Top Ten Armies of the World

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NEXT

ojedgreat my own version of the worlds most powerfull nations 3/30/2004 10:23:41 AM

how can china be number 2 in the place of russia,..and whats germany doing in the list.britain is the strongest nation in eeurope followed by france. in my opinion the list should be as folows: usa russia britain france china northkorea isreal germany india nigeria

Quote Reply

Nasty German Idiot RE:my own version of the worlds most powerfull nations 3/30/2004 12:24:44 PM

Northkorea stronger than Germany ? Well can you give me a reason for that ? They spend all their money on military but doent even come close to the German budget. And i dont even want to talk about their economy and how long it would survive in a War. You could just destroy whats left of their food industry and they would all starve. And personally i dont think you have any Idea of the German Warfighting capability.

Quote Reply

french stratege Take in account short term military potential 3/30/2004 12:50:44 PM

As I said in previous posts to evaluate military power and rank you have to take in account military hardware and its quality INCLUDING FORCE MULTIPLIERS like C4ISR, training, skills, manpower but ALSO technologies, manpower reserve especially on officers and NCO, and war POTENTIAL and ability to scale up quickly. This need a well balanced industry strong in materials(steels, superalloys, aluminium, titane, carbon fibers, rare earths, polymers, etc..), heavy machinery, civilian aeronautic, automotive, electronic components, tooling and instrumentation.Also some assets like reco satellites, nuclear supersilent top subs and intercontinental nuclear ballistic missiles as deterrent are absolutely needed to belong in the first circle of great power. For example if France reintroduce one year mandatory draft AND spend 6.5% of GNP instead of 2 % now it would almost match today US military power in war time.(by having 70% of US brut power). For example France can scale up to MONTHLY rate of 100 fighters per month like Rafales in few months INDEPENDANTLY. And this is only a question of politicall will and perception of threat.

Quote Reply

french stratege Adendum :Take in account short term military potential 3/30/2004 12:53:38 PM

For example if France reintroduce one year mandatory draft AND spend 6.5% of GNP instead of 2 % now it would almost match today US military power in war time.(by having 70% of US brut power). Understand: "war time" after French reserve mobilisation without industry scale up This compare to today US power (without US scaling up)

Quote Reply

Ad RE:Adendum :Take in account short term military potential 3/30/2004 1:00:06 PM

Yes but the probable with producing these ?100 fighters per month? is that you require experienced pilots to fly them, you also speak about a years mandatory draft. I see this as being a contradiction to what you previously said, in terms of quality. Its good to see you back, finally some robust, but interesting discussions!

Quote Reply

Ad RE:Adendum :Take in account short term military potential 3/30/2004 1:00:53 PM

Probable- should read *problem*

Quote Reply

mike_golf RE:Adendum :Take in account short term military potential 3/30/2004 1:16:52 PM

The other issue I would see here, and if you survey the history of modern warfare it is a common problem, is what longer term impact would you have on your economy by your short term "scale up" to meet a threat. Can your economy sustain a 1 year conscript mobilization of the adult male population, the increased spending to ramp up your weapons production and so forth. Do you have enough cash (or gold) and credit to sustain the cost of what you are doing? What happens when the manpower shortage caused by conscription starts impacting your industrial production. Military power is very clearly a derivative of your long term economic power. Many nations have ramped up their short term military power only to find that they lost because they couldn't sustain themselves economically longer term.

Quote Reply

fullamongo RE:my own version of the worlds most powerfull nations - ojedgreat 3/30/2004 1:29:15 PM

ojedgreat, are you saying that north korea would beat south korea in a war? cos south korea is not on your list. Note: south korea has 4,500,000 reserves on top of their standing army.

Quote Reply

fullamongo The List 3/30/2004 1:30:57 PM

i wonder if we could trash out a definitive top ten? (possibly without putting an order on it)

Quote Reply

fullamongo RE:Top Ten Armies of the World 3/30/2004 1:39:59 PM

South korea has t-80u's while north korea has t62's

Quote Reply

FABIO My list of top TEN armed forces 3/30/2004 2:47:41 PM

1 - USA - has no doubt 2 - Russia Russia has the "Know how" to attack any country of the world... They have Nuclear Strategic Forces to Destroy any country as well. They can erase from the map a lot of contries as UK France, or ROK. People will say that Nukes are just blackmails, I agree, but is a power that only US and Russia have. Russian Air Force can also defend and attack... The Russian Navy have problems, but would be necessary just change some budgets. 3 - UK - The also have some "know how" - But the mais problem of UK is that they are a lot dependent of US. Without US support , they couldnt fight long conflits. 4 - France - Same as UK , but without much experience 5 - China - Impossible to be beaten, but still without attack forces... Currently , China has just Great defence forces... (maybe the greatest) 6 - India - Almost the same as China 7 - Germany - They have some limits... but they can improve their armed forces in a few years if they want. 8 ?? 9 ?? 10 ?? People said : Japan, ROK, Australia, Israel, But they are just "states" from US. ROKorea could not face North Korea without US help. The same for the others... I know that people will complain... specially the britishes.... But Sweden?? Please....

Quote Reply

RM-Nod RE:My list of top TEN armed forces 3/30/2004 3:16:45 PM

(ref. nuclear weapons)"but is a power that only US and Russia have." You've got to be kidding, have you not heard of Britain, France or China? These are also substantial nuclear powers. And what capacity does the Russian air force have to attack? I'm getting bored of repeating myself in regards to Russia now. And how are the UK and France dependant on the US?

Quote Reply

mike_golf RE:My list of top TEN armed forces 3/30/2004 3:39:54 PM

not to mention that I think it will take a bit more than some budget changes to fix the problems in the Russian Navy. Or that I think it is fairly clear that ROK could easily defeat DPRK if they stood on the defense, and most likely could invade DPRK and win as well. WITHOUT US support one way or another. DPRK is, much like Iraq was, a hollow shell. The look really good on paper, but when push comes to shove their military is going to fold.

Quote Reply

fullamongo RE:My list of top TEN armed forces - fabio 3/31/2004 11:14:18 AM

Sweden probably has as much right to be in the top ten as australia. Israel may have more nukes than britain although they don't have ICBM's.

Quote Reply

RM-Nod RE:My list of top TEN armed forces - fabio 3/31/2004 12:25:45 PM

Is Israel capable of making there own warheads?

Quote Reply

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NEXT

	News As History - November 21, 2009
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us