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: Most Powerful Military of All Time in Terms of Global Percentage
Aeb4ever    1/13/2006 1:20:45 AM
What was the most powerful military of all time in terms of global share of military power? For example, the USA is currently ranked at having about 53% of total naval power. I am referring in terms of all branches vs the world. My votes would be either the Mongols at height, Romans at height, English at height, USA after WWII, or USA after Cold War. Can’t make a guess at each countries percentage though. Fell free to add your own list or make a guess at the percentages of mine.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
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   NEXT
Ehran       2/9/2007 2:54:27 PM

"The Brits could not have defeated Neopoleonic France by themselves. "

 

Well, they did in 1805, when Nelson defeated not only Napoleonic France but also her ally Spain, in the same battle at Trafalgar.

 

Look at the statistics in that battle -

 

Britain (on her own -

449 dead,
1,214 wounded

----------------

 


4,480 dead,
2,250 wounded,
7,000 captured,
21 ships captured,
1 ship blown up

 

And the combined forces of Napoleonic France and Spain had more ships in that battle than the British did.



one battle does not win a war like that.  to defeat france the british would have had to have fielded an army of somewhat comparable size and while the money was there the manpower was lacking for that.  i suppose they could have recruited the assorted germans of the day into the army and indian recruits would certainly have filled the ranks wonderfully well but that just wasn't how things were done back in the day.
in the end that fine old combination of english gold and somebody else's blood beat nappy into the ground (eventually).
 
Quote    Reply

Shooter2K       2/9/2007 6:08:33 PM

"THe poms (English) and Germans get a honourable mention for their heights but they always had several large competitors and never controlled such a monopoly like the said empires/nations... "

wrt the poms - wtf??? at once stage they dominated 1/4 of the known world - and by known world we're talking at an intercontinental level. a lot of the other major powers mentioned here dominated their known world but it was transnational, transregional or transcontinental.

The poms were the first major intercontinental superpower of their time - their navy was always designed to be able to fight two geographical wars at once - and they were the first real intercontinental power to fully appreciate the need to protect SLOCs. - Look what they did to the Spanish in Elizabeths time - even though they were smaller they absolutely ruined the economic base of the spanish and neutered their ability to fund war.

the mongols owned the largest contiguous empire of any country in the world - but the poms owned, managed and defended the largest non contiguous empire - by a golden mile.

they never lost their empire due to military conflict. the same can't be said for quite a few of the others.
Some minor defects above; The Mongol or any other primitive Empire never came close to the total land mass under USSR rule! The mongols were pikers in that league.
But the British Empire was far and away the largest of it's kind in history! There are no others in the same league!!! But when it comes to your question about Military Power ratios, the post WW-II USA was/is far and away the most powerfull force that has ever existed on the face of this planet!!!!


 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       2/10/2007 1:31:46 PM
"one battle does not win a war like that.  to defeat france the british would have had to have fielded an army of somewhat comparable size and while the money was there the manpower was lacking for that.  i suppose they could have recruited the assorted germans of the day into the army and indian recruits would certainly have filled the ranks wonderfully well but that just wasn't how things were done back in the day.
in the end that fine old combination of english gold and somebody else's blood beat nappy into the ground (eventually)."
 
 
Britain doesn't need a large army because it's an island. 
 
As for the Napoleonic Wars, Britain won, whereas Napoleon (the 19th Century's equvalent of Hitler) lost, with the United States on their side.
 
 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       2/10/2007 1:37:59 PM
" I'm saying that THE OTTOMANS WERE THE MOST POWERFULL EMPIRE BETWEEN 1450-1650 after that they began to lose their power.Understand?"
 
Spain and Portugal were the world's two superpowers in those days.  In those days Spain's navy ruled the waved like Britain's did in later centuries.
 
But it still failed to invade England when it sent an Armada - the largest naval invasion force in history at that time - to the English Channel.  Despite the Royal Navy not even being in existence at the time - England had just ragtag colelction of merchant ships and privateering vessels, etc - the English, led by Sir Francis Drake, still managed to defeat the Armada.
 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       2/10/2007 1:50:55 PM
"one battle does not win a war like that.  to defeat france the british would have had to have fielded an army of somewhat comparable size and while the money was there the manpower was lacking for that.  i suppose they could have recruited the assorted germans of the day into the army and indian recruits would certainly have filled the ranks wonderfully well but that just wasn't how things were done back in the day.
in the end that fine old combination of english gold and somebody else's blood beat nappy into the ground (eventually)."




The French and the Americans lost the Napoleonic Wars. http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/lachen/laughing-smiley-014.gif" border=0>

The Napoleonic Wars were fought between 1792 and 1815.


The Allies (goodies) -

Britain
Austrian Empire
Portugal
Prussia
Russia
Spain
Sweden
Ottoman Empire
-----------------------------

The Axis (baddies)

First French Empire
Italy
Naples
Holland
Duchy of Warsaw
Confederation of the Rhine
Kingdom of Denmark/Norway
United States
Muscat and Oman
Here's what Wikipedia says about the Napoleonic Wars -

(Unlike the rest of the Allied forces) Britain remained at war throughout the ENTIRE period of the hostilities of the Napoleonic Wars. Protected by naval supremacy, the United Kingdom was able to maintain a low-cost low-intensity warfare on a global scale for over a decade (defeating the French at Trafalgar in 1805). Commitment increased in the Peninsula War, where, protected by topography, guerrilla activity, and sometimes massive earthworks, the British army succeeded in harassing French forces for several years. By 1815, the British army would play a central role in the final defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    European chest thumping.   2/10/2007 1:59:43 PM

" I'm saying that THE OTTOMANS WERE THE MOST POWERFULL EMPIRE BETWEEN 1450-1650 after that they began to lose their power.Understand?"

 

Spain and Portugal were the world's two superpowers in those days.  In those days Spain's navy ruled the waved like Britain's did in later centuries.

 

But it still failed to invade England when it sent an Armada - the largest naval invasion force in history at that time - to the English Channel.  Despite the Royal Navy not even being in existence at the time - England had just ragtag colelction of merchant ships and privateering vessels, etc - the English, led by Sir Francis Drake, still managed to defeat the Armada.

Try looking at the Ming when thou boast.;

h*ttp://www.international.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=10387

Zheng He's Voyages of Discovery

Noted oceanic scientist Jin Wu discusses the 15th century expeditions of the Chinese mariner Zheng He & the celebration of the 600th anniversary of his first voyage

By Richard Gunde

What Zheng He accomplished, Jin Wu declared, must be considered an achievement for all of mankind, not just a Chinese achievement.

On April 12 Jin Wu, distinguished oceanic scientist and former Minister of Education of the Republic of China (on Taiwan), discussed Zheng He's voyages of discovery and the upcoming celebrations of the 600th anniversary of his first voyage.

In his talk, Professor Wu emphasized that, especially since the documentary record surrounding Zheng He (sometimes written Cheng Ho; 1371-1435) and his voyages is so thin, oceanic scientists and engineers and other physical scientists can provide important insights to supplement the work of historians.

Historical Background

Professor Wu began by briefly retracing the history of Zheng He's voyages. Upon the orders of the emperor Yongle and his successor, Xuande, Zheng He commanded seven expeditions, the first in the year 1405 and the last in 1430, which sailed from China to the west, reaching as far as the Cape of Good Hope. The object of the voyages was to display the glory and might of the Chinese Ming dynasty and to collect tribute from the "barbarians from beyond the seas." Merchants also accompanied Zheng's voyages, Wu explained, bringing with them silks and porcelain to trade for foreign luxuries such as spices and jewels and tropical woods.

These voyages, Professor Wu noted, came a few decades before most of the famous European voyages of discovery known to all Western school children: Christopher Columbus, in 1492; Vasco da Gama, in 1498; and Ferdinand Magellan, in 1521. However, Zheng He's fleets were incomparable larger. According to figures presented by Professor Wu:

Navigator

Number of Ships

Number of Crew

Zheng He (1405 - 1433)
48 to 317
28,000
Columbus (1492)
3
90
Da Gama (1498)
4
ca. 160
Magellan (1521)
5
265

Moreover, Zheng He's ships, Professor Wu explained, were impressive examples of naval engineering. His so-called treasure ships (which brought back to China such things a giraffes from Africa) were 400 feet long. Columbus's flagship the St. Maria, in contrast, was but 85 feet in length. Zheng He's treas

 
Quote    Reply

Ehran       2/10/2007 5:02:37 PM

"one battle does not win a war like that.  to defeat france the british would have had to have fielded an army of somewhat comparable size and while the money was there the manpower was lacking for that.  i suppose they could have recruited the assorted germans of the day into the army and indian recruits would certainly have filled the ranks wonderfully well but that just wasn't how things were done back in the day.
in the end that fine old combination of english gold and somebody else's blood beat nappy into the ground (eventually)."

 

 

Britain doesn't need a large army because it's an island. 

 

As for the Napoleonic Wars, Britain won, whereas Napoleon (the 19th Century's equvalent of Hitler) lost, with the United States on their side.

 



if britain actually wanted to win a war against france instead of indulging in a prolonged stalemate britain would have to field a large land army.  the way they did it historically was to use british gold and someone else's blood to muster that army up.

the us wasn't so much on napoleon's side as trying some opportunistic land grabbing while the brits were focussed elsewhere.
 
Quote    Reply

eldnah       2/10/2007 6:36:24 PM
The America benefited most from the Napoleonic Wars. It defeated the British-Amerindian army at the Battle of the Thames freeing the Northwest Territories from British influence, stopped British impressment of US merchant sailors and the seizure of American shipping the US purchased the Louisiana Territory from the French. 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       2/10/2007 7:36:56 PM

" I'm saying that THE OTTOMANS WERE THE MOST POWERFULL EMPIRE BETWEEN 1450-1650 after that they began to lose their power.Understand?"

 

Spain and Portugal were the world's two superpowers in those days.  In those days Spain's navy ruled the waved like Britain's did in later centuries.

 

But it still failed to invade England when it sent an Armada - the largest naval invasion force in history at that time - to the English Channel.  Despite the Royal Navy not even being in existence at the time - England had just ragtag colelction of merchant ships and privateering vessels, etc - the English, led by Sir Francis Drake, still managed to defeat the Armada.


although thats nice patriotic jingoism at play, its a bit cavalier with the truth.
recent forensic history shows that the bulk of the damage done to the spanish was due to poor navigation skills and a particularly violent series of storms north west on their way home.
 
they were killed by the weather more than they were killed by a gaggle of ships led by a pirate.
 
nonetheless, the urban myth still holds sway.

 
 
Quote    Reply

the British Lion       2/10/2007 11:40:13 PM




" I'm saying that THE OTTOMANS WERE THE MOST POWERFULL EMPIRE BETWEEN 1450-1650 after that they began to lose their power.Understand?"



 



Spain and Portugal were the world's two superpowers in those days.  In those days Spain's navy ruled the waved like Britain's did in later centuries.



 



But it still failed to invade England when it sent an Armada - the largest naval invasion force in history at that time - to the English Channel.  Despite the Royal Navy not even being in existence at the time - England had just ragtag colelction of merchant ships and privateering vessels, etc - the English, led by Sir Francis Drake, still managed to defeat the Armada.




although thats nice patriotic jingoism at play, its a bit cavalier with the truth.

recent forensic history shows that the bulk of the damage done to the spanish was due to poor navigation skills and a particularly violent series of storms north west on their way home.

 

they were killed by the weather more than they were killed by a gaggle of ships led by a pirate.

 

nonetheless, the urban myth still holds sway.


 


 

That's one myth I've never heard... quite the opposite actually. I've always heard all credit being given to the weather with non at all being given to Drake. People who listen to that myth you just said are people who must have skipped school, where teaching anything that glorifies Britain is a big no-no!

Yeah the weather was the decisive factor, but the naval contribution (such as it was) shouldn't be ignored either. By constantly harassing the Spanish, the Brits did prevent them from regrouping and keeping in good order, not to mention the fire attack in harbor that did a lot of damage.
 

But again, most knowledgeable people realize that we can thank the storms for that win. Even the people at the time acknowledged that... the medals awarded said "God breathed and they were scattered."

 

Reguards,
 
B.L.
 
Quote    Reply
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   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics