# 2012 - WORLD MILITARY RANKINGS



## S_O_C_O_M

GFP provides a unique analytical display of data covering global military powers with statistics compiled through various sources. All manner of countries are considered in the ranking, a spectrum helping to produce a near-complete comparison of relative military strengths from across the globe. *The user should note that nuclear capability is not taken into account for the final ranking for this listing is purely a "numbers game" *meant to spark debate and including nuclear weapons would clearly defeat its purpose. 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.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ahfatzia

A bit of a surprise Taiwan ranks 14th and my country, Singapore, ranks 41st. Where's the all powerful Vietnam? According to the Dai Viet boys here, they can wipe Taiwan and Singapore off the map and subjugate the Chinese Hoas. 

Seriously Nepal is stronger than Dai Viet. Oh wait, Philippines at 23rd? I don't believe it, a country that defeated the US of A is not ranked? Must be my eyes, can someone prove me wrong, please.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yyetttt

Please don't post GFP rankings. That site looks like it costs a $1 dollar a month.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S_O_C_O_M

jellodragon said:


> Please don't post GFP rankings. That site looks like it costs a $1 dollar a month.



That site is very accurate and has precise equipment/manpower figures. It also has many interactive features such as to compare one country with another.


----------



## Avisheik

Phillipines does not have any major fighter aircraft and they are ranked above the likes of singapore, saudi arabia and south africa??

Nepal and afghanistan are ranked even though their military is weaker (equipment wise) to bangladesh, sri lanka and vietnam who are not ranked

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mosu

yes this site is correct they rank according to gdp and manpower

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SamranAli

BS rankings.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GORKHALI

BS ranking!!

1>Australia below Filipines(These guys don't even have a 4th Gen aircraft unlike Oz) 

2> France and Israel below India.Oh!!Please cut the crap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tshering22

SHIELD said:


> BS ranking!!
> 
> 1>Australia below Filipines(These guys don't even have a 4th Gen aircraft unlike Oz)
> 
> 2> France and Israel below India.Oh!!Please cut the crap.



I think it is going by the size of manpower than just quality.

Otherwise I am sure that Israel is stronger than today's UK at least in terms of capability. And France should be at number 5 at least.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

This site is a real joke.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## illusion8

France at No.8
Israel at No.10
Australia at No.24
Saudi Arabia at No.26

 no way.


----------



## clmeta

Nonsense rankings. The first six are definitely UN security council permanent members and Israel.
They have ranked India above France and Israel, whereas India mostly imports all its weapons and the makers are ranked below India.
Unbelievable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rockstarIN

The ranking is done taking consideration of manpower, economy etc. Not whos got F-22, Haarp. 

its the ability to engage in a world war kinda scenerio.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Capt.Popeye

Are these rankings taken from BILLBOARD, MTV or Eurovision ?


----------



## skydrill_2

rockstar said:


> The ranking is done taking consideration of manpower, economy etc. Not whos got F-22, Haarp.
> 
> its the ability to engage in a world war kinda scenerio.



+1.........


----------



## DarkPrince

what a ranking nepal is in the list but not BD 


n why is greece no 33

they've got a very strong air force


----------



## Serpentine

Number of these bs rankings is so damn high in this forum
Any country,under specific circumstances can win a more powerful country,quantity doesn't always count
Viet Nam is a good example,so as Afghanistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mb444

Hilarious website...... Probably run by a kid as a school project...


----------



## anarchy 99

India at number 4? 

And the countries it imports weapons from are below them. You cant make this sh*t up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shinigami

illusion8 said:


> France at No.8
> Israel at No.10
> Australia at No.24
> Saudi Arabia at No.26
> 
> no way.


 


SHIELD said:


> BS ranking!!
> 
> 1>Australia below Filipines(These guys don't even have a 4th Gen aircraft unlike Oz)
> 
> 2> France and Israel below India.Oh!!Please cut the crap.


 


clmeta said:


> Nonsense rankings. The first six are definitely UN security council permanent members and Israel.
> They have ranked India above France and Israel, whereas India mostly imports all its weapons and the makers are ranked below India.
> Unbelievable.


 


mb444 said:


> Hilarious website...... Probably run by a kid as a school project...


 


anarchy 99 said:


> India at number 4?
> 
> And the countries it imports weapons from are below them. You cant make this sh*t up.



u people know nothing about military power or warfare. 

why are u here? at least dont make retarded comments. 

This website is DEADLY accurate. You can take my word for it, because i am very familiar with these things.


----------



## Mercenary

Global Fire Power is a total joke.

Iran is ranked ahead of Germany.

Is this site for real?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shinigami

what strikes me strange is that indians are blissfully unaware how powerful their military is. just because you dont go around threatening your neighbours, does not mean you are weak.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mercenary

Shinigami said:


> what strikes me strange is that indians are blissfully unaware how powerful their military is. just because you dont go around threatening your neighbours, does not mean you are weak.



Indian military is large and bloated.

India lost 700 men when they deployed forces along the Pakistani border in 2002.

Its a large moving elephant, while Pakistan is nimble as ants.

The elephant can kill hundreds, perhaps thousands of ants, but soon the ants will overpower that elephant and the elephant will be eaten to the bone.


----------



## Shinigami

Mercenary said:


> Indian military is large and bloated.
> 
> India lost 700 men when they deployed forces along the Pakistani border in 2002.
> 
> Its a large moving elephant, while Pakistan is nimble as ants.
> 
> The elephant can kill hundreds, perhaps thousands of ants, but soon the ants will overpower that elephant and the elephant will be eaten to the bone.



pakistan lost a lot more in the stand off. i am guessing thats why your numbers were'nt released.

about your claim of Indian military is large and bloated,

The Sunday Times of London, which had reporters on all the fronts, wrote on 12 December1971 says, "*It took only 12 days for the Indian Army to smash its way to Dacca, an achievement reminiscent of the German Blitzkrieg across France in 1940. The strategy was the same: speed, ferocity and flexibility.*"

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Vinod2070

Pakistan is more of a nuisance for India.

PA's main (and real) adversaries are all inside.

All glorious victories have also been very much within. The 111 brigade, jumping a few fences and a glorious victory secured.

They will dare not fight India and we are not interested.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mercenary

Shinigami said:


> pakistan lost a lot more in the stand off. i am guessing thats why your numbers were'nt released.
> 
> about your claim of Indian military is large and bloated,
> 
> The Sunday Times of London, which had reporters on all the fronts, wrote on 12 December1971 says, "*It took only 12 days for the Indian Army to smash its way to Dacca, an achievement reminiscent of the German Blitzkrieg across France in 1940. The strategy was the same: speed, ferocity and flexibility.*"



We didn't

India lost 700 men while Pakistan hardly lost any.



Shinigami said:


> pakistan lost a lot more in the stand off. i am guessing thats why your numbers were'nt released.
> 
> about your claim of Indian military is large and bloated,
> 
> The Sunday Times of London, which had reporters on all the fronts, wrote on 12 December1971 says, "*It took only 12 days for the Indian Army to smash its way to Dacca, an achievement reminiscent of the German Blitzkrieg across France in 1940. The strategy was the same: speed, ferocity and flexibility.*"



The fact that our army was isolated and surrounded by all sides.

Why don't you boast about Goa too and how you did a blitzkreig on Portugal. 

And when you fought as equals, you got destroyed such as 1962 clash with China when India was totally and utterly defeated.


----------



## harpoon

Mercenary said:


> We didn't
> 
> India lost 700 men while Pakistan hardly lost any.



There is no clear statistics bcs of the secretive nature of PA. The world don't even know how much PA men was lost in Kargil.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Battle of Bach Dang River

ahfatzia said:


> A bit of a surprise Taiwan ranks 14th and my country, Singapore, ranks 41st. Where's the all powerful Vietnam? According to the Dai Viet boys here, they can wipe Taiwan and Singapore off the map and subjugate the Chinese Hoas.
> 
> Seriously Nepal is stronger than Dai Viet. Oh wait, Philippines at 23rd? I don't believe it, a country that defeated the US of A is not ranked? Must be my eyes, can someone prove me wrong, please.



If GFP extended into a top 100, then hopefully you can see the rank of Vietnam.

If you cannot read any statement by the government or the military in Vietnam or at least from officials of Vietnam, then please dont conclude "they can wipe Taiwan and Singapore off the map and subjugate the Chinese Hoas". That is not the Vietnamese government's ideas and expectations of most Vietnamese.

Dont make others misunderstand that Singapore and Taiwan depend on the protection of Uncle Sam is because the threats from Vietnam.

Vietnam has never been stronger than China, but as you can see, we defeated them many times in the past to defend our country every times they had wanted to annex VN.

And an interesting thing, before the French invaded Vietnam in 1858, they had conducted a research Vietnam and concluded that "the Vietnamese dont know how to use guns, except some ethnic minority people in mountain areas". However, in 1858 coalition French-Spanish began opening fire attack Da Nang, they had to take 25 years to be able to invade entire Vietnam, but in the end we still won the French. Vietnamese army in 1954 with rudimentary equipment, but with special tactics, defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu, captured more than 11 thousand French soldiers, who were equipped to teeth and backed by the US...


----------



## Holmes

Shinigami said:


> u people know nothing about military power or warfare.
> 
> why are u here? at least dont make retarded comments.
> 
> This website is DEADLY accurate. You can take my word for it, because i am very familiar with these things.


 
correkt. But militiary isnt everything. man power is even deadlier.. you'll soon see..  
Where are the ICBM's?.. Rise..


----------



## Vinod2070

harpoon said:


> There is no clear statistics bcs of the secretive nature of PA. The world don't even know how much PA men was lost in Kargil.


 
Although the democraticaly elected PM of the time did clarify that.

He mentioned a figure of 4000 killed, perhaps a bit conservatively.


----------



## harpoon

Mercenary said:


> The fact that our army was isolated and surrounded by all sides.
> 
> Why don't you boast about Goa too and how you did a blitzkreig on Portugal.
> 
> And when you fought as equals, you got destroyed such as 1962 clash with China when India was totally and utterly defeated.



1962 was the weakest point of IA's post independence history..then on there was no looking back. Fact that Chinese never did any stupid since 1962 is a testament to that.


----------



## kawaraj

surprised no Vietnam which sound quite cocky around the forum.


----------



## Shinigami

Mercenary said:


> We didn't
> 
> India lost 700 men while *Pakistan hardly lost any*.



then why arent they releasing the numbers like india did? why are they being withheld?
Look at any indo-pak conflict in the past, both wars and battles fought on even ground. tell me who lost more troops?



Mercenary said:


> The fact that our army was isolated and surrounded by all sides.
> 
> Why don't you boast about Goa too and how you did a blitzkreig on Portugal.



according to sun tzu(art of war), your men fight the hardest when they are surrounded. 
E.Pak was much more militarized than goa. it was much harder to capture. 



Mercenary said:


> And when you fought as equals, you got destroyed such as 1962 clash with China when India was totally and utterly defeated.



 people make this mistake. its forgivable though

all they did in 62 was beat a small group of indian border gaurds who were armed with sticks and stones and ran away when the real counter attack came.

Then they fliched in the 87 rematch
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/167488-1986-how-india-china-almost-went-war.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ahfatzia

Battle of Bach Dang River said:


> If GFP extended into a top 100, then hopefully you can see the rank of Vietnam.
> 
> If you cannot read any statement by the government or the military in Vietnam or at least from officials of Vietnam, then please dont conclude "they can wipe Taiwan and Singapore off the map and subjugate the Chinese Hoas". That is not the Vietnamese government's ideas and expectations of most Vietnamese.
> 
> Dont make others misunderstand that Singapore and Taiwan depend on the protection of Uncle Sam is because the threats from Vietnam.
> 
> Vietnam has never been stronger than China, but as you can see, we defeated them many times in the past to defend our country every times they had wanted to annex VN.
> 
> And an interesting thing, before the French invaded Vietnam in 1858, they had conducted a research Vietnam and concluded that "the Vietnamese dont know how to use guns, except some ethnic minority people in mountain areas". However, in 1858 coalition French-Spanish began opening fire attack Da Nang, they had to take 25 years to be able to invade entire Vietnam, but in the end we still won the French. Vietnamese army in 1954 with rudimentary equipment, but with special tactics, defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu, captured more than 11 thousand French soldiers, who were equipped to teeth and backed by the US...




Hey, I didn't say it. It was your compatriots who claimed Vietnam can destroy Taiwan easily and yet Taiwan ranks 14th. 

In fact I'm on Vietnam's side. How can my country(41), a small city state, can rank high than Vietnam, a much bigger country. How about Philippines(23)? This survey is BS. Vietnam should rank in the low 30s, Philippines in the 40s and Singapore shouldn't ranked. Don't you think so?


----------



## Holmes

harpoon said:


> 1962 was the weakest point of IA's post independence history..then on there was no looking back. Fact that Chinese never did any stupid since 1962 is a testament to that.


Besides that the chinese militiary officials have themselves said that India is not enemy, means everything else is just media hype.


----------



## AHMED85

i think this was no matching with Defense Budget list....


----------



## Avisheik

ahfatzia said:


> Hey, I didn't say it. It was your compatriots who claimed Vietnam can destroy Taiwan easily and yet Taiwan ranks 14th.
> 
> In fact I'm on Vietnam's side. How can my country(41), a small city state, can rank high than Vietnam, a much bigger country. How about Philippines(23)? This survey is BS. Vietnam should rank in the low 30s, Philippines in the 40s and Singapore shouldn't ranked. Don't you think so?



Its the other way round Singapore should be ranked at around mid 30 and philipines should not be ranked at all. Singapore's air force is quite comparable to that of pakistan and their navy is first class



Holmes said:


> Besides that the chinese militiary officials have themselves said that India is not enemy, means everything else is just media hype.



more like PDF hype

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ahfatzia

Avisheik said:


> Its the other way round Singapore should be ranked at around mid 30 and philipines should not be ranked at all. Singapore's air force is quite comparable to that of pakistan and their navy is first class




Being a small city state we have to be a little humble and modesty or else we make too many enemies.


----------



## Avisheik

ahfatzia said:


> Being a small city state we have to be a little humble and modesty or else we make too many enemies.



But you are undervaluing your country here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peaceful Civilian

I think correct ranking.
Pakistan at 15 without nuclear consideration.
Not bad place.
Just wondering about Saudi Arabia , Rich oil country, largest/quality air force in top 5 and still Ranking at 26.
I was expecting Saudi arabia in top 15.
India rank is also correct.
Turkey at 6. Wonderful position.
South Korea at 7th position and North korea is at 22 without considerations of nuclear weapon.

Overall correct ranking


----------



## dunhill

kawaraj said:


> surprised no Vietnam which sound quite *cocky* around the forum.



Viet Nam is a dirt poor country and its ranks will be at very bottom list, but I still belief that will gives it *cocky* to any invader mouth that included yours country if give it a try.


----------



## Shinigami

Peaceful Civlian said:


> I think correct ranking.
> Pakistan at 15 without nuclear consideration.
> Not bad place.
> Just wondering about Saudi Arabia , Rich oil country, largest/quality air force in top 5 and still Ranking at 26.
> I was expecting Saudi arabia in top 15.
> India rank is also correct.
> Turkey at 6. Wonderful position.
> South Korea at 7th position and North korea is at 22 without considerations of nuclear weapon.
> 
> Overall correct ranking



why only KSA -AF? did u take into account its navy? or army? GFP did apparently. then there is also manpower. can u figure those rich shiekhs getting up and fighting?


----------



## joekrish

There are lot of controversial ways to calculate a country's fire power, may be this is the least.


----------



## Battle of Bach Dang River

ahfatzia said:


> Hey, I didn't say it. It was your compatriots who claimed Vietnam can destroy Taiwan easily and yet Taiwan ranks 14th.
> 
> In fact I'm on Vietnam's side. How can my country(41), a small city state, can rank high than Vietnam, a much bigger country. How about Philippines(23)? This survey is BS. Vietnam should rank in the low 30s, Philippines in the 40s and Singapore shouldn't ranked. Don't you think so?



Singapore military power would place higher if its larger troops. On military equipment, Singapore owns the most modern equipment in ASEAN.

We dont query about the ranking. I think that GFP has its scientific basis.



ahfatzia said:


> Being a small city state we have to be a little humble and modesty or else we make too many enemies.



Dont worry, with your mighty army, plus the protection of Uncle Sam, I think no one wants to be an enemy of Singapore.

Usually, bullies often like bullying a weak country and/or no a military umbrella.



kawaraj said:


> surprised no Vietnam which sound quite cocky around the forum.



Not surprised, VN never in the rankings of GFP yet.
Try to win an invader, you will feel it's very great.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arp2041

clmeta said:


> Nonsense rankings. The first six are definitely UN security council permanent members and Israel.
> They have ranked India above France and Israel, whereas India mostly imports all its weapons and the makers are ranked below India.
> Unbelievable.






anarchy 99 said:


> India at number 4?
> 
> And the countries it imports weapons from are below them. You cant make this sh*t up.



India deserves the no. 4 place mate, the reason France & Israel are below India b'coz they have a low military power than India, this fact cannot be altered by another fact that India buy weapons from these countries. India also buys weapons from Switzerland, Ukraine or even Brazil, does that mean they are above India in military power, just look at some figures:

India has 750+ fighter jets whereas both France & Israel have around 300.

India has 1.3 million armed personnel whereas both France & Israel have around few lakhs.

India has 2nd largest army, 4th largest air force, 5th largest navy, 100+ nuclear weapons, nuclear capable missiles, large paramilitary force, 10th largest GDP, 8th largest military budget, etc...

So IMO 4th is a proper rank for India though i will not say that it is totally undisputed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## illusion8

arp2041 said:


> India deserves the no. 4 place mate, the reason France & Israel are below India b'coz they have a low military power than India, this fact cannot be altered by another fact that India buy weapons from these countries. India also buys weapons from Switzerland, Ukraine or even Brazil, does that mean they are above India in military power, just look at some figures:
> 
> India has 750+ fighter jets whereas both France & Israel have around 300.
> 
> India has 1.3 million armed personnel whereas both France & Israel have around few lakhs.
> 
> India has 2nd largest army, 4th largest air force, 5th largest navy, 100+ nuclear weapons, nuclear capable missiles, large paramilitary force, 10th largest GDP, 8th largest military budget, etc...
> 
> So IMO 4th is a proper rank for India though i will not say that it is totally undisputed.



You are replying to a troll don't bother wasting your time on cr@p.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

arp2041 said:


> India deserves the no. 4 place mate, the reason France & Israel are below India b'coz they have a low military power than India, this fact cannot be altered by another fact that India buy weapons from these countries. India also buys weapons from Switzerland, Ukraine or even Brazil, does that mean they are above India in military power, just look at some figures:
> 
> India has 750+ fighter jets whereas both France & Israel have around 300.
> 
> India has 1.3 million armed personnel whereas both France & Israel have around few lakhs.
> 
> India has 2nd largest army, 4th largest air force, 5th largest navy, 100+ nuclear weapons, nuclear capable missiles, large paramilitary force, 10th largest GDP, 8th largest military budget, etc...
> 
> So IMO 4th is a proper rank for India though i will not say that it is totally undisputed.



Moreover, there is geography. It is very very hard to defeat large countries. The size of the country multiplies its military capability.


----------



## clmeta

I know our military is powerful but don't overboard and keep your feet grounded.
India buys weapons from Israel. How can it be ranked above Israel?
Whether it is military intelligence, espionage, defence technology or battle experience, Israel is clearly ahead.
That is one of the main reasons we good terms with them.
If India was the size of Israel, can you imagine we could have survived ?


Shinigami said:


> what strikes me strange is that indians are blissfully unaware how powerful their military is. just because you dont go around threatening your neighbours, does not mean you are weak.



Yes Alexander, we saw it 1971.
Please cut the crap.


Mercenary said:


> Indian military is large and bloated.
> 
> India lost 700 men when they deployed forces along the Pakistani border in 2002.
> 
> Its a large moving elephant, while Pakistan is nimble as ants.
> 
> The elephant can kill hundreds, perhaps thousands of ants, but soon the ants will overpower that elephant and the elephant will be eaten to the bone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

These rankings are pointless for nations like India. They would make some sense in the colonial era, when colonial powers were expanding the military reach.

Its makes no difference if India is ranked 1st or 192nd as long as Indian military can defend the nation in the time of need.


----------



## Mercenary

harpoon said:


> 1962 was the weakest point of IA's post independence history..then on there was no looking back. Fact that Chinese never did any stupid since 1962 is a testament to that.



And 1971 was our weakest point...and besides Bangladesh is Pakistan's ally now. 



arp2041 said:


> India deserves the no. 4 place mate, the reason France & Israel are below India b'coz they have a low military power than India, this fact cannot be altered by another fact that India buy weapons from these countries. India also buys weapons from Switzerland, Ukraine or even Brazil, does that mean they are above India in military power, just look at some figures:
> 
> India has 750+ fighter jets whereas both France & Israel have around 300.
> 
> India has 1.3 million armed personnel whereas both France & Israel have around few lakhs.
> 
> India has 2nd largest army, 4th largest air force, 5th largest navy, 100+ nuclear weapons, nuclear capable missiles, large paramilitary force, 10th largest GDP, 8th largest military budget, etc...
> 
> So IMO 4th is a proper rank for India though i will not say that it is totally undisputed.



Its quality and not quantity.

One French Fighter can shoot down 6 Indian Fighters. 

The French and Israeli Air Force alone can annihilate the Indian Air Force.

While the Indian Navy would be at the bottom of the Sea if it ever went toe to toe with the French Navy.

Once your Air Force is taken out, the French and Israeli Fighters can lay waste to your "2nd largest army"

In essence, India is no where as strong as the European Powers like France or Germany or England.

Only on retarded sites like Global Firepower ranks a country like India higher than France of Israel because India has a large poorly trained military equipped with obsolete equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harpoon

Mercenary said:


> And 1971 was our weakest point...and besides Bangladesh is Pakistan's ally now.



The difference is IA never compromised the territorial integrity of India..even in 1962. As for BD being ally of Pakistan...thats too much of an overstretch..don't you think. Don't forget BDs accuse India of supporting the present BD govt.Ever heard of the term RAWAWAMI.



Mercenary said:


> Its quality and not quantity.
> 
> One French Fighter can shoot down 6 Indian Fighters.
> 
> The French and Israeli Air Force alone can annihilate the Indian Air Force.
> 
> While the Indian Navy would be at the bottom of the Sea if it ever went toe to toe with the French Navy.
> 
> Once your Air Force is taken out, the French and Israeli Fighters can lay waste to your "2nd largest army"
> 
> In essence, India is no where as strong as the European Powers like France or Germany or England.
> 
> Only on retarded sites like Global Firepower ranks a country like India higher than France of Israel because India has a large poorly trained military equipped with obsolete equipment.



I would like to see the source from which you come up with this conclusions. Talking about quality I have seen here Pakistanis chest beating about how great is their training of their armymen and PAF pilots (1 Pakistani = 10 Indians), yet Pakistan is ranked below India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shinigami

Mercenary said:


> And 1971 was our weakest point...and besides Bangladesh is Pakistan's ally now.
> 
> 
> 
> Its quality and not quantity.
> 
> One French Fighter can shoot down 6 Indian Fighters.
> 
> The French and Israeli Air Force alone can annihilate the Indian Air Force.
> 
> While the Indian Navy would be at the bottom of the Sea if it ever went toe to toe with the French Navy.
> 
> Once your Air Force is taken out, the French and Israeli Fighters can lay waste to your "2nd largest army"
> 
> In essence, India is no where as strong as the European Powers like France or Germany or England.
> 
> Only on retarded sites like Global Firepower ranks a country like India higher than France of Israel *because India has a large poorly trained military equipped with obsolete equipment.*




&#8220;I believe what this demonstrates is that the capacity exists out there for any nation with the appropriate resources and the will to acquire technology and to train their aircrews to be very, very capable,&#8221; said Col. Russ Handy, commander of the 3rd Operations Group. &#8220;In the long term this could occur in nations outside of the Indian Air Force.&#8221;

The surprising sophistication of Indian fighter aircraft and skill of Indian pilots demonstrated at the Cope India air combat exercise Feb. 15 through 27 at Gwalior Air Force Station, India, should provide a reality check for those who had assumed unquestioned U.S. air superiority
Hampton Stephens

&#8220;The (Indian) pilots are as aggressive as our pilots. They are excellent aviators; they work very hard at mission planning; they try to get as much out of a mission or sortie as possible, just like us,&#8221; he said. &#8220;From one fighter pilot to another, there&#8217;s really not that much difference in how we prepare for a mission and what we want to get out of it.&#8221;
Col. Greg Neubeck


"very proficient in [their] aircraft and smart on tactics. That combination was tough for us to overcome,"

"The adversaries are better than we thought," Col. Mike Snodgrass added.&#8221; And in the case of the Indian Air Force both their training and some of their equipment was better than we anticipated."

&#8220;What we&#8217;ve seen in the last two weeks is the IAF can stand toe-to-toe with best AF in the world.&#8221;

&#8220;I pity the pilot who has to face the IAF and chances the day to underestimate him; because he won&#8217;t be going home.&#8221;

Indians seem to excel at air power. U.S. Air Force pilots who face off against their Indian counterparts in mock combat rave about the skills and panache of Indian airmen.
James Holmes
From Russia With Love? China vs. India Carrier Showdown | Flashpoints


&#8220;The greatest compliment we heard from an IAF pilot &#8211; You American pilots are just like us, simply down to earth people.&#8221;
The Boresight: Swirl of Controversy: Cope India and Red Flag 2008 Exercises

The outcome of the exercise boils down to [the fact that] they ran tactics that were more advanced than we expected, Snowden says. India had developed its own air tactics somewhat in a vacuum. They had done some training with the French that we knew about, but we did not expect them to be a very well-trained air force. 
http://taiwantp.net/cgi/TWforum.pl?board_id=6&type=show_post&post=449_6

"The Indian Air Force is a world-class air force with great aircraft, great pilots, and great leadership," said Capt. Marcus Wilson, an Aggressor pilot at Nellis and the team chief for the exercise.
404: Code One Magazine

Indian pilots have created their own combat techniques and proved to be very smart, flexible and adaptive. This was also not an expected fact because Western tactical experts used to stay on their vision of dealing with Russian style pilots with rigid tactics and no independent moves what so ever. All this matters combined points out the Indian fighters to a real considerable threat leaving the Western analysts and USAF Command thinking it over how credible their own weapons are.
http://www.dutchaviationsupport.com/Articles/IL-78 MIDAS&Crousaders.pdf

Indian AF Su-30K during the Cope India exercise. The Flanker's soundly defeated US Air Force F-15Cs during this exercise, exploiting not only superior BVR radar/missile capabilities, but also the TKS-2 datalink, used to network flights of Flankers 
Sukhoi T-50/I-21/Article 701 PAK-FA and Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker

"We came rolling in, like, 'Beep-beep, superpower coming through,'" Colonel Fornof told me. "And we had our eyes opened. We learned a lot. By the third week, we were facing a threat that we weren't prepared to face, because we had underestimated them. They had figured out how to take Russian-built equipment and improve upon it."
Black Hawk Down author Mark Bowden
Infamous YouTube star Fornof re-appears in pro-F-22 article - The DEW Line 

Indian planners combined the use of top-line fighters like this Su-30 with older types and impressive, innovative tactics. 
Credit: USAF TSGT. KEITH BROWN
http://taiwantp.net/cgi/TWforum.pl?board_id=6&type=show_post&post=449_6

"When we saw that they were a more professional air force, we realized that within the constraints of the exercise we were going to have a very difficult time," Snowden (A USAF senior pilot at cope india)says. "In general, it looked like they ran a broad spectrum of tactics and they were adaptive. They would analyze what we were doing and then try something else. They weren't afraid to bring the strikers in high or low. They would move them around so that we could never anticipate from day to day what we were going to see." 


thats about the AF. 

dont even get me started on the navy, a 15-1 kill ratio is something even the USN does not have


----------



## Shinigami

double post......


----------



## Grand-Vizier

Tshering22 said:


> I think it is going by the size of manpower than just quality.
> 
> Otherwise I am sure that Israel is stronger than today's UK at least in terms of capability. And France should be at number 5 at least.



Israel stronger than UK ? wtf ? yes UK doesnt have as good airforce as israel atm but combined navy and airforce UK can project much better power , Israel is good defensively when attacked as seen before.

Saudi Arabia should be higher , at least in top 17-18 , with new apaches , f-15 , eurofighter etc .

Australia , spain , canada should be higher.



Mercenary said:


> Global Fire Power is a total joke.
> 
> Iran is ranked ahead of Germany.
> 
> Is this site for real?



I think it might take into consideration the law that prohibits germany to build big army.



Mercenary said:


> Global Fire Power is a total joke.
> 
> Iran is ranked ahead of Germany.
> 
> Is this site for real?



I think it might take into consideration the law that prohibits germany to build big army.


----------



## KingMamba

True rankings IMO with all nukes/ alliances taken into consideration. Top 15

1- USA- Not much else needs to be said. 
2- Russia- Manpower, nukes, great military infrastructure, great air force, and good navy. Most important they are battle tested.
3- China- Manpower, nukes, expanding military budget and expertise. Overall Good navy/ air force. Good economy to sustain a war.
4- UK- Nato alliance, good air force although shrinking, great navy, decent sized army but Nato alliance cancels out the need for large manpower. Nukes/missiles
5- France- Nato alliance, great airforce, strong navy, good numbers, great expertise in weaponry, large amount of nukes/missiles. Morale of troops is questionable (France always surrenders ). 
6- Israel- Top of the line tech, Nato backup, nukes, first class airforce, unlimited manpower, missiles, and most important greatly battle tested.
7- India- Large army, good navy, expanding air force which will be first class when all fighters are inducted, nukes, missiles, and battle tested. Oh yeah and a good economy to sustain a war.
8- Turkey- Nato alliance, great navy, good airforce, expanding knowledge in military tech, and good economy to sustain a war. 
9- South Korea
10- Japan
11- Germany
12- Pakistan
13- Brazil
14- Iran
15- Taiwan 

Got lazy although you can look up the capabilities of these countries yourselves.


----------



## danger007

Mercenary said:


> And 1971 was our weakest point...and besides Bangladesh is Pakistan's ally now.
> 
> 
> 
> Its quality and not quantity.
> 
> One French Fighter can shoot down 6 Indian Fighters.
> 
> The French and Israeli Air Force alone can annihilate the Indian Air Force.
> 
> While the Indian Navy would be at the bottom of the Sea if it ever went toe to toe with the French Navy.
> 
> Once your Air Force is taken out, the French and Israeli Fighters can lay waste to your "2nd largest army"
> 
> In essence, India is no where as strong as the European Powers like France or Germany or England.
> 
> Only on retarded sites like Global Firepower ranks a country like India higher than France of Israel because India has a large poorly trained military equipped with obsolete equipment.


 
hmmm then how about one Rafael and JF-17, j-10b....2squadrans will eliminate entire paf....hehehehe


----------



## Grand-Vizier

KingMamba93 said:


> True rankings IMO with all nukes/ alliances taken into consideration. Top 15
> 
> 1- USA- Not much else needs to be said.
> 2- Russia- Manpower, nukes, great military infrastructure, great air force, and good navy. Most important they are battle tested.
> 3- China- Manpower, nukes, expanding military budget and expertise. Overall Good navy/ air force. Good economy to sustain a war.
> 4- UK- Nato alliance, good air force although shrinking, great navy, decent sized army but Nato alliance cancels out the need for large manpower. Nukes/missiles
> 5- France- Nato alliance, great airforce, strong navy, good numbers, great expertise in weaponry, large amount of nukes/missiles. Morale of troops is questionable (France always surrenders ).
> 6- Israel- Top of the line tech, Nato backup, nukes, first class airforce, unlimited manpower, missiles, and most important greatly battle tested.
> 7- India- Large army, good navy, expanding air force which will be first class when all fighters are inducted, nukes, missiles, and battle tested. Oh yeah and a good economy to sustain a war.
> 8- Turkey- Nato alliance, great navy, good airforce, expanding knowledge in military tech, and good economy to sustain a war.
> 9- South Korea
> 10- Japan
> 11- Germany
> 12- Pakistan
> 13- Brazil
> 14- Iran
> 15- Taiwan
> 
> Got lazy although you can look up the capabilities of these countries yourselves.



UK airforce is quite outdated if you check it out , they only have eurofighters that are new , they are getting new ships and 2 AC though . and israel cant be 6th . I think Brazil should be ranked higher , im not sure about their armed forces but they are growing good and have that air company embrao or something and slowly improving in defence tech. If we dont include the any laws for both japan and germany i would put them 6th position , atleast germany with very good defence products and japan economy.

Remember this ranking excludes nukes---oh just saw you said taking nukes and alliances into account .


----------



## KingMamba

Grand-Vizier said:


> UK airforce is quite outdated if you check it out , they only have eurofighters that are new , they are getting new ships and 2 AC though . and israel cant be 6th . I think Brazil should be ranked higher , im not sure about their armed forces but they are growing good and have that air company embrao or something and slowly improving in defence tech. If we dont include the any laws for both japan and germany i would put them 6th position , atleast germany with very good defence products and japan economy.
> 
> Remember this ranking excludes nukes---oh just saw you said taking nukes and alliances into account .



Bro the problem I have with Brazil is that they don't have much military experience. I find it hard to believe they can beat any of the countries I ranked ahead of them as the experience part is very vastly underrated.

UK still gets the nod because Nato alliance cancels out the need for them to have a large air force while their navy is still first class and they have nukes/missiles to back them up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Wright

KingMamba93 said:


> True rankings IMO with all nukes/ alliances taken into consideration. Top 15
> 
> 1- USA- Not much else needs to be said.
> 2- Russia- Manpower, nukes, great military infrastructure, great air force, and good navy. Most important they are battle tested.
> 3- China- Manpower, nukes, expanding military budget and expertise. Overall Good navy/ air force. Good economy to sustain a war.
> 4- UK- Nato alliance, good air force although shrinking, great navy, decent sized army but Nato alliance cancels out the need for large manpower. Nukes/missiles
> 5- France- Nato alliance, great airforce, strong navy, good numbers, great expertise in weaponry, large amount of nukes/missiles. Morale of troops is questionable (France always surrenders ).
> 6- Israel- Top of the line tech, Nato backup, nukes, first class airforce, unlimited manpower, missiles, and most important greatly battle tested.
> 7- India- Large army, good navy, expanding air force which will be first class when all fighters are inducted, nukes, missiles, and battle tested. Oh yeah and a good economy to sustain a war.
> 8- Turkey- Nato alliance, great navy, good airforce, expanding knowledge in military tech, and good economy to sustain a war.
> 9- South Korea
> 10- Japan
> 11- Germany
> 12- Pakistan
> 13- Brazil
> 14- Iran
> 15- Taiwan
> 
> Got lazy although you can look up the capabilities of these countries yourselves.



Saudia Arabia has a more modern armed forces than Iran, Taiwan, Pakistan, Brazil, Japan, South Korea, and the UK. 

Im surprised you omitted them when they should be right after Israel. At least on paper.


----------



## kum.

I Think It should be


1) USA
2) RUSSIA
3) CHINA
4) INDIA
5) FRANCE
6) UK
7) ISRAEL
8) NORTH KOREA
9) PAK
10) JAPAN


----------



## timetravel

The right order would be:

USA
Russia
India
China
France
Israel
UK
Iran
Japan
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
South Korea
North Korea


----------



## skydrill_2

for me--

1. USA
2. RUSSIA
3. CHINA
4. INDIA
5. FRANCE
6. UK
7. ISRAEL
8. NORTH KOREA
9. BRAZIL

ASIA--

1.CHINA 2. INDIA 3. N. KOREA 4.JAPAN


----------



## Edevelop

Wright said:


> *Saudia Arabia has a more modern armed forces than Iran, Taiwan, Pakistan, Brazil, Japan, South Korea, and the UK. *
> 
> Im surprised you omitted them when they should be right after Israel. At least on paper.



ROFL before picking up their weapons in a war, they'll start to runaway

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skydrill_2

cb4 said:


> ROFL before picking up their weapons in a war, they'll start to runaway...



yup, saudi may be modern but they cant be stronger than pakistan


----------



## applesauce

timetravel said:


> The right order would be:
> 
> USA
> Russia
> India
> China
> France
> Israel
> UK
> Iran
> Japan
> Pakistan
> Saudi Arabia
> Turkey
> South Korea
> North Korea



what are you smoking?


----------



## Wright

Some nations have the ability to form great militaries, but simply opt not to. Japan, Germany, UK, France are examples. 

It would be more fair if only those nations serious about their militaries were included.


----------



## Fanling Monk

timetravel said:


> The right order would be:
> 
> USA
> Russia
> India
> China
> France
> Israel
> UK
> Iran
> Japan
> Pakistan
> Saudi Arabia
> Turkey
> South Korea
> North Korea




Don't you think this is better?

India
USA
Russia
none
x
x
x
x
x
x

After all the customer is always the King.


----------

