The Top 10 Armies You Don't Want to Fight.

[Americanpeacebomber]

Vietnam got backed by both USSR and China, otherwise it would be quick handy fight for USA.

But i do agree that France and UK don't have the power to invade and to occupy Vietnam or NK, except the big three like USA/China/Russia have the capability to do that.

Some Russian sources give more specific numbers: the hardware donated by the USSR included 2,000 tanks, 7,000 artillery guns, over 5,000 anti-aircraft guns, 158 surface-to-air rocket launchers. Over the course of the war the Soviet money donated to the Vietnamese cause was equal to 2 million dollars a day. From July 1965 to the end of 1974, fighting in Vietnam was attended by some 6,500 officers and generals, as well as more than 4,500 soldiers and sergeants of the Soviet Armed Forces. In addition, military schools and academies of the USSR began training Vietnamese soldiers — more than 10 thousand people.[208]

Remember the US killed up 3-5 million Vietcong.

 

[Edevelop]

Why do people fear the U.S so much. I would argue that they are maybe ranked as the best in air war, but i don't think on land!
Lol, they are importing diapers from Pakistan for their soldiers. They can't fight face to face. We have already seen that in Afghanistan, Vietnam, World wars....

 

[Quasar]

1-usa
2-russia
3-china
4-uk
5-france
6-india
7-pakistan
8-israel
9-south korea
10-(Turkey-japan-germany-italy)

 

[500]

Do u think a country of 7,624,600 with 20+% arabs would all fight? or just the standing army?

Isrel has 12 armor divisions when mobilised.

On specs AK beats Merkavas

LOL.

plus we have the numbers.

You have 300 AK we have 1600 Merkavas.

Even turkey doesnt operate more than 232-4 F-16s and they produce them... israel also leased us jets... and there are

Israeli air force is much stronger than Turkish. Turkish air force is much stronger than Pakistani.

 

[RayKalm]

Isrel has 12 armor divisions when mobilised.


LOL.


You have 300 AK we have 1600 Merkavas.


Israeli air force is much stronger than Turkish. Turkish air force is much stronger than Pakistani.

What would you rank the top 10, or 15?

 

[below_freezing]

Conventional

1.USA
2.China
3.Russia
4.France
5.UK


Unconventional

1.USA
2.Russia
3.China
4.France
5.UK

agree, Russia's nuke arsenal is far superior but in a conventional war, our logistics, production and electronic warfare would eliminate their mechanical hardware advantage.

for non P5 members, that's when rankings get interesting.

 

[RayKalm]

agree, Russia's nuke arsenal is far superior but in a conventional war, our logistics, production and electronic warfare would eliminate their mechanical hardware advantage.

for non P5 members, that's when rankings get interesting.

How will you eliminate Russia's size advantage? Russia is twice the size of China (roughly). Has islands all over the place, where as China is a sitting target for Russia.

 

[below_freezing]

How will you eliminate Russia's size advantage? Russia is twice the size of China (roughly). Has islands all over the place, where as China is a sitting target for Russia.

However, they have very low population density, most of that already low population density lives in Europe and only one (that is 1) railroad connecting Siberia to the rest of Russia.

If we fight a conventional (no nukes) war, then that means we can use a cruise missile to hit maybe 10 critical bridges on the Siberian Railroad, and our forces can roll across the border with almost no opposition and take any airports within a few hundred KM of the border within days.

However, because Russia has a gigantic nuclear arsenal and will do a first strike, that's not going to happen.

 

[Tractor]

How will you eliminate Russia's size advantage? Russia is twice the size of China (roughly). Has islands all over the place, where as China is a sitting target for Russia.

Russia a mass of freezing lands no need to be destroyed.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Except long range missiles India have anything (even more fire power) than make India better army then both France and UK

Well, i do consider the factor of the dependency of the military industrial complex, which both France and UK are clearly above India.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

agree, Russia's nuke arsenal is far superior but in a conventional war, our logistics, production and electronic warfare would eliminate their mechanical hardware advantage.

for non P5 members, that's when rankings get interesting.

Superior in quantity, but not superior in quality.

We have just mastered the miniaturization of the nuclear warhead technology in the 1990s, whereas Russia's stockpile belongs to the relics of the Cold War, which are mostly decayed in the performance.

 

[Sasquatch]

Superior in quantity, but not superior in quality.

We have just mastered the miniaturization of the nuclear warhead technology in the 1990s, whereas Russia's stockpile belongs to the relics of the Cold War, which are mostly decayed in the performance.

Better a Mix of Quantity and Quality.

 

[500]

What would you rank the top 10, or 15?

When one country has strong army and another strong navy its like comparing whale to elephant. If you still insist to compare, then I suggesr you to create a follow list with ranks for each country:

1) air force
2) navy
3) army
4) WMD
5) military industry
6) strategic depth
7) economy
8) manpower

And then calculate the median result. But it still will be very subjective list, since importance of these factors deppends on situation.

 

[EastWest]

My ListDisregarding nuclear warfare and other WMD capabilities- because in a nuclear war no one will win)

i) USA - leads in modern warfare capablities and network centric warfare

ii) Russia - has huge numbers but questionable network centric warfare capabilites..

iii) China - close and probably overtake Russia in few years if present rate of modernization continues

iv) France - gr8 infrastructure but manpower in question compared to India, China etc..

v) India - will probably overtake france in a decade: already has larger manpower and weapons compared to France but lags in manufacturing industry infrastructure and modern warfare(network centric warfare)- will develop in a decade

vi) UK - declining armed forces and doubtful armed forces modernization in future over weak economy

vii) Israel - their technical capabilities can be matched only by USA..and they have conscription which makes them a very large armed force

viii) Germany - has gr8 technical and manufacturing capablities - lags in manpower and also their pacifist constitution

ix) Pakistan - large manpower and very well developed Army(manufacturing industry infrastructure and long term fighting capabilities in question though).

x) North Korea -has a huge manpower at its disposal but very weak infrastructure and questionable modern warfare techniques and very weak economy- longterm warfare capabilities very doubtful

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Better a Mix of Quantity and Quality.

Should consider (1)quality of the nukes + (2)quantity of the nukes + (3)ability of the missile defence.

1. China > USA > Russia
2. Russia > USA > China
3. China >= USA > Russia