What's new

Bangladesh Navy vs Myanmar Navy

These D**K measuring threads only attract trolls. Myanmar Navy has certain strengths and so does ours.

Currently we have subs, they don't. That may change however.
 
. . .
@Nilgiri Myanmar is just a petty 60-70$ billion worth rag-tag nation.Get it straight,A-hole! :D

UK was worth a lot less than Bengal before Plassey. Didnt stop those rag taggers from taking you over now did it?

Its worth (consumption) per person that counts, not total aggregated production in foreign currency terms (which only really matters when you hit the trillion mark). Myanmar is well ahead of BD in consumption per capita as is every nation in the region except Afghanistan and Nepal.
 
Last edited:
.
Its worth (consumption) per person that counts, not total aggregated production in foreign currency terms (which only really matters when you hit the trillion mark).

Consumtion per capita? Lets see..Qatar vs India or Qatar vs China? Whos better? India/China or Qatar?



UK was worth a lot less than Bengal before Plassey.

UK? They were superior to South Asians in terms of technology and military.But there is not that difference between us and the Burmiz,is there?
 
.
Which country has provided and continues to provide by far the most military support to Myanmar?

The guns they shoot your illegals with, which county provided the tooling for those originally?

Which country will continue to provide this level of military support for Myanmar so it can easily choose to liquidate the Rohingya with no questions asked and no diplomatic pressure applied?

Your "strategic best friend ally"? :rofl:

That is the status and worth of BD to anyone in the world.
I didn't mention any name but chamcha knows who he is.
 
.
UK? They were superior to South Asians in terms of technology and military.But there is not that difference between us and the Burmiz,is there?

Not True, The Gun powder Technology, field cannons and muskets were available to Bengal as well. What kind of military techs you are talking about?
 
.
Not True, The Gun powder Technology, field cannons and muskets were available to Bengal as well. What kind of military techs you are talking about?

But we did not have that amount of industry to completely equip our soldiers.Only very few soldiers had a musket,and most mordern ( of that time ) weapons were mostly French,so it costed us a good deal.Lastly and more importantly,the whole of South Asia was warring against each other and would not unite against the British.
 
.
But we did not have that amount of industry to completely equip our soldiers.Only very few soldiers had a musket,and most mordern ( of that time ) weapons were mostly French,so it costed us a good deal.Lastly and more importantly,the whole of South Asia was warring against each other and would not unite against the British.

Siraj-ud-daula had more than enough Men and weapons to Dominate Any aggressors of the then world. I would say he had humongous amount of Muscle power in comparison to Lord Clive. He was not defeated in the battle field but in the political chess board. Game of Bangla thrones.
 
Last edited:
.
Consumtion per capita? Lets see..Qatar vs India or Qatar vs China? Whos better? India/China or Qatar?

I'm talking about countries that have reached a certain threshold in both population and land area under their control. Let's say at least 100,000 square km area and at least 20 million people.

Countries in this category definitely should have per capita income as more important than total income for most subjects of geopolitics, including military power capability. It is a broad illustration of how much per person consumption can be harnessed for defense/military/soft power projection and defense....which is what really counts.

For example tell me the reasons why all military ranking websites put BD very low even though BD total GDP is bigger than many of the ones that outrank it militarily rank wise (like Myanmar by a far margin)?

Example: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp

UK? They were superior to South Asians in terms of technology and military.

That's clearly wrong. Your compatriot can discuss that with you. But read up on the first anglo maratha war and then the 2nd and 3rd paying attention to the statecraft that was used by the British. Then compare with the earlier statecraft used by the British/EIC in Bengal.

This was by no means a typical South Asian version of battles of isandlwana and rorke's drift...both adversaries were matched in terms of tactics. But the British from ultimately their higher per capita income were able to deploy much more trained "diplomats" and "traders" around the world to gnaw away at various weaknesses in established regions of civilisation....changing this where needed when it was a more primitive populace (like in Africa).

Proliferation of technology meant that technological mismatch was not a big deal for regions like subcontinent that could afford much of the latest technology, training (artillery teams etc.) and such...as first anglo-maratha war illustrated. The long term statecraft-based strategy however of the British was unmatched in subcontinent at that time. I mean in many cases they used the very same armies that they defeated, with little "upgrading" at all (i.e nothing massively wrong/outdated with them compared to British troops - who were also mostly locals too).
 
.
ok let burmise come and take our country they are 4 crores and we are 20 crores so we will easily overwelmed them and by peoples voting the name will be unitited state of bangladesh
 
. .
Siraj-ud-daula had more than enough Men and weapons to Dominate Any aggressors of the then world. I would say he had humongous amount of Muscle power in comparison to Lord Clive. He was not defeated in the battle field but in the political chess board. Game of Bangla thrones.

Most soldiers on Siraj inventory were mercenaries supplied by tributaries whereas English brought professional soldiers from Europe and native Madras. Clive army fought bigger and fierce battle later to consolidate Bengal and won in every one of them.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom