolver. Don't come at me bro. (USAF) |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:35:22 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe we had 18 Active Army divisions (6 armored!) and 10 ARNG divisions. US Navy was at nearly 600 ships (including battleships!) vs less than 300 today. US Air Force over 80 fighter squadrons vs 30 something today. 14 carriers versus 10. Not sure about readiness levels or aircraft capacity, but it's still notably more carriers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:41:44 PM EDT
[#50]
This is really a .45 vs. 9mm thread.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
