Military technology in Asia and the rest of the world judged

[tanlixiang28776]

Yes.

Good day all, Tay.

P.S. The above answer is laconic and sarcastic, my bad, but putting Russia as second in NavalPower
with a Navy barely at blue water level when they lack aircraft carriers ruined any possible discussion.

In my opinion naval power is not always based on projecting power to other countries but defending core interests with impunity. Russia still has the most dangerous, advanced, and large submarine fleet after the United states by far. While its surface fleet is much weaker the underwater component counts for alot. Also Russia still does have a aircraft carrier.

 

[Viet]

First of all i would like the introduce myself. I have been a long time member of this forum and have stopped really posting for a long time.

What this thread is discussing will be how personal bias blinds many in arguments in threads about military technology. I am personally living the United states which currently has the best both in quality and quantity when it comes to everything military. I am also from China which means i have great interest in its military development as well. I also follow other countries development.

Now to my main point. The countries I will be discussing will be placed into a couple groups for easier classification and relevancy. These countries will be under discussion as they are pertinent to this particular forum.

I want to see how ones bias ones affects the listings

USA
Pakistan
Vietnam
China
India
Japan
Russia
Strong European country eg France,Britain which I will refer to simply EU

Below is my personal arrangements of countries by quality and quantity of military technology in the current date of 12/17/2015

Airforce:

1.USA
2.Russia
3.China
4.India
5.EU
6.Japan
7.Pakistan
8.Vietnam

Navy:

1.USA
2.Russia
3.Japan
4.China
5.EU
6.India
7.Pakistan
8.Vietnam

Army:

1.USA
2.China
3.Russia
4.India
5.Pakistan
6.EU
7.Japan
8.Vietnam

Strategic forces:

1.USA
2.Russia
3.China
4.EU
5.India
6.Pakistan

Japan and Vietnam are not included since they lack nuclear strategic forces.

Now pls give any comments on my listing and make your own list. Can be simply be overall instead of categorically.

Good to see at least a Chinese member recognize Vietnam rising military power. I believe we will become best friends. Hahaha.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Good to see at least a Chinese member recognize Vietnam rising military power. I believe we will become best friends. Hahaha.

Is that what you got from this post after fully reading it? If so I would consider reading it again.

Honestly speaking that is not the intention of the post whatsoever. In fact it highlights the disparity between the countries in a small group of selected countries with Vietnam being at the bottom of every list while many countries are not included that would be above it are not even included.

 

[Indos]

Yes.

Good day all, Tay.

P.S. The above answer is laconic and sarcastic, my bad, but putting Russia as second in NavalPower
with a Navy barely at blue water level when they lack aircraft carriers ruined any possible discussion.

I think he knows nothing mate...even he puts Vietnam above Singapore for Air Force....

And for Naval power, this data from our Chinese friends is more accurate.......

 

[tanlixiang28776]

I think he knows nothing mate...even he puts Vietnam above Singapore for Air Force....

And for Naval power, this data from our Chinese friends is more accurate.......

View attachment 280011

This chart is somewhat meaningless in the context of this post. It shows quantity but not quality and only includes three out of the 8 countries mentioned.

to be frankly honest most of the countries on that graph are not worth mentioning

 

[Kyle Sun]

come on man, where is israel ? or turkey ?

this two countries have much more powerful airforce.than india let alone.viet.

 

[Taygibay]

Also Russia still does have a aircraft carrier.

You're not entirely wrong on the subs part if they work near potential which is not certain.
The carrier though is useless. Four deployments ( 5 if one nitpicks ) between 2000 and its 2014 refit
is not the expected rhythm for such tools. Call it half a carrier at best.

You seem to know your stuff more than most but those lists are still very ... huh ... say "inspired'?
Projection remains essential my good man! Otherwise, split your thread into defensive and offensive
armed forces and we'll talk. As is, ranking India ahead of EU ( and Pakistan for land forces ) is ...
not really serious outside of regional Asian context.

Good day Tanlixiang, Tay.

P.S. Hey there Indos my friend!

 

[Irfioo7]

In airforce and navy category EU should be at no 3

 

[Indos]

This chart is somewhat meaningless in the context of this post. It shows quantity but not quality and only includes three out of the 8 countries mentioned.

to be frankly honest most of the countries on that graph are not worth mentioning

How come we trust your judgement even with about 60 F 16 Block 52 and around 32 F 15 SG that Singapore has in its inventory, you still put VIetnam above Singapore.....

I dont want to spend time for explaining about Naval power as you can search by yourselves...

 

[Viet]

Is that what you got from this post after fully reading it? If so I would consider reading it again.

Honestly speaking that is not the intention of the post whatsoever. In fact it highlights the disparity between the countries in a small group of selected countries with Vietnam being at the bottom of every list while many countries are not included that would be above it are not even included.

Ok, I just canceled sending a friend request to you.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

come on man, where is israel ? or turkey ?

even Viet is on the list.

These are the countries that spark debate on this forum. The others are generally not really argued over.

You're not entirely wrong on the subs part if they work near potential which is not certain.
The carrier though is useless. Four deployments ( 5 if one nitpicks ) between 2000 and its 2014 refit
is not the expected rhythm for such tools. Call it half a carrier at best.

You seem to know your stuff more than most but those lists are still very ... huh ... say "inspired'?
Projection remains essential my good man! Otherwise, split your thread into defensive and offensive
armed forces and we'll talk. As is, ranking India ahead of EU ( and Pakistan for land forces ) is ...
not really serious outside of regional Asian context.

Good day Tanlixiang, Tay.

Perhaps i should be more clear. These military capabilities are based on their relationship to other countries on the list and their kind of war that would entail if such conflicts arise. In this case the wars would be involve countries that are fairly close to each other ie neighboring countries, outside USA, and EU obviously. So long range projection of power is taken less into consideration as these would basically be border wars.

How come we trust your judgement even with about 60 F 16 Block 52 and around 32 F 15 SG that Singapore has in its inventory, you still put VIetnam above Singapore.....

I dont want to spend time for explaining about Naval power as you can search by yourselves...

read the post then come back to me on that

 

[Viet]

This chart is somewhat meaningless in the context of this post. It shows quantity but not quality and only includes three out of the 8 countries mentioned.

to be frankly honest most of the countries on that graph are not worth mentioning

Quality matters. The firepower of a single warship of our navy, be it corvette or frigate or submarine, can wreck the entire naval surface fleet of Indonesia, Thailand or Malaysia sinking them to the bottom of the sea before they realize what happens.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Ok, I just canceled sending a friend request to you.

im not here to make friends

 

[Kyle Sun]

These are the countries that spark debate on this forum. The others are generally not really argued over.


Perhaps i should be more clear. These military capabilities are based on their relationship to other countries on the list and their kind of war that would entail if such conflicts arise. In this case the wars would be involve countries that are fairly close to each other ie neighboring countries, outside USA, and EU obviously. So long range projection of power is taken less into consideration as these would basically be border wars.



read the post then come back to me on that

put korea and singapore on the list at least.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

put korea and singapore on the list at least.

make your own list if you like.

Quality matters. The firepower of a single warship of our navy, be it corvette or frigate or submarine, can wreck the entire naval surface fleet of Indonesia, Thailand or Malaysia sinking them to the bottom of the sea before they realize what happens.

The gepard 3.9 class corvette in the VPN is 1500 tons and by other naval standards is merely a corvette. And with this statement you put yourself in a similar boat compared to the major powers mentioned in this thread.