2011 World Military Strength Ranking released (Top 20)

The lists sounds correct, thanks for the link. I really like the websites comparison feature. S & F

reply to post by Count Chocula


m8 you are greatly under estamating the british people, we might be small compared to other countries but we have war in our bloods and a history to go with it

the british empire was the largest in history covering almost 34million sq km

and as for our women marrying and breeding muslims, a few maybe but your a yank right?

havent mexicans been doing this to your women for decades?

There is only one way to settle this, each countries military sends its best fighter, and they have a Royal Rumble.

People saying "What makes US #1?" Look at the Air Force and Navy numbers compared to the other countries, then it all makes sense. Look how much military aircraft the US has

Originally posted by Count Chocula

The sad fact is the UK and France havent won a war in almost 200 years. Its been Americans keeping your failboat from sinking for most of that time.

My top military powers based on PERFORMANCE i.e. winning:

1.USA
2.Russia
3.Israel

Wow, if your not trolling then I don't know what you are doing, but your words are definitely designed to provoke a response.

Google The Falklands war, because unless history has been lying to me, Britain won.

America doesn't keep our "failboat" from sinking all the time......granted they are a big help, and good allies.
WWII for example, Britain, Russia and other European countries were winning the war by the time America joined in, without Americas help, it might have dragged on for a while longer, but it would have been won. America helped speed up the victory, and more than likely saved a lot of lives as a result. But the war was not won because "mighty" America flexed its muscles.

I'm sorry mods if this seems off topic (it isn't if you think about it, it is based on military strength), but the poster of the above quote needed put in his place, personally I found his post very ignorant and rude.

As for the list, it definitely seems technology / hardware based, not based on man power.

Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by michael1983l

 

Are you kidding?
You think china is anywhere close to the US and Russia. They have been world military powers for decades. Add to that the vast knowledge and experience they have in war, china doesn’t even come close.

China just started building an army after ww2 when Japan destroyed their country and their so-called army has yet to be tested in the world arena and in real war. It hasn’t …

China will have the ability to mobilize a standing army of 2 hundred million once their air force and navy is up to what they need if it's not already there.
With a one child per family policy that was in effect for so many years, came a population that is close or even more males than females.

reply to post by loneranger26


Sometimes, I wish military's from around the world would do this for us fan boys.

reply to post by CountDrac


I'm kinda surprised by South Korea's ranking, they are good but I didn't think they were that good. I would have expected France, Germany and Israel to be above them. I'm really surprised by Germany's ranking....below Brazil??? When was the last time Brazil was in any major conflict. Iran should be above them even.

North Korea seems very low to me as well. While they may have a crazy idiot for a leader, I know they will put up a hell of a fight, at least at the very start. I wouldn't want to get in a conflict with them, there will be mass casualties on both sides in a conflict with them. The Armed forces are the only part of that society that gets what they need to survive.

Originally posted by woogleuk

Originally posted by Count Chocula

The sad fact is the UK and France havent won a war in almost 200 years. Its been Americans keeping your failboat from sinking for most of that time.

My top military powers based on PERFORMANCE i.e. winning:

1.USA
2.Russia
3.Israel

Wow, if your not trolling then I don't know what you are doing, but your words are definitely designed to provoke a response.

Google The Falklands war, because unless history has been lying to me, Britain won.

America doesn't keep our "failboat" from sinking all the time......granted they are a big help, and good allies.
WWII for example, Britain, Russia and other European countries were winning the war by the time America joined in, without Americas help, it might have dragged on for a while longer, but it would have been won. America helped speed up the victory, and more than likely saved a lot of lives as a result. But the war was not won because "mighty" America flexed its muscles.

I'm sorry mods if this seems off topic (it isn't if you think about it, it is based on military strength), but the poster of the above quote needed put in his place, personally I found his post very ignorant and rude.

As for the list, it definitely seems technology / hardware based, not based on man power.

edit on 16/7/11 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)

Yeah I find it funny that 90% of Americans think they 'won' world war 2 and 'saved everyones ass'. I put it down to a mixture of poor education and the general ignorence of the American peoples personalities. In actual fact Hitler declared war against America, not the other way around. Also by the time America entered the war almost all historians agree that it would have been impossible for the Germans to invade England successfully, or even to continue the advance into Russia.
If anyone can take the credit for 'winning' world war 2, in my opinion it's Russia. They are the ones who took Berlin, following the overwhelming defeat of the entire eastern front.
I think in actual fact, the only reason America joined the war was because they realised Japan was about to inflict a world of FAIL on the western seaboard and they had to do something to get out of the great depression

Oh thats where my tax dollers go!

reply to post by Deoxyribonucleic

Did you know that the Canadians Forces are training SAS for low 75 feet altitude deployments into a water environment from a Herc flying over "Big Lake" in my area (sarcastic lol). Come on people! Who cares.... we could argue about this subject forever. I think some members actually need to look up the word ally.

Peace,Nova

Originally posted by shadowATS

Originally posted by SpookyFox
India has a better army than the U.K?
Aaahahahahahahaha oh this thread gave me a good laugh. The Indian army still use spears and stones don't they?

yeah the indian defence forces still have the indigenous spear and stones,the kinds that made half the world slap sanctions on india only to revoke them later on in couple of years to acknowledge the growing economy and the market opportunity of india.to put it in perspective our middle class population is bigger than the entire population of the states.

edit on 16-7-2011 by shadowATS because: missed out a word...

edit on 16-7-2011 by shadowATS because: my eyes were aching

I think India has a pretty potent punch. Good sized armed forces, vast pool of new recruits and a indigenous weapons production capacity. In any war, they will be able to easily replace their losses and produce even more weapons and troops than most nations. The rankings take more into account than just the size and training and equipment of the nation.

The UK's ranking is pretty impressive, don't get bent out of shape about it. You have great armed forces.

What you guys fail to realize is that the USA funded most of these countries and gave them technology...south korea, japan, france etc so yeah its no question USA is the top dog oh yeah lets not forget the pos country they call israel

Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

This list does not take into account nukes.

Who cares seriously we alraedy know who owns the most nukes russia usa and china so whats your point...I highly doubt nukes will get the entire job done

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

yes but im actually happy they are in the top 10. This list does not take into account nukes etc

the list also does not take into account,
armies by proxy.

Meaning an Army may wear a certain flag
but have heads of state that are loyal to
another country.

Since the USA, Britain and France are all proxies
for Israel. That puts Israel at the top of the list.

lol How is Isreal at the top of the list when russia, iran and china could blow isreal "seriously" off the map before anyone even knew it happened?

reply to post by SpookyFox


I agree that the European front was not won due to just American military, however on D-day the Allies landed around 156,000 troops in Normandy. The American forces landed numbered 73,000: 23,250 on Utah Beach, 34,250 on Omaha Beach, and 15,500 airborne troops, which was about half of the total allied invasion on this day.

That being a fact, it is as good as saying the american military did increase there victory chances, and there were also many factors to consider when thinking about the war west of Berlin. Hitler pulled Tank divisions closer to berlin which made the march alittle easier. Also dont forget about there fight against the red army- the Nazis got the snot beat out of them. So really how much factor did the US play in that battlefronts victory. Prob no more or no less than anyone else.

NOW.,..the fight in the Pacific was a total American beat down. The US military Island hopped right to there front door( while annihilateing there navy). Then preceded to drop the most devistating weapon know to man.

Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

This list does not take into account nukes.

Why do you assume that? According to the article "The final GFP rankings are based on an ever-evolving in-house formula which takes 45 different factors and compiles them against each country in the list, applying bonuses and penalties as needed to generate - what we hope is - the most accurate listing of its kind." I didn't see anything about the inclusion or non-inclusion of Nuke weapons in that description of the ratings. Where is it that you got the info that they do not take into account nukes?

Originally posted by bhornbuckle75

Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

This list does not take into account nukes.

Why do you assume that? According to the article "The final GFP rankings are based on an ever-evolving in-house formula which takes 45 different factors and compiles them against each country in the list, applying bonuses and penalties as needed to generate - what we hope is - the most accurate listing of its kind." I didn't see anything about the inclusion or non-inclusion of Nuke weapons in that description of the ratings. Where is it that you got the info that they do not take into account nukes?

Are you serious?

"Things You Should Know
The user should note that nuclear capability is not taken into account for the final ranking. This listing is purely a "numbers game" meant to spark debate and including such a game-changers as nuclear weapons would clearly defeat its purpose. In any case, most any nation going to war would most likely wage a conventional war such as those seen since 1945 - the last recorded use of an atomic weapon against another nation. "

www.globalfirepower.com...

At the end of the day, the United States has a stock pile of 5,113 Nuclear weapons far far greater than any other country, this is why the list doesn't include nukes. It'd be ridiculous,

Nuke category would be something like

United States 5,113
Russia 2,400
United Kingdom 225

reply to post by Zmboop


Sorry...I missed that section. No reason to be rude though...(though to be honest, I'm rude to people on here, quite a bit...so I don't take it personally )

Basically I just missed that section....skimmed it too quick. You are right. I am wrong. Please don't hit me.