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: Country with best conventional armed forces (army, air force, navy)
dba    11/3/2006 3:46:57 PM
Which country would be ranked #1 in an all-out conventional war involvng all armed forces like WW2? Obviously I would exclude US & Russia in this ranking. And no nukes. And I would say size matters also. So even if UK army was really good its small size would make it inferior to say China. Thanks.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   NEXT
Herald1234       11/3/2006 4:00:02 PM

Which country would be ranked #1 in an all-out conventional war involvng all armed forces like WW2? Obviously I would exclude US & Russia in this ranking. And no nukes. And I would say size matters also. So even if UK army was really good its small size would make it inferior to say China.

Thanks.
First why would you exclude Russia and the United States?
 
Second what do you mean by asking which country would be # 1 in conventional warfare?
 
If you are asking the question this way, "Which nation in your opinion excluding the United States or Russia would be the most effective in conducting non-nuclear warfare combined/joint operations in achieving its war aims?" you might have a reasonable and clear question.
 
Herald


 
 
Quote    Reply

ProDemocracy       11/3/2006 4:01:32 PM
Overall: China, UK, India, France, Turkey, Israel
 
Air Force: UK/France, Israel, China, India
 
Navy: UK, China/France, India
 
Army: China, India, France/UK 
 
Quote    Reply

dba    Ex, China versus Korea   11/3/2006 4:03:50 PM
To make it more interesting.
Say North Korea collapses and South Korea tries to takes over.  And China doesn't like a US friendly nation such as Korea on its border so China sends troops to take over North Korea.  So this leads to conflict between China and South Korea.  Who would win?
The scenario is unlikely to really happen but wanted to help people rank conventional armed forces. 

BTW, if you think South Korea would step aside for China to take over North Korea in case of its collapse, you can bet South Korea won't let that happen. 

 
Quote    Reply

dba    Ex, China versus Korea   11/3/2006 4:05:06 PM



Which country would be ranked #1 in an all-out conventional war involvng all armed forces like WW2? Obviously I would exclude US & Russia in this ranking. And no nukes. And I would say size matters also. So even if UK army was really good its small size would make it inferior to say China.

Thanks.

First why would you exclude Russia and the United States?

 

Second what do you mean by asking which country would be # 1 in conventional warfare?

 

If you are asking the question this way, "Which nation in your opinion excluding the United States or Russia would be the most effective in conducting non-nuclear warfare combined/joint operations in achieving its war aims?" you might have a reasonable and clear question.

 

Herald



 



There you go.  Sorry typed that question in a hurry.  So what would be your answer?  Thanks.
 
Quote    Reply

dba    Ex, China versus Korea   11/3/2006 4:05:22 PM



Which country would be ranked #1 in an all-out conventional war involvng all armed forces like WW2? Obviously I would exclude US & Russia in this ranking. And no nukes. And I would say size matters also. So even if UK army was really good its small size would make it inferior to say China.

Thanks.

First why would you exclude Russia and the United States?

 

Second what do you mean by asking which country would be # 1 in conventional warfare?

 

If you are asking the question this way, "Which nation in your opinion excluding the United States or Russia would be the most effective in conducting non-nuclear warfare combined/joint operations in achieving its war aims?" you might have a reasonable and clear question.

 

Herald



 



There you go.  Sorry typed that question in a hurry.  So what would be your answer?  Thanks.
 
Quote    Reply

dba    Ex, China versus Korea   11/3/2006 4:06:26 PM



Which country would be ranked #1 in an all-out conventional war involvng all armed forces like WW2? Obviously I would exclude US & Russia in this ranking. And no nukes. And I would say size matters also. So even if UK army was really good its small size would make it inferior to say China.

Thanks.

First why would you exclude Russia and the United States?

 

Second what do you mean by asking which country would be # 1 in conventional warfare?

 

If you are asking the question this way, "Which nation in your opinion excluding the United States or Russia would be the most effective in conducting non-nuclear warfare combined/joint operations in achieving its war aims?" you might have a reasonable and clear question.

 

Herald



 



There you go.  Sorry typed that question in a hurry.  So what would be your answer?  Thanks.
 
Quote    Reply

dba    Ex, China versus Korea   11/3/2006 4:07:13 PM



Which country would be ranked #1 in an all-out conventional war involvng all armed forces like WW2? Obviously I would exclude US & Russia in this ranking. And no nukes. And I would say size matters also. So even if UK army was really good its small size would make it inferior to say China.

Thanks.

First why would you exclude Russia and the United States?

 

Second what do you mean by asking which country would be # 1 in conventional warfare?

 

If you are asking the question this way, "Which nation in your opinion excluding the United States or Russia would be the most effective in conducting non-nuclear warfare combined/joint operations in achieving its war aims?" you might have a reasonable and clear question.

 

Herald



 



There you go.  Sorry typed that question in a hurry.  So what would be your answer?  Thanks.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       11/3/2006 4:39:35 PM
Easy answer?
 
Great Britain and maybe Italy/Spain/Australia/Japan?  They have good power projection capabilities and can operate at least in brigade strength out of national area across an entire theater independent of allies, if they have to.
 
France claims it, though I suspect their power projection capability is much like Iran's-mythical.
 
India possibly, though it would be very small.  
 
Difficult answer?
Answer these questions.
1. Do they have joint service amphibious operations capability?
2. Do they have sea and airlift to support expeditionary warfare?
3. Do they have a merchant marine that can support their military forces overseas?
4. Do they have access too or posssess a secure logistics base that they can use to sustain an expeditionary force?
5. Do they have a navy, or is it a coast defense joke?
6. Are they doctrine oriented toward toward offensive expeditionary warfare? 
 
As you can see, landlocked army-dominated military powers need not apply.
 
Herald  
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       11/5/2006 1:19:58 PM
France claims it, though I suspect their power projection capability is much like Iran's-mythical.
 
I did not know that Itan has any projection forces! LOL
BTW for your information, see what think the BRITISH governement:
:
Towards the end of his speech, the hon. Member for Newark (Patrick Mercer) was slightly critical of the role of France. I refer him to the interview given in Newsweek by General Jones, the US four-star general who is currently Supreme Allied Commander Europe. He went out of his way to praise the quality of the French army, describing it as probably the finest expeditionary force in Europe
 
Memorandum submitted by Professor Malcolm Chalmers (October 2002)
Playing to the UK's strengths
The proposals in the New Chapter are designed to play to the UK's strengths, focusing military energies in areas where it has capabilities which few others possess. The UK is one of only three powers (along with the US and France) with a capability for rapidly projecting military power over long distances
 
They are not very large elements.
(Mr Hoon) I disagree with you. I think if you check the numbers you will find that they have significant professional forces as well. France has only recently abandoned conscription and no one suggests that France does not have a highly professional and some very sharp-end forces that would readily satisfy the terms of the NATO response force."
 
You want more evidence?
-Bases around the world including asia with full readiness,
-30 ground elint station in the world,
-35 000 troops abroad on 5 continents
- ability to project 60 000 men of ground army and up to 120 000 in a national commitment including navy and air force
-permanent training in deserts, moutain and jungle warfare for all projection force
-a surface task force which is able to crush any other surface force in the world (except USA of course) thank to a nuclear carrier with Rafales, air buddy refueling and up to 3E2C on board and ability to strike with antiship missile 800 miles away
-a 6 well trained and silent SSN force supplemented by a well trained modern ASW forces (frigates and 35 ASW planes)
-only army with USA to have digital brigades (UK not yet ready on this side)
-an air force similar to israeli air force with 100 transport/airrefueling aircraft and 7 E3F/E2C awacs....
-600 cruise missiles available
................
For sure I want much more but it is not a mythical force except for its proficiency and romantism of fighting in remote deserts or jungles..
............
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates       11/5/2006 5:31:09 PM
You have to define what is meant by best?
 
Power projection is one criteria but is it the only criteria?
What about winning of a war of attrition?
What about winning a total war?
What about waging a national defensive war?
 
Any of these features would change which army is the best.  The metrics must be more clearly defined.
 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics