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
AdamB       1/25/2007 9:42:14 AM
"Italy surpassed Britain in GDP in 1987"
 
Italy surpassed Britain in 1987 but then Britain overtook the Italians  again in around 1998 and the French in 2000.
 
Britain - $2.341
GDP per capita - $31,400
 
France - $2.154 trillion
GDP per capita - $30,100
 
Italy - $1.78 trillion
GDP per capita - $29,700
 
source: CIA World Factbook
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       1/25/2007 10:08:53 AM
When you define military rank of a world power, you have to rank it against its ability to counter a potential threat worldwide, if war has to start in the coming weeks.
Of course such a power is ranked with its ability to act independantly, to support blackmail of a third party and to protect its territory agaisnt an existing threat, and to get a military victory at the end.
Ability to get a victory depends on existing assets and ability to extend this assets during a war to achieve victory even if it takes 2 or 3 years.
Falkland experience and other like Suez, show you can not count everytime on your traditional allies to support you, so you have to go alone.
0 (prerequisite): to have total  independant freedom of action
Meaning no dependance on weapon use.so to have its own weapons or being able to substitute them by its own in a short time (likely within months or in a year): Rank is USA then Russian and France (all 3 fully independant) then UK and China (limited dependancy on some systems)
1: To avoid nuclear blackmail means having independant world wide nuclear weapons:
Rank is USA, Russia, France, are in the first group then UK (US partly dependant) and China (very few warheads able to be send at the opposite of the earth).
2: Having a force able to defends its territory
In the first group, USA, and France are safe (no continental threat for France ) as UK in the second so they do need strong ground forces in metropolitan area.
3 Having an army able to be projected
In the first group, USA, and France are able to project worlwide as UK in the second group but only US and France have full means of assessing situation (satellites, worldwide ELINT station, space surveillance etc..) , real carrier, and overseas base worldwide with depot and standing troops.Only US , France and UK have quality force which can handle a much bigger third world army while deploying a well inferior army in number.
4 Having an army to extend quickly to replace losses and increase it power
Only USA, France, and Russia produce alone all necessary state of the art weapons, have weapons production line open for all kind of system (or under cocoon) and fully technologically independant while UK is close.Only USA , France and UK have easy access to war loans.All the five powers , have sufficient manpower (officers and NCO to extend by several time)
 
So the rank is obvious:
1 USA, 2 France, 3 Russia, 4 UK, 5 China.
Then Japan, Germany, India, Italy (more potential power than real one but it give them a real weight)
 
 
Quote    Reply

Military power       1/29/2007 10:25:01 AM
Your list is a complete joke.lol china india above russia? and this includes nuclear potential? i dont know why alot of you guys rate china as a military superpower most of their weapons are still old and they depend on the russians for oil and weapons. The only thing going for china is a booming economy and manpower!!! how do u fight a war without oil? or quality equipment ? Sure they have the manpower!  manpower is useless without the right equipment!!  i think the chinese will even need permission from the russia's even to take back taiwan back because they will need the oil flowing. India? simply broke.  My list will be  1.USA 2.UNITED KINGDOM  3.FRANCE 4. RUSSIA 5. CHINA 6. INDIA 7.GERMANY 8.ISRAEL 9. JAPAN 10. ITALY 
 
Reason for placing russia above India and China is they posses russian made exquipment which am sure the russians will know how to counter them. russia has a larger oil reserve than both, more nuclear weapons and a more technological superior equipment.
 
Quote    Reply

Ezekiel       2/1/2007 8:10:33 AM
1. USA 2. Russia 3. UK 4. China 5. India 6. Israel 7. France 8. Germany 9.pakistan 10. Italy
 
Quote    Reply

PuckaMan       2/1/2007 9:00:48 PM
I can't believe that this thread is still going..... Since it started, I've lived and travelled in Asia, finished University and other things... Unfortuantely the 3 years have not yielded any intelligent analysis or anyone who actually realises that this is a pointless, boring thread. Do yourself a favour and ignore it.
 
Quote    Reply

dba    SK performed very well in Vietnam.   2/2/2007 1:38:26 PM

This list is not definitive. I'm not entirely happy with it myself.

1 USA
2 Russia
3 China (Dubious)
4 Republic of Korea
5 India
6 Germany
7 UK
8 France
9 Israel
10 Sweden

Special mention goes to vietnam who've beaten France, USA and China in the past 50 years.


And special mention should go to South Korea which maintained 3 combat divisions (2 marine & 1 army I believe) in Vietnam.  They performed so well and mauled vietcongs and NVA units so badly that Ho Chi Minh eventually ordered his troops to avoid South Korean troops unless they were 100% sure of defeating South Korean troops. 

And here is a page from US Army website on the South Korean troops in Vietnam.> some of the kill ratios SK troops got from different battles.  No wonder Ho Chi Minh ordered his troops to avoid SK troops.
 
Quote    Reply

dba    SK performed very well in Vietnam.   2/2/2007 2:11:05 PM

This list is not definitive. I'm not entirely happy with it myself.

1 USA
2 Russia
3 China (Dubious)
4 Republic of Korea
5 India
6 Germany
7 UK
8 France
9 Israel
10 Sweden

Special mention goes to vietnam who've beaten France, USA and China in the past 50 years.


And special mention should go to South Korea which maintained 3 combat divisions (2 marine & 1 army I believe) in Vietnam.  They performed so well and mauled vietcongs and NVA units so badly that Ho Chi Minh eventually ordered his troops to avoid South Korean troops unless they were 100% sure of defeating South Korean troops. 

And here is a page from US Army website on the South Korean troops in Vietnam.> some of the kill ratios SK troops got from different battles.  No wonder Ho Chi Minh ordered his troops to avoid SK troops.
 
Quote    Reply

scuttlebut steve    its all about nukes   2/4/2007 12:56:41 AM
try this:  USA
            RUSSIA
            UK
            FRANCE
            CHINA
these countries are the top 5, and tied for 6 is everyone with limited nuclear capability and tied for dead last is everyone else.  only the US and Russia have the power (nuke wise) to blanket the world with nuclear explosions, britain and france field ssbns that can wipe out entire continents, and china has lots of nukes too.  all of the other nuclear powers ( been a long time since i looked at any numbers so correct me if i am wrong) can cause regional destruction with limited number of limited range nuclear strikes, and all the non-nuke countries are SOL cause they cant shoot down ICBMs and they cant launch their own weapons in retaliation.  anyone disagree?
         
 
Quote    Reply

Shagga2    Italian Army   2/15/2007 3:57:22 PM
Why everybody thinks the Italian Army is that bad, and its soldiers the worst?
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    Ignorance.   2/15/2007 5:21:42 PM

Why everybody thinks the Italian Army is that bad, and its soldiers the worst?
1. Isonzo/Caporetto
2. Mussolini.
3. But mainly because they don't bother to dig into the history deeply for the whys of 1 and 2; and are thus revealed to be superficial thinkers who accept foolish stereotyping.

Sort of like those who ignorantly bash the French.
Maybe if some would read the unit history of the Ariete Division  in North Africa for example, the bravery and skill of Italian soldiers fighting under the worst conditions imaginable, would be correctly appreciated. The field grade leadership wasn't that bad either at the NCO or the officer cadre. Even the generalship when the generals weren't Mussolini flakes was better than decent.

Italian artillery was always better than German.

Herald

Herald
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics