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
RM-Nod    Yohda - Power Projection   4/7/2004 10:41:17 AM
Where to start, lets see... The UK's projection capabilitis currently stand at :- 480 Logistical and Support Ships 129 Naval Ships (33 major surface combatants, 15 SSN/SSBNs) 83 Large Transport Aircraft 370 Transport Helicopters We also have many bases and friendly nations who can provide bases around the world. So in theory we could transport our entire military force if we needed. This consists of around 386,468 Personnel + 170,000 liable to recall 5000 Armoured vehicles 1000 Artillery pieces (approx) 300 Air defence systems (approx) 400 Attack helicopters 362 Combat aircraft 111 Training aircraft w/ combat capability 81 Minor surface combatant ships 33 Major surface combatant ships 11 SSNs 28 Maritime, fixed wing combat aircraft 11 AEW Helicopters 7 Fixed wing AEW/AWACS 4 SSBNs With this comes significant stand off weaponry allowing the UK to strike targets out of reach of counter attacks. So if it came to the crunch the UK is very capable of taking on large or equal apponants if needed. However in the modern world this does not happen very often (it hasn't happened since Korea) and is never likley to happen where one nation goes it alone. On the other hand if something catastrophic did happen then only the US, UK and France would have any capability to do anything about it. Just to reiterate ad's question, how is China able to attack the UK without nuclear weapons?
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Accurate Defence Budgets   4/7/2004 10:43:51 AM
Ad, the UK defence budget is around $50bn. It's on the MoD web site but it's hard to find.
 
Quote    Reply

Polar    RE:Polar, RE: Ad   4/8/2004 6:22:04 AM
Well, I'm no friend of alternative history as well (sounds like a contradiction...). But: I'm no economist with degree, but a distinct amount of german scientists, officers and commercial leaders as well as the heavy industry as a whole was able to field an army that declassed Europe. Same can and will happen again somewhere else. If you've got the right (or wrong, IMHO) people and a grudge or a goal. Query: Well, maybe I do not understand your last comments because of my language deficies ( as I am not a native english speaker), but what is the difference of PPP and GDP in that context?
 
Quote    Reply

Ad    RE:Polar   4/8/2004 9:03:56 AM
PPP tends to grossly over estimate a certain nations GDP, while the traditional MER way of working things tends to be the most accurate. Take a look at this explanation of defence spending. link
 
Quote    Reply

   RE:Polar   4/8/2004 9:23:09 AM
China isnt really anything without the US, most of the toy/dvs/ps2s compaines are moving to china for cheap labor if war ever happend US wouldnt import all those toys and china would fall back too the dark age 10 fold.Also keep in mind that 10 billion a year the US gives to keep china from straving would be gone too.
 
Quote    Reply

   RE:Polar   4/8/2004 9:29:01 AM
Also, how do you guys come up with just U.K vs china, china couldnt even get out of its backyard if it wanted too.U.K wouldnt fight alone, Common Wealthe & US on there side any maybe some E.U nations.
 
Quote    Reply

ArrowGuns    Ad: question   4/8/2004 10:57:15 PM
This whole scenario of China vs. UK or for that matter UK vs. anybody is ridiculous. Why would any country except Islamic terrorists dream of attacking UK? What for? Now the question: The clear and present danger for UK (that I read somewhere) was the negative population growth observed in most ethnic groups. With the exception of Moslems. Is the prediction that UK (and maybe France) will be majority Islamic by 2030? Is there truth in it? Could you check for demographic and census reports within your country and confirm? Apart from this, IMHO, UK has no enemies in the world today. It sure has several die-hard patriots who sometimes get blinded by nationalism and complacency. The East is catching up with you faster than you would like to believe.
 
Quote    Reply

dudley    RE:Price of War: Ad, Yodha   4/9/2004 12:24:13 AM
in an air battle or sea i can see.but not on the ground near india or china but in a far off place things being equal you bet.
 
Quote    Reply

Ad    RE:Yodah   4/9/2004 8:01:57 AM
Arrows, I think that the Muslim population growth is scare mongering, at the moment there are approximately one million Muslims inside Britain and three million other non-Anglo-Saxons. It would take some extreme population decrease in the Anglo Saxon population for this to occur. The Muslim population of 2030 stands a far better chance of being British anyway; apathy towards religion, roast beef, pint of Carling, going to the football, wearing Western style fashion etc, I would assume that the assimilation process would have happened and that many Muslims would consider themselves to be English (if their born in England of course) and British second. Obviously Islam may still play a part, but not to the same degree as it may do now. I think the younger generations are only bound by it due to their parents. I know that the China question was a totally improbable situation. However, I was trying to make it obvious to Yodah that Britain has ?Power Projection?, which means that Britain, if it so did wish could attack China. He doesn?t seem to be able to comprehend the strength of Britain?s Naval forces or Britain?s stand off capabilities, such as TLAM coming from any of Britain?s 11 SSN?s. Or the possibility of TLAM coming from T-45 on the second batch onwards. Britain is the more capable military power in both offence and defence. This is down in part to Britain having a very high-tech armed forces. An example being that in Kosavo, 80% of all munitions dropped by Britain were Paveway II smart weapons. While the USAF used a smaller number, just 73% of all bombs dropped were smart. It is also down to Britain?s Royal Navy, which is the worlds second largest, and the benefits this creates. The modernisation of the fleet is only going to strengthen this, and it will increase the number of hull?s. As a pure example, a T45 using the PAAMS system would be able to cope with several PLAAF air-attacks, as the PLAAF would be unable to ?swamp? a British taskforce, containing three or four of these vessels, as this system can control many Aster-15 and 30 missile at the same time. I?m not for one minute suggesting that Britain would ever fight China, however, the fact that Britain could pick and choose its battles makes it a far more flexible force, as Dudley said ?a battle fought somewhere neutral?? this would be impossible, as China could not move anything and sustain anything bigger than Brigade size. While Britain could move all of its forces to fight that battle. If for some reason British and Chinese troops did clash, then superior British equipment, training and experience would give the British troops the edge over the PLA troops. Yodah doesn?t seem capable of realising any of this, as his military knowledge appears to be extremely limited. He can only see 2.5 million PLA servicemen and how this would instantly make China a viable military machine. Discounting, quality of equipment, quality of opposition, quality of training and the huge technology gap.
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Yodah   4/9/2004 9:10:24 AM
Yodah, you don't seem to understand that you don't have to be able to invade and beat a county one on one to claim your force is "better". You are right that we probably couldn't invade China but could China invade Britain, even it it somehow magically got it's entire force to France? The answer is no, so now is Britain better? According to your logic then yes we are but then you say that China is better because it could defend against a British attack. I'm afraid your method is highly confused. What Ad is pointing out to you is that Britain fully capable of defending itself but it can also move it's force to take the fight to the enemy, protect out interests, protect our allies interests etc etc. That is something the Chinese military or any other (apart from France and the UK) can't do. How does that make China a better force than the British one? PS I see that when your assertion that UK projection could only be achieved with US help was proved wrong you now try to claim that all of the UK's friends around the world are only Friends with Britiain because of the US, this is the most desperate attempt to keep yourself in teh argument I have seen, Britain has not only the commonwealth but many dependancies, allies, trading partners etc etc that have been friends with Britain for a very long time and has nothing to do with the US. You obviously have something against the UK or something because you keep making these claims and have absolutley nothing to back them up. Either put up or shut up, it's up to you.
 
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