Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rods2]

Interesting results.



But I suspect that as the question is badly worded, the answers are similarly flawed and if the question was: Would you be willing to fight to defend your country? The results would be very different.

In Europe, don't argue with Finns. I wonder if the result for Finland is a result of their long border with Russia and the Winter War in the 1930's where the Russian bear got badly mauled, but Finland ultimately lost.

[Sir Tigger KC]

Not surprised at the Vietnamese being near the top as the tough little buggers whipped the French and the Yanks! 

I lived there for a while and saw a few 'big hard foreigners' come to a sticky end when they thought they could push their smaller hosts around!   

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

The question is ambiguous.

If Cameron nuked Russia and expected us all to give up our lives for his stupidity.....then no.



However, if that nice Mr Putin suddenly had a 'twitchy' nuclear finger and wiped out half of the country....then yes.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Not surprised at the Vietnamese being near the top as the tough little buggers whipped the French and the Yanks!

I lived there for a while and saw a few 'big hard foreigners' come to a sticky end when they thought they could push their smaller hosts around!   

They did indeed.

[chrisgixer]

Seems to me responses are generally, with some exceptions, related to wealth of the country concerned. Ie the wealthier, the least likely.

No surprise really, is there?

[Terbs]

Change the question to ...'Would you die for your country'....and I would expect a very different reaction

[omega2018]

worryingly there's two nuclear armed countries in the top 10 and the country they would fight is each other.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I'm surprised the Japs least want a rumble.....11%

[Sir Tigger KC]

I'm surprised the Japs least want a rumble.....11%

Not really...... When you've already been nuked a couple of times. 

[Diamond Black Geezer]

Dont think anyone's surprised with Afghan and Pakistan in that top ten, but as said, its an ambiguous question. On the one hand you could use this list as a way of seeing who is the most 'war like' races, on the other hand who's the most 'patriotic' or maybe a blend of the two. But then we're way down the list, and we've been in every War 

Sad to see Belgium so far down, maybe there's a breeding in every generation, that they were so badly mauled in both World Wars, perhaps the feeling is they'd have been better off simply laying down and letting the tanks 'roll by' as it were. A beautiful country which was effectively completely destroyed twice in 30 years. But then again nearly half of Poles would fight, in spite of what was done to their country.

Interesting findings 

[Kevin Wood]

The question is ambiguous.

Indeed. In a world war II situation, what have you got to lose...

If it's one of Tony B. Liar's political crusades based on lies and fabricated evidence, on the other hand, then the "honourable" gentleman would be welcome to go to the front line himself.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

And of course these days what exactly does "your country" mean ? The country you live in ? The country you were born in ? The country which you are culturally / religiously / ancestorally attached to ?

[Varche]

Once you had been fed some propaganda about ISIS fighters eating your babies or similar the percentage would increase.

I think in modern warfare (I might be wrong) the forces don't/won't need untrained canon fodder so the numbers will never be as large again.

[Rods2]

Russia is still using WWII tactics in Ukraine. Massed artillery bombardments which has caused over 60% of Ukraine's casualties, followed by waves of tanks and infantry. This is why Putin on the 28th May, made all casualties a state secret. At Debaltseve in February the Russian army used barrier troops for the first time since WWII, where the conscripts don't want to be there and have been fighting very badly, whereas the reverse is true for Russian special forces (Spetsnaz) who have generally fought well.

The majority of the Russian mercenaries can fight and aim artillery in the morning, but in the afternoon or evening, both go out of the window where they have had their litre or so of Vodka. Often they will then start fighting between themselves or play practical jokes, that seem funny at the time, like waking their sleeping colleagues up with a grenade.

In the coming war between Russia and NATO, then I would expect casualties to be biased very much towards the Russian forces until they 'de escalate' with battlefield tactical nuclear weapons as this is standard Russian military doctrine.

[Gaffers]

Russia is still using WWII tactics in Ukraine. Massed artillery bombardments which has caused over 60% of Ukraine's casualties, followed by waves of tanks and infantry.

Thats because its so bloody effective.  Most countries still try and amass battlegroups of 2 tanks and 2 armoured infantry especially to smash through difficult and well - defended positions. Those that dont are devoid of suitable formations to make them.

until they 'de escalate' with battlefield tactical nuclear weapons as this is standard Russian military doctrine.

So wrong it's not even funny.