Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Top Ten Armies of the World
Arditi    3/4/2004 3:54:10 PM
According to the CIA and other Intelligence Services (European, Asian, African) this is the tally - based on a Combination of Manpower, Technology, Firepower, Training, Resources, Available Reserves, and Nuclear Potential (Current or Likely): 1. USA 2. China 3. Germany 4. India 5. France 6. Russia 7. UK 8. Italy 9. Israel 10. Pakistan
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
french stratege    rm nod   4/2/2004 10:15:54 AM
You forgot E2C and we have also land attack cruise missiles.3 E2C provide a very usefull low aaltitude coverage about 250 miles around the task force and can coordinate attack. We could redo Falkland war even more easily than UK.No Argentina aircraft would even approach successfully our task force even if they have 2 dozen SU27 (but not awacs and air refueling).In case of war we would use also ferries and civilian auxiliary ships like tankers and ro-ro (as UK can do).UK has only 20 % more capacity for troops aboard pure military landing ship.Don't forgot also BVR capacity for fighters. Also commonwealth capacity depend on political will of other commonwealth country. It is different than having already a logistic military base, maintenance facilities and prepositionned supply. For chance geographical position of our bases is well located: south America, Dakar and Djibouti, la Reunion and New Caledonia.Close to main potential theaters of operation. I don't change my point of view.
 
Quote    Reply

Arditi    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World   4/2/2004 12:43:36 PM
The French are the only Country that owns the distinction of having lost to the Italians twice.
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:rm nod   4/2/2004 1:13:31 PM
"we have also land attack cruise missiles" You mean Scalp? Yes but you only have a maximum of 40 aircraft carrying these and that assumes your carrier is only embarked with offensive aircraft. The actual number of offensive aircraft is 37 assuming the usual 3 E2C are embarked, 2 Invincibles carry around the same number aircraft (38 with 6 AEW SeaKings). So we can assume the same amount of Scalp/Storm shadow can be carried. Though Frances aircraft are superior to the Harrier in AA combat the Harrier GR7 is very capable in the air to ground role annd has a similar range to that of the Super Etentard so the CDG does not give a massivley more capable land attack capability in my opinion. However the UK also has longer range TLAMs which can be fired covertley from most enemies. It is this fact that I believe gives the UK a better land attack capability. "We could redo Falkland war even more easily than UK" Do you mean more easily than we did originally? If so then I agree though I would have thought that would be obvious. However if you mean better than the UK could do now then I have to disagree. The UK would barley have to go anywhere near the islands with any surface combatants thanks to TLAM. "In case of war we would use also ferries and civilian auxiliary ships like tankers and ro-ro (as UK can do)" It's not as simple as that, at least not against an oponant with good air assets. The FN has only 17 major and minor surface combatants with any air defences compared to the UK's 33. These ships are needed to escort your logistical ships and without them any operation against anyone with good air forces or ship to ship missiles would be difficult. "Also commonwealth capacity depend on political will of other commonwealth country. It is different than having already a logistic military base, maintenance facilities and prepositionned supply. For chance geographical position of our bases is well located: south America, Dakar and Djibouti, la Reunion and New Caledonia.Close to main potential theaters of operation." I don't think Quokka meant the UK has the commonwealth to help out with logistics, I think he meant more as general back up. But as Rule points out the UK also has many bases around the world, as he has listed, yet despite the number of conflicts the UK has been involved in few have been used at all. To repeat what he says, using these bases means you have to take detours which ultimatley is difficult and costly.
 
Quote    Reply

fullamongo    RE:This place has gone a little nuts... - and to civvy - RM nod   4/2/2004 1:47:23 PM
"so the Harrier can intercept the TU-160s when they get withing 265km of the carriers which is before they are close enough to fire there missiles" The indian/russian PJ-10 has a range of 300Km, is stealth and supersonic. The Kh 55 (12 carried by a blackjack) has a range of 3,000Km. Russians also have tu22m3 and tu95's. I think they have the measure of the RN
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:rm nod/French Strat   4/2/2004 3:16:56 PM
1. What is the organization of French amphibious forces? Numbers of LPD/LPH group and amphibious helos, landing/assault craft? The name/number of the specialist amphibious brigade/division would help. 2. Falklands. A subject, as you know, on which I abhor superficial analysis. As in "do the Falklands" - do you mean your present equipment against 1982 Argentina or 2004 Argentina? With or without Mount Pleasant airfield? If you put the 1982 Argentine air force on Mount Pleasant today the job would be a lot tougher. And please "mind the gap" - it is one thing to fight a carrier-to-shore battle. It is very different when your amphibious group has to close the gap and must be protected during the landings. Hence my question about the specialist French amphibious group.
 
Quote    Reply

Israel    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World   4/2/2004 9:39:49 PM
I dont like Israeli army being at the ninth place. Look at the stupidity of this report, india has mostly russian made weapons but her army is better than russia, what joke.
 
Quote    Reply

fullamongo    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World -Israel   4/3/2004 12:17:50 PM
Do you think Israel should be lower??
 
Quote    Reply

Amihai    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World -Israel*(for israel)   4/3/2004 3:10:04 PM
Ammmm, India sure does have a Russian weapon but an Armey rating isn't just how big is the army and how much weapons does he got, Israel have a small well trained Armey with new hi-tech weapons for her soldiers, that what made her Armey better then her Arabs neighbors it the last 60 years. But you should also take in charge the ?homeland protection?! The Israeli Armey is only for defense (not the fence, heard it once, not funny!!) purpose (I?m not sure about the spelling of the last word) only. I think that Israel should be a bit higher (something like 4-6 more) . And another point, Israel is now getting 102 brand new f-16i;s. Now after that(year 2008) Israel goanna have the second largest air force in the world, even larger then UK.
 
Quote    Reply

Amihai    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World -Israel*(for israel)   4/3/2004 3:12:04 PM
And another thing, Israel is selling India all of her high tech weapons then that means that we have and advantage on her
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World -Israel*(for israel)   4/3/2004 3:20:23 PM
What will be the compesition of the Israeli air force? PS - it won't be second largest because China at least will have massive numbers of aircraft. Not all that good but still in terms of numbers huge.
 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy