How accurate do you think Global Fire Power is?

[Ir.Tab.]

And this is an ignite for the next round!

 

[RayKalm]

Ah... so, that is the problem, pakistan is not ranked higher than what it is.

You've got to be impartial when assessing anything. just because your country is not ranked higher, does not mean you trash the ranking.

As far as pakistan not being ranked higher, it could be due to its oil/energy dependency which is a huge disadvantage in case of war.

Nope. My problem is that modernity isn't taken into account. Israel-Pakistan-Egypt-Iran this is the order of modernity between these four countries.

 

[King Solomon]

Nope. My problem is that modernity isn't taken into account. Israel-Pakistan-Egypt-Iran this is the order of modernity between these four countries.

I already illustrated several times that modernity of weapons IS taken into account but you didn't pay heed.

Again, for your convenience:

Israel-Iran-Egypt = Both Iran and Egypt are numerically superior but technically inferior.

China-Russia and China-US = In many aspects China is superior to them if you consider "numbers game" , yet ranks lower.

South Korea - north korea

Correction: it is because your country is not ranked higher.

Why is your country not ranked higher? Because of energy dependency and vulnerability to naval blockade with a low coastline area.

 

[Ir.Tab.]

Is it my turn?
@S19:
Ok, those could not prove exactly it is a result of other parameters or the modernity of weapons. there is a need for clearance!

@RayKalm
My order is Iran - USA - Russia - bunch of others!

Now your turn RayKalm. Isn't some one to moderate us in this forum for the sake of god!

 

[RayKalm]

I already illustrated several times that modernity of weapons IS taken into account but you didn't pay heed.

You don't seem to understand. Just because Russia is ranked higher than China does NOT mean that modernity is taken to account, that's only you telling yourself that.

Again, for your convenience:

Israel-Iran-Egypt = Both Iran and Egypt are numerically superior but technically inferior.

That's quite funny, cause as you've been saying that modernity of weapons is taken into account, so I want you to explain to me without giving the "no oil, or gas" argument of how Pakistan is numerically and modern-wise below Iran and Egypt.

China-Russia and China-US = In many aspects China is superior to them if you consider "numbers game" , yet ranks lower.

South Korea - north korea

Once again, you're just putting out names of country out there. This proves nothing.

Correction: it is because your country is not ranked higher.

Why is your country not ranked higher? Because of energy dependency and vulnerability to naval blockade with a low coastline area.

Many countries above Pakistan are energy hungry. Israel, China, Brazil, Turkey etc.

 

[oFFbEAT]

For an example:

The Composite Index of National Capability (CINC)

This one could be classified as a scientific Index because it is possible to evaluate it's scope and shortcomings and the required information is officially published by countries.

Your Index is not exactly Firepower Index......It takes many other things into account....it is what it says....the Coyntry's overall capability(National Capability)........
Otherwise.....absolute Firepower wise, India is not above Russia, China is not above America, Brazil is not above Germany....and so on....

Global Firepower is NOT total B.S...........Iran is placed above Pakistan for a reason (Indiginous military capabilities has to be taken into account--This is the only reason I think India shouldn't be placed high on the list....we import to much)......
They have also reasonably excluded nuclear capability......in today's world NUKES don't really matter......if any country uses NUKES on any other country(be it nuclear/non-nuclear) than the perpetrator is doomed......the whole world will go mad...

 

[King Solomon]

That's quite funny, cause as you've been saying that modernity of weapons is taken into account, so I want you to explain to me without giving the "no oil, or gas" argument of how Pakistan is numerically and modern-wise below Iran and Egypt.

Last time I'm attempting to make you understand, pay heed.

Therefore GFP comparisons are for consideration in a conventional war based solely on each individual nation's capabilities on land, at sea and through the air while including logistical and financial aspects when waging total war. Sources are stated whenever possible though some statistics are estimated if official numbers are not available.

Get it? Logistical AND financial aspects.

So, you wishing to see "no oil no gas" argument is avoiding the basic concept of the comparison. WHy do you think the info pages contains those info?

Egypt's oil production and consumption is almost the same. Iran has huge surplus. Even India has enough to cater for war. While pakistan has nominal oil production and has to import most of its oil from abroad. Understand?

Finally, please publish your own rankings. I and everyone would be interested behind the reasoning of your own ranking.

 

[oFFbEAT]

What about modernity? The quality of weapons rather than the quantity?

Nope. My problem is that modernity isn't taken into account. Israel-Pakistan-Egypt-Iran this is the order of modernity between these four countries.

And if according to your theory, "modernity of weapons" is taken into account....then the list will be more deviated....Countries like India, Pakistan, Brazil, China will obviously rank lower than U.S.A, Russia, France, Israel, Germany etc.......Just think, how can a country have more modern weapons than the countries from which it Imports weapon......
Moreover, what will the Importer country do if the exporter stops exporting weapons in times of wars(International politics is highly unpredictable).....therefore, indigenous capabilities should be of utmost importance....

For these reasons, I think, GFP Index is fairly accurate......few countries like India, Pakistan, Brazil even China(they still import from Russia) should be placed lower though.........

 

[ViXuyen]

I think the most important criteria of being a great military power is having complete military industries to supply owns weapons; having the ability to produce your own weapons guaranteed you can replace any lost equipment during the war; second is having oil to run the vehicle, and third is manpower.

 

[RayKalm]

Last time I'm attempting to make you understand, pay heed.



Get it? Logistical AND financial aspects.

So, you wishing to see "no oil no gas" argument is avoiding the basic concept of the comparison. WHy do you think the info pages contains those info?

Egypt's oil production and consumption is almost the same. Iran has huge surplus. Even India has enough to cater for war. While pakistan has nominal oil production and has to import most of its oil from abroad. Understand?

Finally, please publish your own rankings. I and everyone would be interested behind the reasoning of your own ranking.

Hmm, since when does logistical and financial aspects have anything to do with a modern army?

Logistic wise, India relies on Iranian/Russian oil and weapons. They haven't got that good of an economy compared to the mouths they have to feed, and numerous amount of problems, yet they are 4th on that list.

Same thing goes for Turkey and China. They may have good economies, but they rely heavily on oil.

So, I ask you, once again, prove to me how GFP accounts for modernity.

I have already published my own rankings countless times.

I'll do it again.

1.) USA
2.) Russia
3.) China
4.) India-France
5.) France-India
6.) Japan
7.) United Kingdom
8.) Germany
9.) Turkey
10.) South Korea
11.) Israel
12.) Pakistan

I would put Iran at 14th.

 

[Lonely Hermit]

Hmm, since when does logistical and financial aspects have anything to do with a modern army?

Mate you really don't know how war's are really fought.
In a war it does not depend on how many troops you have or number of tanks you have.
War's are won by how quickly you can mobilize how good your logistics.

Indeed logistics wins war and it is most important factor which people here do not realize.

Logistic wise, India relies on Iranian/Russian oil and weapons. They haven't got that good of an economy compared to the mouths they have to feed, and numerous amount of problems, yet they are 4th on that list.

I hope you are aware that many of the weapon system are license manufactured in India like Su 30 or T90 tanks even Rafales will be license manufactured. We are a nation who can build our own Aircraft carrier and nuclear submarine and about oil even India also has oil not enough for civilian but enough for our war machine to wage war.

So, I ask you, once again, prove to me how GFP accounts for modernity.

I have already published my own rankings countless times.

If you really think GFP can predict an outcome of war then mate you are quiet wrong war's depend on a lot of factor, if global fire power was reliable then US should have easily won Vietnam war.
I seriously do not like these comparison thread only meant to satisfy your damn ego.

 

[King Solomon]

Hmm, since when does logistical and financial aspects have anything to do with a modern army?

You are truly an ignorant person. Go learn how wars are fought. Go study WWII and see why the victor nations won. Then come back.

Logistic wise, India relies on Iranian/Russian oil and weapons. They haven't got that good of an economy compared to the mouths they have to feed, and numerous amount of problems, yet they are 4th on that list.

Same thing goes for Turkey and China. They may have good economies, but they rely heavily on oil.

Even though India relies on Russian and Iranian oil, their domestic oil production is enough to cater for any of their needs. Same goes for China. India produces about 900k barrels/day and China about 4000k barrels/day.

Sure, in case of a war , half of their economies may shut down if their oil imports stop but their production is enough to divert resources to their military machine. Same goes for USA. As for turkey, it seems to be an exception there.

So, I ask you, once again, prove to me how GFP accounts for modernity.

I proved many times before but you're too ignorant to pay heed.

 

[RayKalm]

You are truly an ignorant person. Go learn how wars are fought. Go study WWII and see why the victor nations won. Then come back.

Funny. I'm ignorant on the basis of asking you what logistical and financial aspects have to do with a modern army - note, I did not say that they are totally useless in war.

You're ignorannce has been shown.

Even though India relies on Russian and Iranian oil, their domestic oil production is enough to cater for any of their needs. Same goes for China. India produces about 900k barrels/day and China about 4000k barrels/day.

This still doesn't explain as to why Turkey is so high. Last I check, they produced less than 70K barrels of oil a day.

900k a day for India is still not enough for India to last in an actual war. American oil, which amounted in all to 6 billion barrels, out of a total of 7 billion barrels consumed by the Allies for the period of World War Two, was what brought victory to them. 900K a day is child's play.

Sure, in case of a war , half of their economies may shut down if their oil imports stop but their production is enough to divert resources to their military machine. Same goes for USA.

Look above.

As for turkey, it seems to be an exception there.

Hmm. Foiled! You can't use 'exception' as an excuse to justify your previous statements only for a few individual countries.

I proved many times before but you're too ignorant to pay heed.

No, you have not proven your point.

I'm still waiting. Calling me ignorant won't justify your ignorant claims.

 

[King Solomon]

Funny. I'm ignorant on the basis of asking you what logistical and financial aspects have to do with a modern army - note, I did not say that they are totally useless in war.

You're ignorannce has been shown.

This still doesn't explain as to why Turkey is so high. Last I check, they produced less than 70K barrels of oil a day.

900k a day for India is still not enough for India to last in an actual war. American oil, which amounted in all to 6 billion barrels, out of a total of 7 billion barrels consumed by the Allies for the period of World War Two, was what brought victory to them. 900K a day is child's play.

Look above.

Hmm. Foiled! You can't use 'exception' as an excuse to justify your previous statements only for a few individual countries.

No, you have not proven your point.

I'm still waiting. Calling me ignorant won't justify your ignorant claims.

Whatever floats your boat, bimbo.

And... don't worry, just email GFP and beg them to rank pakistan higher. They might do it.

 

[RayKalm]

Good to see that you're out of any logical arguments, not that you had any to begin with.

As with your 2nd sentence, if you wish to think that then do so. I would only put Pakistan as high/low as 12-13th, and no higher/lower than that.