What's new

World's Top Ten Militaries -A1Kaid

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK lets assume other qualities also, but still I am very much sure, nations with Nuke capabilities are goin to place on 1 to 10, and we can very well rank them with the no.s of WMD they posses.
1. United States 5000+Nukes
2. Russia 5000+
3. China 200-400
4. France 350+
5. United Kingdom 200
6. Israel 100-200
7. India 100-140
8. Pakistan 60+
9. North Korea 0-10
10. Iran
 
India dsnt have 100 to 140 nukes
more, like 50 to 100, and plus ill be surprissed if more than half actually work.
 
OK lets assume other qualities also, but still I am very much sure, nations with Nuke capabilities are goin to place on 1 to 10, and we can very well rank them with the no.s of WMD they posses.
1. United States 5000+Nukes
2. Russia 5000+
3. China 200-400
4. France 350+
5. United Kingdom 200
6. Israel 100-200
7. India 100-140
8. Pakistan 60+
9. North Korea 0-10
10. Iran
nuclear capabilities alone dont determine strenght but the capacity to deliver over long distances otherwise what use are they except to bomb ourselves to glory and take the rest of the world with us..what a scene that would be.. lol
 
India dsnt have 100 to 140 nukes
more, like 50 to 100, and plus ill be surprissed if more than half actually work.

"*****As of September 2005, India was estimated to have had a stockpile of around 100-140 warheads. In addition, Defense News reported in their November 1, 2004 edition, that "[an Indian] Defence Ministry source told Defense News in late 2004 that in the next five to seven years India will have 300–400 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons distributed to air, sea, and land forces." It has estimated that India currently possesses enough separated plutonium to produce and maintain an arsenal of 1,000-2,000 warheads. According to the calculations of one of the key advisers to the US Nuclear deal negotiating team, Ashley Tellis:
Operating India’s eight unsafeguarded PHWRs in such a [conservative] regime would bequeath New Delhi with some 12,135–13,370 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium, which is sufficient to produce between 2,023–2,228 nuclear weapons over and above those already existing in the Indian arsenal. Although no Indian analyst, let alone a policy maker, has ever advocated any nuclear inventory that even remotely approximates such numbers, this heuristic exercise confirms that New Delhi has the capability to produce a gigantic nuclear arsenal while subsisting well within the lowest estimates of its known uranium reserves.***"
List of states with nuclear weapons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Well we shouldn't let nationalism blind us I do think pakistan deserves to be in the top 10 but not as a high a ranking as some people have given it coz i'm gonna be objective and the truth is there are countries with more powerful militaries like it or not.

here is the ranking compiled according to various sources By size (number of troops), the top ten nations looks like this;

China
United States
India
Korea, North
Russia
Korea, South
Pakistan
Israel
Turkey
Iran

But anyone who has studied military history knows that the number of troops is a misleading measure. There are several factors that make the troops of one army more effective than others. The most obvious modifying factor is weapons and equipment (quantity and quality). Closely related to this are the “combat support” elements. The most important of these are logistics (being able to move troops, and their supplies, long distances and in a timely manner) and maintenance (keeping things in repair and running under all conditions.) Then there are the intangibles (like leadership, training and the most intangible item of all; military tradition.) Apply all of those to the raw number of troops and you get different number. This number is called "combat power."

Top Ten By Combat Power

1-United States
2-China
3-Israel
4-India
5-Russia
6-Korea, South
7-Korea, North
8-United Kingdom
9-Turkey
10-Pakistan

The most unusual entry here is Israel. But this is because Israel is one of the few nations to have a reserve army that can be mobilized for action more quickly than most countries can get their active duties into shape for combat. The mobilized Israeli armed forces number over half a million troops. In addition, the Israelis have world class equipment and weapons, as well as exceptional intangibles. The downsize of this is that mobilizing its armed forces also cripples the Israeli economy. Under these conditions, Israel must conduct a war that ends within a few months. After that, supplying the armed forces becomes difficult and actual combat power begins to decline.

The other nations in the top ten have large armed forces that are well equipped and trained, at least compared to most nations farther down on the list. Britain’s armed forces, like Israel’s, are better equipped, trained and more experienced than most. Turkey benefits from having a strong military tradition and excellent leadership at the small unit level, as well as good combat training.

Overall, the U.S. combat power is about three times that of second place China, and ten times that of tenth place Pakistan. But another modifying factor is how you plan to use that combat power. Wars are not fought in a vacuum, but in places that often inconvenient places for one side. Most armed forces are optimized for fighting on their own borders; for defending the homeland. Only the United States is capable of quickly moving lots of combat power to anywhere on the planet. Moreover, given a few months, the United States can put enough combat power just about anywhere, and become the major military force in that neighborhood. Countries like Britain and France can move some forces to just about anywhere on the planet. But no one can put forces anywhere quite like the United States.

For most nations with powerful armed forces, it's mainly a matter of having the most formidable military force in the neighborhood.

I agree with this list mostly sounds about right to me though I would put india above israel and pakistan above north korea lower on the list.

here is another list according to CIA:

According to the CIA and other Intelligence Services (European, Asian, African) this is the tally - based on a Combination of Manpower, Technology, Firepower, Training, Resources, Available Reserves, and Nuclear Potential (Current or Likely):
1. USA
2. China
3. Germany
4. India
5. France
6. Russia
7. UK
8. Italy
9. Israel
10. Pakistan
 
Last edited:
Well we shouldn't let nationalism blind us I do think pakistan deserves to be in the top 10 but not as a high a ranking as some people have given it coz i'm gonna be objective and the truth is there are countries with more powerful militaries like it or not.

here is the ranking compiled according to various sources By size (number of troops), the top ten nations looks like this;

China
United States
India
Korea, North
Russia
Korea, South
Pakistan
Israel
Turkey
Iran

But anyone who has studied military history knows that the number of troops is a misleading measure. There are several factors that make the troops of one army more effective than others. The most obvious modifying factor is weapons and equipment (quantity and quality). Closely related to this are the “combat support” elements. The most important of these are logistics (being able to move troops, and their supplies, long distances and in a timely manner) and maintenance (keeping things in repair and running under all conditions.) Then there are the intangibles (like leadership, training and the most intangible item of all; military tradition.) Apply all of those to the raw number of troops and you get different number. This number is called "combat power."

Top Ten By Combat Power

1-United States
2-China
3-Israel
4-India
5-Russia
6-Korea, South
7-Korea, North
8-United Kingdom
9-Turkey
10-Pakistan

The most unusual entry here is Israel. But this is because Israel is one of the few nations to have a reserve army that can be mobilized for action more quickly than most countries can get their active duties into shape for combat. The mobilized Israeli armed forces number over half a million troops. In addition, the Israelis have world class equipment and weapons, as well as exceptional intangibles. The downsize of this is that mobilizing its armed forces also cripples the Israeli economy. Under these conditions, Israel must conduct a war that ends within a few months. After that, supplying the armed forces becomes difficult and actual combat power begins to decline.

The other nations in the top ten have large armed forces that are well equipped and trained, at least compared to most nations farther down on the list. Britain’s armed forces, like Israel’s, are better equipped, trained and more experienced than most. Turkey benefits from having a strong military tradition and excellent leadership at the small unit level, as well as good combat training.

Overall, the U.S. combat power is about three times that of second place China, and ten times that of tenth place Pakistan. But another modifying factor is how you plan to use that combat power. Wars are not fought in a vacuum, but in places that often inconvenient places for one side. Most armed forces are optimized for fighting on their own borders; for defending the homeland. Only the United States is capable of quickly moving lots of combat power to anywhere on the planet. Moreover, given a few months, the United States can put enough combat power just about anywhere, and become the major military force in that neighborhood. Countries like Britain and France can move some forces to just about anywhere on the planet. But no one can put forces anywhere quite like the United States.

For most nations with powerful armed forces, it's mainly a matter of having the most formidable military force in the neighborhood.

I agree with this list mostly sounds about right to me though I would put india above israel and pakistan above north korea lower on the list.

here is another list according to CIA:

According to the CIA and other Intelligence Services (European, Asian, African) this is the tally - based on a Combination of Manpower, Technology, Firepower, Training, Resources, Available Reserves, and Nuclear Potential (Current or Likely):
1. USA
2. China
3. Germany
4. India
5. France
6. Russia
7. UK
8. Italy
9. Israel
10. Pakistan

That is incorrect about Pakistan being #10 in troop size ( that is if you are referring to active military personnel)! Because you have failed to provide one any sources, and two the truth, I will go ahead and tell everyone what the list looks like according to number of troops (Active Military Personnel)

1) China - 2,255,000
2) United States - 1,426,026
3) India - 1,325,000
4) North Korea - 1,106,000
5) Russia - 1,037,000
6) Iran - 745,000
7) South Korea - 687,000
8) Pakistan - 619,000
9) Turkey - 514,850
10) Egypt - 450,000


Remember this is a list according to "Active Military personnel" not complete Man Power a military can summon for War or whenever it needs more soldiers.

Source: Active Military Personnel
 
here are some real tens

1-Afganistan not miltiary wise (yet US lose control over Kabul so called "SUPER POWER")
2-China
3-US " a war cant be fought if your heart aint in it ; most people join for money and college financial aid
4-UK
5-Pakistan
6-Iran
7-Isreal
8-North Korea
9-India
10-dunno.
 
Well we shouldn't let nationalism blind us I do think pakistan deserves to be in the top 10 but not as a high a ranking as some people have given it coz i'm gonna be objective and the truth is there are countries with more powerful militaries like it or not.

here is the ranking compiled according to various sources By size (number of troops), the top ten nations looks like this;

China
United States
India
Korea, North
Russia
Korea, South
Pakistan
Israel
Turkey
Iran

But anyone who has studied military history knows that the number of troops is a misleading measure. There are several factors that make the troops of one army more effective than others. The most obvious modifying factor is weapons and equipment (quantity and quality). Closely related to this are the “combat support” elements. The most important of these are logistics (being able to move troops, and their supplies, long distances and in a timely manner) and maintenance (keeping things in repair and running under all conditions.) Then there are the intangibles (like leadership, training and the most intangible item of all; military tradition.) Apply all of those to the raw number of troops and you get different number. This number is called "combat power."

Top Ten By Combat Power

1-United States
2-China
3-Israel
4-India
5-Russia
6-Korea, South
7-Korea, North
8-United Kingdom
9-Turkey
10-Pakistan

The most unusual entry here is Israel. But this is because Israel is one of the few nations to have a reserve army that can be mobilized for action more quickly than most countries can get their active duties into shape for combat. The mobilized Israeli armed forces number over half a million troops. In addition, the Israelis have world class equipment and weapons, as well as exceptional intangibles. The downsize of this is that mobilizing its armed forces also cripples the Israeli economy. Under these conditions, Israel must conduct a war that ends within a few months. After that, supplying the armed forces becomes difficult and actual combat power begins to decline.

The other nations in the top ten have large armed forces that are well equipped and trained, at least compared to most nations farther down on the list. Britain’s armed forces, like Israel’s, are better equipped, trained and more experienced than most. Turkey benefits from having a strong military tradition and excellent leadership at the small unit level, as well as good combat training.

Overall, the U.S. combat power is about three times that of second place China, and ten times that of tenth place Pakistan. But another modifying factor is how you plan to use that combat power. Wars are not fought in a vacuum, but in places that often inconvenient places for one side. Most armed forces are optimized for fighting on their own borders; for defending the homeland. Only the United States is capable of quickly moving lots of combat power to anywhere on the planet. Moreover, given a few months, the United States can put enough combat power just about anywhere, and become the major military force in that neighborhood. Countries like Britain and France can move some forces to just about anywhere on the planet. But no one can put forces anywhere quite like the United States.

For most nations with powerful armed forces, it's mainly a matter of having the most formidable military force in the neighborhood.

I agree with this list mostly sounds about right to me though I would put india above israel and pakistan above north korea lower on the list.

here is another list according to CIA:

According to the CIA and other Intelligence Services (European, Asian, African) this is the tally - based on a Combination of Manpower, Technology, Firepower, Training, Resources, Available Reserves, and Nuclear Potential (Current or Likely):
1. USA
2. China
3. Germany
4. India
5. France
6. Russia
7. UK
8. Italy
9. Israel
10. Pakistan

Very well presented and educational for me. But the question I do want to ask you is, I am very surprise to see North Korea at 7th place on combat power. They would not be as Israelies are in terms of how much would affect there economy, and money they would have for prolong battle? My question is based on the state that North Korea is in currently. And also the factor of modern equipments that they have in there inventory.
 
"*****As of September 2005, India was estimated to have had a stockpile of around 100-140 warheads. In addition, Defense News reported in their November 1, 2004 edition, that "[an Indian] Defence Ministry source told Defense News in late 2004 that in the next five to seven years India will have 300–400 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons distributed to air, sea, and land forces." It has estimated that India currently possesses enough separated plutonium to produce and maintain an arsenal of 1,000-2,000 warheads. According to the calculations of one of the key advisers to the US Nuclear deal negotiating team, Ashley Tellis:
Operating India’s eight unsafeguarded PHWRs in such a [conservative] regime would bequeath New Delhi with some 12,135–13,370 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium, which is sufficient to produce between 2,023–2,228 nuclear weapons over and above those already existing in the Indian arsenal. Although no Indian analyst, let alone a policy maker, has ever advocated any nuclear inventory that even remotely approximates such numbers, this heuristic exercise confirms that New Delhi has the capability to produce a gigantic nuclear arsenal while subsisting well within the lowest estimates of its known uranium reserves.***"
List of states with nuclear weapons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bad source.
 
So, true.
Teachers and professors in canada would give u a 0, for sourcing anything from wikipedia :taz:


I find it appalling anyone would dare quote or take a source of information from Wikipedia.

Anyways I have not seen a single post here that is greater and more accurate than my first post (on this thread).


SNIPER ON THE ROOF!!! :sniper:
 
Nothing wrong with wikipedia where you can access the sources used by the poster.

Many posters there EXTENSIVELY footnote from sound sources. Others fail to do so altogether. If used, it bears it's own research prior to doing so. Unsourced information is valueless regardless from where it comes.

I've used wikipedia for info on deaths in Afghanistan reaching back through the civil war to the Soviet-Afghan war. It's thorough with multiple named sources that can, themselves be checked.

Well-footnoted info is always the key.
 
Nothing wrong with wikipedia where you can access the sources used by the poster.

Many posters there EXTENSIVELY footnote from sound sources. Others fail to do so altogether. If used, it bears it's own research prior to doing so. Unsourced information is valueless regardless from where it comes.

I've used wikipedia for info on deaths in Afghanistan reaching back through the civil war to the Soviet-Afghan war. It's thorough with multiple named sources that can, themselves be checked.

Well-footnoted info is always the key.

The bad thing abt wikipedia its nt reliable half of the stuff on wikepedia is not totally true. Its bad cuz you and me can go on there write articles teh way we like them.
 
:sniper:
1 United States
2 Russia
3 China
4 India
5 Germany
6 France
7 Japan
8 Turkey
9 Brazil
10 Great Britain
11 Italy
12 South Korea
13 Indonesia
14 Mexico
15 Canada
16 Iran
17 Egypt
18 North Korea
19 Spain
20 Pakistan

"****The user should note that nuclear capability, individual unit experience, equipment quality and training are not taken into account. ****"
World Military Strength Ranking

This is a disease which is called "BLIND IN HATE" You indians are so funny :pakistan::pakistan::china::sniper::guns:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom