https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l02xADJgscI

A breakdown of the warrior.

romans would win

although not as good individually, romans have much larger and more complete armies

The Romans were very good and disciplined. However they needed direction. Once their leaders fell the unit would be lost until another officer stepped in .they historically had issues with adapting to new battle scenarios . They paid for that shortcoming against the guerrilla tactics of the Gauls.
The Spartans on the other hand were trained not only to work as a group but more so to protect each other . They were also skilled in individual combat . They were not so tied to their leaders as they were to the battle objective.

Spartans were also trained to fight since birth

Chuck Norris would kick both their asses!

Spartans hands down. Roman technology would be the Spartan's only weakness and Spartans would find way to negate the advantage , by better tactics.

Hard to say..I'm thinking the opening scene of Gladiator vs the hotgate scene of 300

I'll take the current US army...

I'm leaning towards the roman, mainly due to tech, steel and Iron against bronze... would be an interesting fight to see... where is Q when you need him.

Did you plan on invading a chow hall or burger king?

bullet catcher shut up

Shut it iTard.