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
   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

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Salvo    RE:No Nukes-Advocate Of REason    4/19/2004 10:28:06 AM
You can't take into account Nukes especially for Euro countries (and especially especially UK) because most of these weapons can't be fired unless the US says so. In terms of military projection, the EU countries are just Vassal states directly under the countrol of the US.
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:britain and france   4/19/2004 10:40:41 AM
And the UK has commanded the larger and more important NATO Allied Rapid Reaction Corps since 1999 - including Bosnia and Kosovo. It is formed around the UK's Air Assault Brigade with an integrated aviation component unmatched by any other European country. The new NATO Reaction Forces are designed to let Europeans do more in peacemaking - the Dutch have their own "Force" and the Spanish have their own "Force". No criticism of the French army, but try to put this in perspective; when France gets some heavy lift helicopters and strategic airlift and a few dozen attack helicopters it may come close; until then it is not the same as the ARRC. Please don't pretend it is.
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:britain and france   4/19/2004 10:42:52 AM
And the UK as our ally is currently engaged in more pratice than mere paper theory.
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:No Nukes-Advocate Of REason - Salvo   4/19/2004 10:53:42 AM
Your politics do not concur with reality. Both the UK and France have always maintianed independent deterrents - made more urgent by France leaving NATO command in 1953. If the UK and France had ever been convinced that the US was 100% certain to engage in nuclear war to protect western Europe, then the UK and France wouldn't have gone to the trouble and cost of acquiring nukes. In fact the reverse is true; US nuclear weapons on US bases in the UK have always been under "dual key" control - i.e. they could and cannot be launched from the UK without UK permission. One of the features of the nuclear "trip wire" was to ensure that the US could not be separated from Europe. This is why the Soviet deployment of SS-20 missiles in the 1980's - which could only hit western Europe - was received by the deployment of US cruise missiles in the UK and Italy, precisely to keep the US engaged in any conflict. And by the old jokes that the Royal Navy orders were for 12 ICBM's to go for Moscow and 4 for New York.
 
Quote    Reply

trib    RE:No Nukes-Advocate Of REason - Salvo   4/20/2004 1:42:38 AM
salvo, UK got nukes they can fire without US agreement and it's more true about french nukes which is NOT under US control like you said. On the power projection, please tell me one thing since when UK and France (The 2 EU country with power projection capability) takes orders from US for their military deployment? The Falkland was a US idea? Deplying French troops in Chad, and ivory coast was a US idea? Your vision of the world is somewhat limited, it's true no one can disagree US is the Main military power at this present time, but please, It's not the only military power in the world and EU army are not under strict leadership of the White house. UK enter the Irak Conflict because they want to, not because US ordered them to go.
 
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World   4/20/2004 1:49:53 AM
Man for man I'd actually go Vatican Guard :)
 
Quote    Reply

owain    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World   4/20/2004 3:07:33 AM
Once again these top ten threads are a tad unrealistic, the only statement I have is to those that think that the UK is just a puppet. Be real. The UK has a long history of international relations, an excellent relationship with the US doesn't make us a puppet. I know you wont believe this but still... If we were such a puppet we wouldn't have to have nukes (as someone already pointed out. If we were that bad we would have the same uniform and equipment. Just say that to any UK unit and the 'puppet' would come off and probably hit you in the face!
 
Quote    Reply

bigtasty    RE:Top Ten Armies of the World   4/20/2004 5:55:37 AM
surely n.korea has astronger military than germany?
 
Quote    Reply

Salvo    RE:No Nukes-Advocate Of REason - Salvo   4/20/2004 7:20:24 AM
It may not be specifically written somewhere that the EU must follow Washington's commands but it is implied either through soft power (Economic/polotical) or through other levers.
 
Quote    Reply

owain    RE:No Nukes-Advocate Of REason - Salvo   4/20/2004 7:33:55 AM
Who in their right mind would openly comply with Washingtons requests? Of course subtle suggestions regarding trade, arms , aid are going to be used. No one would dare bite the hand that feeds them, I just resent the blatant statement that the UK is a puppet. When there are countries out there that wouldn't exist realisticaly if it didn't depend on the US. Top Army in the World? The one that has most influence. United States! They not only have the power to project an outstanding amount of power ANYWHERE, but have the unique ability to be needed by most other countries no matter what anyone says.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics