6 Most Powerful Armies of All Time

[Saif al-Arab]

There can be no serious list without Arabs being included.

Arabs created 3 of the 11 largest empires in human history. No other ethnic group in the top 15 is near such a number. Arabs ruled countless of caliphates, kingdoms, sultanates, sheikdoms, emirates, imamates on 3 continents (Asia, Africa and Europe) in the past 1500 years and where the main power in the Islamic world for almost 1000 years before the rise of Turks (Ottoman empire) in the early 1500's.

I will just post 4 empires. This should suffice to get the point across.

Rashidun Caliphate - 632-661 (11th biggest biggest empire in history, first Islamic empire and third biggest Islamic caliphate and empire in history after the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphates)

Rashidun Caliphate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Umayyad Caliphate - 661-750 (5th biggest biggest empire in history, biggest Islamic caliphate and empire in history by far and second biggest non-Western empire in history after the Mongol Empire which is number 2 overall after the British Empire)

Umayyad Caliphate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Abbasid Caliphate - 750-1517 (9th biggest biggest empire in history, second biggest Islamic caliphate and empire in history and longest ruling caliphate in Islamic history)

Abbasid Caliphate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fatimid Caliphate - 909-1171 (34th biggest biggest empire in history, biggest Shia Muslim (Shia Ismaili) caliphate and empire in history and the fifth biggest caliphate in history after the Umayyad, Abbasid, Rashidun and Ottoman caliphates)

Fatimid Caliphate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of largest empires - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am not even talking about the Arab generals many of whom were undefeated.

Khalid ibn al-Walid (ra), Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas (ra), the 4 rightly guided Caliphs etc.

Based on conquest and territory controlled along with the modern armies I would say that the US, Arabs, Turks, Mongols (although their empire was very short-lived), Romans, Brits, Germans, French, Spaniards and Chinese deserve special mentions.

In ancient times (long before Romans and Persians emerged) it was mostly Semites in the form of ancient Egyptians, Akkadians, Assyrians etc. People who created the first real empires. Chinese came slightly after them.

Anyway such lists are always subjective and many of the lists that exist are in many ways laughable.

In reality the modern-day army of Zimbabwe would have steamrolled great powers from 300 years ago just due to much superior weaponry. It makes no sense to compare modern-day armies with long gone armies.

Such lists should be divided into time periods and maybe even geography if you ask me. At least there is no doubt to the title of the "most powerful army of all time". That lies firmly in the hand of the US.

 

[jhungary]

1. Qin Empire Army

The most numerous land forces on this blue planet, an awesome fighting machine with massive deployment of highly advanced weaponaries without peers such as crossbow, that was 2,000 years ahead its time with an effective kill range twice as that of a moden assault rifle. Crossbow could penetrate Alexander army's shields like knives through hot butter, making Alexander the Great's forces looked like kids play.

ever heard of the Art of War?


2. Han Empire Army :

Han Empire Army comprehensively devastated the Hun --> the Hun then escaped to the West for good and beat the Goth --> The Goth went over and beat the Germanics --> the Germanics turned around and beat the Roman Empire.


3. Tang Empire Army:

World's largest and the most advanced economy by a long shot, with military power to match with the statue.


4. The Yuan Empire (the Mongols, setup by the grandson of Genghis Khan):

created the world's largest land-based empire in history, capitaled in Beijing...


5 Ming Empire Army

it destroyed the once all-powerful Mongol hordes once and for good. Due to Ming, the Mongol army have never recoverd many centried later till this day.

World's largest and most powerful land forces and naval forces which were much more advanced and powerful than the combined forces of Europe.


6. US Army

LOL

I don't know what is more funny,

The fact that somebody ACTUALLY came up with this list? or

The fact that somebody ACTUALLY believe it is true.

LOL

 

[vostok]

No the germans lost to basically the greatest coalition of industrial might and manpower in the history of mankind.Russians did not have 'inferior weaponry',they lost 3 times more men than the germans.

My friend, I did not expect such nonsense from you. The ratio of losses of Germans and their allies on the Eastern Front to the losses of the USSR - 1.1 - 1.3 (If we consider only the military, of course, the Nazi barbarians killed dozens times more civilians in the Soviet Union than the Red Army in Germany).
At the same time in 1941, under Hitler control (occupied and allied countries of Europe) was about 2 times more people than in the USSR.
By the mid-42 years, the occupied territories and the Nazi allies had almost 5 times more inhabitants.
It is foolish to regard this war as a war of Germany and Russia. As in the times of Napoleon it was the war of all over Europe against Russia.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

My friend, I did not expect such nonsense from you. The ratio of losses of Germans and their allies on the Eastern Front to the losses of the USSR - 1.1 - 1.3 (If we consider only the military, of course, the Nazi barbarians killed dozens times more civilians in the Soviet Union than the Red Army in Germany).
At the same time in 1941, under Hitler control (occupied and allied countries of Europe) was about 2 times more people than in the USSR.
By the mid-42 years, the occupied territories and the Nazi allies had almost 5 times more inhabitants.
It is foolish to regard this war as a war of Germany and Russia. As in the times of Napoleon it was the war of all over Europe against Russia.

Yeah i'm sorry,i was counting purely killed on both sides ignoring POWs which is why it was like 4.5 million germans to 11 million russians approx and thats why i got that ratin closer inspection huge numbers of german POWs of the last 2 years 44-45 usually made it home alive and thus not added to kill list,while the largest number of soviet pows in 41-42 died in captivity.Thats why the numbers got skewed,when we adjust them, ratios are significantly lowered.So sry abt that.The red army won the war vs the wehrmacht-thats indisputable.While i take ur point about hitler controlling larger nominal population,in real terms this manpower not useable.For example the millions of men from france capable of military service didn't fight in russia except a band of few thousand nazi french ss volunteers.Basically battle was fought with german speaking manpower,some ss legions and its balkan/italian allies.

I do agree largely abt the napoleon argument.Half of napoleon's invasion force was non-french.But also austria/prussia sent token expeditionary forces who avoided any major engagement with russian forces and switched sides later.

 

[vostok]

Yeah i'm sorry,i was counting purely killed on both sides ignoring POWs which is why it was like 4.5 million germans to 11 million russians approx and thats why i got that ratin closer inspection huge numbers of german POWs of the last 2 years 44-45 usually made it home alive and thus not added to kill list,while the largest number of soviet pows in 41-42 died in soviet captivity.Thats why the numbers got skewed,when we adjust them, ratios are significantly lowered.So sry abt that.The red army won the war vs the wehrmacht-thats indisputable.While i take ur point about hitler controlling larger nominal population,in real terms this manpower not useable.For example the millions of men from france capable of military service didn't fight in russia except a band of few thousand nazi french ss volunteers.Basically battle was fought with german speaking manpower,some ss legions and its balkan/italian allies.

I do agree largely abt the napoleon argument.Half of napoleon's invasion force was non-french.But also austria/prussia sent token expeditionary forces who avoided any major engagement with russian forces and switched sides later.

But the French, Dutch, Czechs, Danes and others have worked hard for the military industry or civil economy of the Reich. Spain was neutral reseller of Nazis with the rest of the world.
I supppose you will agree that the productive labor power in the war is no less important than military. Europeans have worked hard to Germans, Austrians, Hungarians and other Nazis fought in the "holy crusade against Bolshevism."
By mid-1942, the Moscow-controlled territory was only about 70 million people. Children, women and senior citizens - working even at night at plants. At the same time, the rate of food per person in the rear was so low that it could not cover the real needs of the body.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

But the French, Dutch, Czechs, Danes and others have worked hard for the military industry or civil economy of the Reich. Spain was neutral reseller of Nazis with the rest of the world.
I supppose you will agree that the productive labor power in the war is no less important than military. Europeans have worked hard to Germans, Austrians, Hungarians and other Nazis fought in the "holy crusade against Bolshevism."
By mid-1942, the Moscow-controlled territory was only about 70 million people. Children, women and senior citizens - working even at night at plants. At the same time, the rate of food per person in the rear was so low that it could not cover the real needs of the body.

Agreed.The forced labour allowed germans to use domestic manpower that would otherwise be tied up running those industries.And yes,i don't for once deny the inhuman sacrifices made by the russian people in that war.

 

[PathanBangladeshi]

1. Army of Turkic Nawab of Bengal

Rest come after

 

[Fenrir]

Norge

Alle som trenger å bli overbevist?

 

[rockstar08]

The Arabs have Created some largest Empires ... so they deserve to be in the list ..

and for old Empires , what's gone is gone ... what matter is , who has the most Powerful Army in the world today .. and that is USA ...

 

[Ocelot]

Napoleon was a looser of history. No need to put him in.

Should they put Napoleon because he got defeated and spend his last days until the middle of nowhere on a island? He was a 1 day fly.

Here's what a British Admiral Eden [then Senior Midshipman] wrote when he met the 'looser' and '1 day fly' at St. Helena.

"After speaking to the Admiral he turned to me, and then I understood for the first time in my life what was the meaning of the phrase 'A born ruler of men.' I had been taught to hate the French as I hated the devil; but when Napoleon looked at me there was such power and majesty in his look that if he had bade me lie down that he might walk over me, I would have done it at once, Englishman although I was. The look on Napoleon's face was the revelation of the man and the explanation of his power. He was born to command."

Napoleon is probably the most enigmatic man who ever lived in history. Get off your high horse, moron.

 

[Beta-Fighter]

India has been ruled by wave after wave of muslim invaders for past 1000 years and brits for another 100 years...
But check out the claim bros? Shuper
...

before 1000 years , their was army also for 10,000 years , Cities live before any Muslims came to existence.

remember Prathiv Raj Chauhan who defeated Afgan king many times?

What about Ashoka ? which rule till Afghanistan ?

 

[21stCentury]

We are two times in that list.

Actually it should have been three times.

They put Roman Empire in that list but they didn't put the Huns in who beated the Romans.

Mongols who are a East Asian people are descendants of the Xiongnu who are direct ancestors of the Huns are not related to Turks in anyway, except for the fact they took over the land that today is turkey and enslaved the original Turks.

 

[Kristian]

In 20 century:

1.United States
2.Soviet
3.Britain
4.Germany
5.Japan

Old time:

1.Arabia
2.Turkey
3.Rome Reich
4.England
5.Mongolia

 

[atatwolf]

Mongols who are a East Asian people are descendants of the Xiongnu who are direct ancestors of the Huns are not related to Turks in anyway, except for the fact they took over the land that today is turkey and enslaved the original Turks.

The Xiongnu were Turkic just as the Huns and successor empires until this day. As for China if it wasn't for the US, your ancestors would be comfort women or dead by now.

 

[Kristian]

War between England v Turkey in around 1200s. 40,000 English soldiers against how big Turkey sizes???