if canada put more into their armed forces godknows who would be the top dog,their combined task force(SAS) have a high failure rait inwhich many former US marines and legionaire applicants appy. along with australia,canada is one to watch. both i think are sleeping dragons.

The problem with deciding how a army should be feared is that people focus on those incidents which which in themselves are super-human, but somewhat rare in themselves. For those who hold up the Marine Corps, they cite Belleau Wood and Chosin Reservoir. For [force], they cite [action] rather then doctrines, equipment and whatnot. Rather then citing individual actions it might do a bit better to cite consistent trends that seperate a army from the pack: like the Mongols and their mobility and ability to commit mass murder.

if u look at doctrine then i think the russians and the chinese would be the meanest. they would get u at all costs. loss of life and property are not considered. if they wanna wipe u out they'll do it

I suppose it boils down to who's doing the fearing. The UK doesn't need to 'fear' Germany because we aint gonna go to war. So really it would depend on who you are risking pi$$ing off.

The Italians If you were in the Wehrmacht what would frighten you more Canadians (or whoever) in front of you,or italians beside you?

from what ive heard it still remains to be the israeli defence force and secondly the russians,and i think the serbian and montenegro army are up there too.

I'd have to say that the most feared modern army was the Warsaw Pact (Mostly Red Army). They spawned the creation of NATO, the entire US heavy armored system of warfare, all the combined arms/interdiction/etc. tacticts, etc. etc. And for pure savagery, read about the Russian war with Chechnya. While the soldiers serving in that theatre were for the most part ill-trained and lacked leadership, they were still quite savage to the local population. Imagine the Red Army at the height of its power (around 1970) with an Army both disciplined, trained, and barbaric. Bad times. For overall human history, I would have to say that the Romans were the most feared army in history. Their dominance lasted for many centuries, unlike the Mongols or subsiquent militaries. They were well-trained, tough, and ruthless.

Good observations. One reason for Roman military dominance, was that they were infantry, while the mongol were cavalry. One a cavalry horde is stopped, they lose, as the horses will eat any grain or grass in the area.

But, what other cavalry has managed to conquer and create the largest contiguous land empire in the world. The Romans never achieved the ability to conduct continental battles concurrently and synchronised to come together to a common junction point - a literal meeting engagement. The mongols were able to seize and hold at times without resorting to war due to the fact that they had terrified the local population from past practices - thats no mean feat. Maybe the thread could expand to best infantry (pre 1st millenia and post 1st millenia) best non mechanised cavalry (pre 1st millenia and post 1st millenia) best mechanised cavalry (pre 1st millenia and post 1st millenia) or do we take modern armies as a point in time due to weapons technology? eg is it the machine gun, aerial warfare, the dreadnought etc... etc etc...

[best mechanised cavalry (pre 1st millenia and post 1st millenia)] eg, do chariots qualify as pre millenia mechanised cavalry?