Top ten military powers?

[Cisco-GUY]

You seriously need to do some head start research, but i guess such statements & the rest of the statement can be attributed to dumbs with no knowledge about current happenings and what is happening on the ground.

Same to be said about the ones who thanked the idiotic post as their IQ level is no different then the .....................................

Before going on the rant, should have looked that what has the US/NATO alliance achieved in 8 years of this war, has the casualties gone down or up ??

What has this alliance achieved deep inside the Afghanistan territory.

And yeah what about the Afghan puppet govt, resented by the Afghans, a govt supported by the alliance, what have they achieved so far except for more and more corruption and inefficiency.

And am pretty sure, that the incompetency of the US/NATO alliance being blamed on one single intelligence agency of some country, the alliance is much much resourceful and equipped with state of the art intelligence network to defeat this one single 3rd world intelligence agency, so ask your alliance why haven't they done it so far.

instead of whining and ranting about your alliance failures on others, ask your govts and alliances that what have they achieved so far, except making sure no stone is left unearth to destabilize this country that you despise.

What NATO has achieved during past 8 years is not another terrorist attack on their soil. We have turned their world into turmoil and they are reduced to defensive posture instead of planning another terrorist attack on my country from their safe sanctuary. War is being fought in their heart instead of my homeland. We have preserved and protected freedom and security on our soil.

This period 8 years only signifies how deep rabbit hole goes and how big tumor it had formed due to this terrorism cancer.

We will not fail, we wont giveup, we will take these extremists on roller coaster ride straight to hell. So if some elements give up seeing them as strategic assets and cooperate with us for which they are being paid, i am sure this incompetency (as you call it) will soon disappear.

 

[pak-yes]

It is true that UKs military budget is twice as that of India. But India pays 10(?) times less to its men in dollar terms. You seem to underestimate the difference sheer numbers can make. Look at the difference in numbers of each kind of aircraft for instance. 200 Su30 - 56 Typhoon Source: wiki

Although I don't like to say it but INDIA is much more powerful than UK in military terms.Uk is just a relic of the past.

 

[amarnath]

Top 10​

1
U.S.A.

2
China
3
Russia
4
India
5
U.K.
6
France
7
Germany
8
Brazil
9
Japan
10
Turkey
World Military Strength Comparison

 

[JoshPaul]

First of all if I came across like I was attacking India or Pakistan then I appologise as I really was not. I have not done as much reaserch on Pakistan but I love Indian culture and way of life. I beleive UK and France are more powerful than India for the same reasons. Advanced Tech, Higher Spending and my other reasons however if they would win a war in India is another thing all together. Indias sheer numbers would be hard to overcome and I am sure no Nation in NATO, including UK and France would go in alone.

QED. France and UK>India but in a war who knows what would happen.

 

[FreekiN]

How the hell is Pakistan at 15?

Indonesia at 14 WTF?

I looked into the statistics and found out that they actually decided ranking on 'population fit for military service.'

 

[UchihaCG]

How the hell is Pakistan at 15?

Indonesia at 14 WTF?

I looked into the statistics and found out that they actually decided ranking on 'population fit for military service.'

Wrong.
Germany France UK won't be on the list then.

There might be some other factors involving it too.... but globalfirepower is a well known and credible source.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Truthseeker could you please explain to me what USEUCOM and all the others mean.

The United States Army | Organization

I was referring to the six command forces of the USA military. Essentially the world is divided into 6 regions and a supreme commander, with assigned responsibilities and resources, is in charge of USA military operations within that region. Of course my giving the USA 6 places in the top ten is meant to be humorous, but there is some truth in the idea that any of the 6 commands of the USA military is stronger than the next nation.

USNORTHCOM -- North America
USSOUTHCOM -- South America
USEUCOM -- Europe including Russia
USCENTCOM -- Most of the Middle East and up into all the 'stans
USAFRICACOM -- Africa except Egypt (in CENTCOM)
USPACOM -- East Asia and the Pacific including India and China

 

[UchihaCG]

---deleted----

 

[gambit]

The United States Army | Organization

I was referring to the six command forces of the USA military. Essentially the world is divided into 6 regions and a supreme commander, with assigned responsibilities and resources, is in charge of USA military operations within that region. Of course my giving the USA 6 places in the top ten is meant to be humorous, but there is some truth in the idea that any of the 6 commands of the USA military is stronger than the next nation.

USNORTHCOM -- North America
USSOUTHCOM -- South America
USEUCOM -- Europe including Russia
USCENTCOM -- Most of the Middle East and up into all the 'stans
USAFRICACOM -- Africa except Egypt (in CENTCOM)
USPACOM -- East Asia and the Pacific including India and China

USGLOBCOM -- Global Command
USSTRCOM -- Star System Command
USGALCOM -- Galactic Command

We are working on the universe. Ran into a snag, something called 'time'.

 

[FreekiN]

Wrong.
Germany France UK won't be on the list then.

There might be some other factors involving it too.... but globalfirepower is a well known and credible source.

Pakistan has more of everything than Indonesia and several countries ranked ahead of it. Only difference is the population fit for service which has pakistan at 60 something million and indonesia at 100m plus

 

[UchihaCG]

Pakistan has more of everything than Indonesia and several countries ranked ahead of it. Only difference is the population fit for service which has pakistan at 60 something million and indonesia at 100m plus

Well true; but we never know what they used for their basis in making this listing....... but it's not # of military though.... (as said, UK Germany, France hardly have numbers)

 

[haawk]

when will you guys stop this childish game of rating miltary strengths ? military strength is a combination

1)technology
2)economy to sustain a war.
3)fuel reserves
4)no.of personell
5)the caliber of training given to personel
6)motivation of the personel.
7)support of your strategic partners
8)assurance of military supplies from your equipment providing nations-(you cant expect to produce all the weapons yourself during war...you have to buy since local production may not be enough )
8)friendly nations that would deter other powerful nation from joining with your enemy(eg. USSR that detered USA from coming to help pakistan in 71')however this kind of friendship will only depend on the strength of your relationship with your friendly nation.


since true strength will depend on all these parameters estimating the order of military strength with a few paremeters will always be faulty.......some can argue that the strategic partners cannot be includer -but they tend to be a game changer in war.......eg-entry of the US in the world wars at later stages turned the tables completely for the allied nations!
so its actually childish to go on with type of ratings over and over again,please stop this thread -which probably would be the n'th thread with the same title

 

[haawk]

when will you guys stop this childish game of rating miltary strengths ? military strength is a combination

1)technology
2)economy to sustain a war.
3)fuel reserves
4)no.of personell
5)the caliber of training given to personel
6)motivation of the personel.
7)support of your strategic partners
8)assurance of military supplies from your equipment providing nations-(you cant expect to produce all the weapons yourself during war...you have to buy since local production may not be enough )
8)friendly nations that would deter other powerful nation from joining with your enemy(eg. USSR that detered USA from coming to help pakistan in 71')however this kind of friendship will only depend on the strength of your relationship with your friendly nation.


since true strength will depend on all these parameters estimating the order of military strength with a few paremeters will always be faulty.......some can argue that the strategic partners cannot be includer -but they tend to be a game changer in war.......eg-entry of the US in the world wars at later stages turned the tables completely for the allied nations!
so its actually childish to go on with type of ratings over and over again,please stop this thread -which probably would be the n'th thread with the same title

 

[Iggy]

You seriously need to do some head start research, but i guess such statements & the rest of the statement can be attributed to dumbs with no knowledge about current happenings and what is happening on the ground.

Same to be said about the ones who thanked the idiotic post as their IQ level is no different then the .....................................

Before going on the rant, should have looked that what has the US/NATO alliance achieved in 8 years of this war, has the casualties gone down or up ??

What has this alliance achieved deep inside the Afghanistan territory.

And yeah what about the Afghan puppet govt, resented by the Afghans, a govt supported by the alliance, what have they achieved so far except for more and more corruption and inefficiency.

And am pretty sure, that the incompetency of the US/NATO alliance being blamed on one single intelligence agency of some country, the alliance is much much resourceful and equipped with state of the art intelligence network to defeat this one single 3rd world intelligence agency, so ask your alliance why haven't they done it so far.

instead of whining and ranting about your alliance failures on others, ask your govts and alliances that what have they achieved so far, except making sure no stone is left unearth to destabilize this country that you despise.

Since i thanked him I will explain why i agree with the statement he made..first of all there is no doubt that no army can match US in a conventional warfare..They were the trend setter in military technology and futuristic warfare..we all just shamelessly follow it..Just look at how they implement RMA in warfares..if you look at the conventional warfare US fought you can see there death toll seems to decreasing..[I am not saying about the attacks after they defeated Iraq or Afghanistan] ...Every army has learning from what US did in Iraq and Afghan war..As for India we are introducing network centric warfare currently after how US sucessfully did it in Iraq and Afgan war...


I am not commenting about Pakistan military because i dont have much knowledge about it..but as for Indian army just look at the current situations of common soldiers?how much protection are we given to them compare with US soldiers?Many of the soldiers dont even have a knee pad to protect his knees...I am sure that our soldiers courage are second to none ..but courage cannot stop bullets

And as for what US and Nato has achived, I totally agreed with Cisco guy about his statements that it helped considering the facts that bases of operations of Al-Queda has severly hit and they are on the run..Just look at how many bombings they had done ranging from US to African nations before the US attack on Afghan and now look at the situation...The bombings had significant shortfall ..

Hope you get my point

 

[vandemataram]

What all of you failed to realize is that NATO is fighting a Gureilla warfare in AF, not a conventional military. So the element of surprise will always favor these rag-tag militia organization. They are not holding any ground and they don't have strategic infrastructure to be bombed. NATO effectiveness only depends upon Intel. I dont want to name them, but some intelligence agencies are also supporting taliban in an attempt to exhaust US resources and prolong WOT.

In conventinal warfare , no one can challange US/NATO. I like jignostic remarks of some enlightened here failing to realize how same shawl wearing bearded mullahs have turned their country into a war zone. Like it or not, if you are laughing at US army performance in AF, you would have been weeping at yours.

Well, there is no mandate that war needs to be conventional....

Conventional, Nuclear, Chemical, Biological everything is a threat...the rag tag guerillas are more than enough to outsmart the NATO forces and that is what is happening in Afghanistan...

I suggest, with all humility, please look up for the following on the internet...

You shall understand the limitations of Her Majesty's forces....

a) Counter Insurgency and Jungle Warfare School
b) Parvat Ghatak
c) High Altitude Warfare School....

I am not talking about who is the best or anything of that sort but would like to remind you that the war today can be fought anywhere...riverines, swamps, jungles, marshes, heights of 20,000 feet and upwards....

I doubt and hope that the members here can second my thought that the kind of training imparted in the above mentioned schools aren't a kid's job...

I assure you on that..you should know how western militaries send their troops to be trained at the institutions, particularly the CIJWS and Parvat Ghatak....

Thank you..