Best Fighting Forces in Modern History (1700's-Present )

[Imperial City-States]

Some army I was never a part of and never supported with my labour, yet I still feel the need to wank over on internet fora because manly men killing other men excite me.

Sexually.

^ This

OT: Don't bash me for this, but The Wehrmact. They were an absolute machine, and had it not been for the Battle of Stalingrad and the spirit of the Red Army, they would have conquered the entirety of Europe.

Check out my Original post .

there will be no unbackable Bashing of the Wehrmact here . Good to see we are on the same page

[Independent Republic of Not My Problem]

The Swiss Army.

[The Klishi Islands]

^This.

A great quote: Kaiser Wilhem asked in 1912 what the Swiss would do if he invaded Switzerland, defended by a 250,000 man militia, with a German army half a million strong. The response:
"Shoot twice and go home".


It's truly amazing how the Swiss have prepared for invasion. Read this cracked article:
http://www.cracked.com/article_20301_th ... tries.html

[The Noble Trek]

To an extent, North Korea.

Instantly, I'm most likely going to get bashed, but whatever. People like to display the North Korean military as a pushover. This is far from the truth. Should a war happen, North Korea would almost instantly take most of South Korea. There are tunnels to Seoul, artillery constantly pointed at major South Korean cities and a 10 million man army, the largest in the world personnel-wise. USA and Japan would intervene and start to win the war. Their equipment is better. However, every single North Korean would be fighting against USA. There is no plausible way USA could provoke a war with North Korea and take over without tens of millions of American deaths and possible nuclear bombings. The North Korean troops are MUCH better trained than American troops. They have large amounts of military equipment such as tanks, heavy artillery, ect. So while they would lose the war, it would be much like the OP's post about Germany in the second world war. The Americans would pay dearly for every inch of land they take.

Lol! No way dude. First of all, tens of millions of American troops killed is a ridiculous number to suggest for anything short of a complete nuclear exchange with Russia or China (assuming that we would even have over 10 million troops at the time of the exchange, a number we would only reach with a draft). We lost 36,000 in the first Korean War- even if NK's army has become much stronger in the last 60 years, they haven't advanced as much as the US military has. Tunnels to Seoul, you say? It's a good thing they have those, because they aren't crossing the DMZ above ground without setting off the nuclear landmines the US has buried there. That's right, nuclear landmines.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

The Wehrmacht's advantage was a tactical/strategic one, not an equipment advantage. Both the Soviets and the French had better tanks than the Germans, particularly at the start of the war. The Luftwaffe had better fighters than the Soviets, but it's hard to say just how much better since so much Soviet materiel was lost on the ground in the initial stages of Barbarossa. Regardless, a single KV-2 held up an entire Panzer division at one point. Until it ran out of ammo. A day later. Early-war German guns simply weren't capable of killing Soviet tanks, and it was only through their early air dominance that the Germans had the success that they did.

In France the Germans won because of their new tactical doctrines with armor. French tanks were parceled out in small groups and attached to infantry units, whereas the Germans deployed their tanks in dedicated armored units which were not restricted by the distance a man could march. That whole 'blitzkrieg' thing, you know? German infantry were effective because the armor had gone through and smashed all of the significant points of resistance for them.

Don't get me wrong, for the time this was brilliant military thinking. German Blitzkrieg and Soviet Deep Battle ideas were revolutionary. The Wehrmacht's gear, though, was quite average.

---

As to who is the most super-awesome-neato-cool army since the 1700's, I personally favor the Russians. Their record is pretty remarkable, out of some 40 (counting the various Coalitions of the Napoleonic era as separate events) major conflicts, they lost 8 (The War of Austrian Succession, 3 of the Coalitions, the Crimean War, the Russo-Japanese War, WWI, and Afghanistan.)

The Russians have a tendency to get lax when not engaged in a conflict. And without a charismatic or strong leader who can harness the potential of the nation (Peter I, Alexander I, Stalin,) they tend to fall into trouble, but once mobilized, there's very little that can stop an angry Russian army. Russia in WWII gave us the most produced military aircraft of all time (the IL-2,) the second most produced tank of all time (the T-34. The first is the T-55,) and the second most produced military rifle (the Mosin-Nagant, with the AK-47 and its variants being the most produced.)

[Imperial City-States]

The Wehrmacht's advantage was a tactical/strategic one, not an equipment advantage. Both the Soviets and the French had better tanks than the Germans, particularly at the start of the war. The Luftwaffe had better fighters than the Soviets, but it's hard to say just how much better since so much Soviet materiel was lost on the ground in the initial stages of Barbarossa. Regardless, a single KV-2 held up an entire Panzer division at one point. Until it ran out of ammo. A day later. Early-war German guns simply weren't capable of killing Soviet tanks, and it was only through their early air dominance that the Germans had the success that they did.

In France the Germans won because of their new tactical doctrines with armor. French tanks were parceled out in small groups and attached to infantry units, whereas the Germans deployed their tanks in dedicated armored units which were not restricted by the distance a man could march. That whole 'blitzkrieg' thing, you know? German infantry were effective because the armor had gone through and smashed all of the significant points of resistance for them.

Don't get me wrong, for the time this was brilliant military thinking. German Blitzkrieg and Soviet Deep Battle ideas were revolutionary. The Wehrmacht's gear, though, was quite average.

---

As to who is the most super-awesome-neato-cool army since the 1700's, I personally favor the Russians. Their record is pretty remarkable, out of some 40 (counting the various Coalitions of the Napoleonic era as separate events) major conflicts, they lost 8 (The War of Austrian Succession, 3 of the Coalitions, the Crimean War, the Russo-Japanese War, WWI, and Afghanistan.)

The Russians have a tendency to get lax when not engaged in a conflict. And without a charismatic or strong leader who can harness the potential of the nation (Peter I, Alexander I, Stalin,) they tend to fall into trouble, but once mobilized, there's very little that can stop an angry Russian army. Russia in WWII gave us the most produced military aircraft of all time (the IL-2,) the second most produced tank of all time (the T-34. The first is the T-55,) and the second most produced military rifle (the Mosin-Nagant, with the AK-47 and its variants being the most produced.)

Tank vs Tank a Panther will be a T34 9 time out of ten , however its because the Soviets ability to Mass produce T34's that gave them a distinct advantage , the Germans over engineered many of their vehicles which is partly why they lost in that they tried to create FAR to many varients for any practical use .

Could you please cite that KV-2 holding up a Division ? seems incrediably unlikely that a single tank would be capable of that . Micheal Wittman most accomplished tank ace of WW2 for the German's held up an Armor column with the Help of Six other Tigers if i recall correctly

[The blood ravens]

Probably the red army or the US military.

The Red Army managed to push the Wehrmacht from the outskirts of Moscow all the way to Berlin. Even with the Russian winter I think that's pretty damn impressive.

[The blood ravens]

The Wehrmacht's advantage was a tactical/strategic one, not an equipment advantage. Both the Soviets and the French had better tanks than the Germans, particularly at the start of the war. The Luftwaffe had better fighters than the Soviets, but it's hard to say just how much better since so much Soviet materiel was lost on the ground in the initial stages of Barbarossa. Regardless, a single KV-2 held up an entire Panzer division at one point. Until it ran out of ammo. A day later. Early-war German guns simply weren't capable of killing Soviet tanks, and it was only through their early air dominance that the Germans had the success that they did.

In France the Germans won because of their new tactical doctrines with armor. French tanks were parceled out in small groups and attached to infantry units, whereas the Germans deployed their tanks in dedicated armored units which were not restricted by the distance a man could march. That whole 'blitzkrieg' thing, you know? German infantry were effective because the armor had gone through and smashed all of the significant points of resistance for them.

Don't get me wrong, for the time this was brilliant military thinking. German Blitzkrieg and Soviet Deep Battle ideas were revolutionary. The Wehrmacht's gear, though, was quite average.

---

As to who is the most super-awesome-neato-cool army since the 1700's, I personally favor the Russians. Their record is pretty remarkable, out of some 40 (counting the various Coalitions of the Napoleonic era as separate events) major conflicts, they lost 8 (The War of Austrian Succession, 3 of the Coalitions, the Crimean War, the Russo-Japanese War, WWI, and Afghanistan.)

The Russians have a tendency to get lax when not engaged in a conflict. And without a charismatic or strong leader who can harness the potential of the nation (Peter I, Alexander I, Stalin,) they tend to fall into trouble, but once mobilized, there's very little that can stop an angry Russian army. Russia in WWII gave us the most produced military aircraft of all time (the IL-2,) the second most produced tank of all time (the T-34. The first is the T-55,) and the second most produced military rifle (the Mosin-Nagant, with the AK-47 and its variants being the most produced.)

Tank vs Tank a Panther will be a T34 9 time out of ten , however its because the Soviets ability to Mass produce T34's that gave them a distinct advantage , the Germans over engineered many of their vehicles which is partly why they lost in that they tried to create FAR to many varients for any practical use .

Could you please cite that KV-2 holding up a Division ? seems incrediably unlikely that a single tank would be capable of that . Micheal Wittman most accomplished tank ace of WW2 for the German's held up an Armor column with the Help of Six other Tigers if i recall correctly

In the early days of operation Barbarossa the Panzer IV was armed with a much smaller, short barreled gun incapable of penetrating the KV, and T-34 armor. So its not far fetched that it could hold them up.

[Imperial City-States]

Tank vs Tank a Panther will be a T34 9 time out of ten , however its because the Soviets ability to Mass produce T34's that gave them a distinct advantage , the Germans over engineered many of their vehicles which is partly why they lost in that they tried to create FAR to many varients for any practical use .

Could you please cite that KV-2 holding up a Division ? seems incrediably unlikely that a single tank would be capable of that . Micheal Wittman most accomplished tank ace of WW2 for the German's held up an Armor column with the Help of Six other Tigers if i recall correctly

In the early days of operation Barbarossa the Panzer IV was armed with a much smaller, short barreled gun incapable of penetrating the KV, and T-34 armor. So its not far fetched that it could hold them up.

The T34 didn't roll around until later

and Panzershrecks would be more then capable of it

[The blood ravens]

In the early days of operation Barbarossa the Panzer IV was armed with a much smaller, short barreled gun incapable of penetrating the KV, and T-34 armor. So its not far fetched that it could hold them up.

The T34 didn't roll around until later

and Panzershrecks would be more then capable of it

Uhh what?

The T-34 entered service in 1940 a full year before operation Barbarossa even began.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34

And the Panzerschreck in 1943.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerschreck

[Imperial City-States]

The T34 didn't roll around until later

and Panzershrecks would be more then capable of it

Uhh what?

The T-34 entered service in 1940 a full year before operation Barbarossa even began.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34

And the Panzerschreck in 1943.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerschreck

Entering Service and Being deployed in large enough numbers to matter are tow very Different things

Things like that take time to go into large scale deployment , usually several Years .


And i still doubt that a single KV-2 held off an Entire Panzer Division because of all this airsupport your talking ( or the other guy sorry ) about

[The blood ravens]

Uhh what?

The T-34 entered service in 1940 a full year before operation Barbarossa even began.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34

And the Panzerschreck in 1943.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerschreck

Entering Service and Being deployed in large enough numbers to matter are tow very Different things

Things like that take time to go into large scale deployment , usually several Years .


And i still doubt that a single KV-2 held off an Entire Panzer Division because of all this airsupport your talking ( or the other guy sorry ) about

Bam.

When Operation Barbarossa began, the Red Army was equipped with 508 new KV tanks.[12] So effective was its armour that the Germans were incapable of destroying it with their tanks or anti-tank weapons and had to rely on 88 mm anti-aircraft guns (flak) or 105 mm guns to knock them out. Only a few of these tanks were used to good effect, but one event of the Battle of Raseiniai was a notable example. On 23–24 June, a single KV-2 effectively pinned down elements of the 6th Panzer Division – the spearhead of Panzergruppe 4 – for a full day at the bridgeheads of the Dubysa river near Raseiniai, Lithuania, playing a prominent role in delaying the German advance on Leningrad and destroying around two dozen German tanks.

You were saying?

[Imperial City-States]

Entering Service and Being deployed in large enough numbers to matter are tow very Different things

Things like that take time to go into large scale deployment , usually several Years .


And i still doubt that a single KV-2 held off an Entire Panzer Division because of all this airsupport your talking ( or the other guy sorry ) about

Bam.

When Operation Barbarossa began, the Red Army was equipped with 508 new KV tanks.[12] So effective was its armour that the Germans were incapable of destroying it with their tanks or anti-tank weapons and had to rely on 88 mm anti-aircraft guns (flak) or 105 mm guns to knock them out. Only a few of these tanks were used to good effect, but one event of the Battle of Raseiniai was a notable example. On 23–24 June, a single KV-2 effectively pinned down elements of the 6th Panzer Division – the spearhead of Panzergruppe 4 – for a full day at the bridgeheads of the Dubysa river near Raseiniai, Lithuania, playing a prominent role in delaying the German advance on Leningrad and destroying around two dozen German tanks.

You were saying?

Thank you smartass but it states Elements not the Entire Division , the way it was phrased it was being stated that they held down an entire division ,. a Panzergruppe is about a Battalion or Brigade sized unit and it was at a key choke point .

Also Panzer IV's were just being upgunned weeks prior to operation Barbarossa and didn't not see wide spread deployment until the majority of the battlelines had been drawn .

[Imperial City-States]

While i'll Agree that the Red Army did accomplish some very difficult things there are several factors to where i would disagree with them being the best mainly because they required Shipments of supplies from the Allies and the atrocious amount of Casualties they sustained . Furthermore if Hitler had actually been intelligent he would have Tackled Russia first ( which Germany would have most likely won ) and then Progressed over to Britian after the Russian front was secure

[Gallup]

The US or Israel.

[United British Union]

The R.A.F of 1940, simply because it held back the overwhelming force of the Nazi Empire for one year by itself.
Also the Royal Navy of all years. At the Battle of Trafalgar it defeated the French, and overpowered the Germans in both World Wars.

[Wolfmanne]

The early modern Prussian Army, the British Armed Forces at different points in time (seems to be a hit-and-miss with them in efficiency) and the Israeli Defence Forces comes to mind. Of course they mean nothing to the various Afghan militias fighting off foreigners, the most recent being the Taliban, which will remain a threat even once we've stabilised Afghanistan.

My Serbian friends would say Serbia though.

[Nazis in Space]

[...]My Serbian friends would say Serbia though.

They'd be right.

The glorious Serbian state backstabbed the Byzantine Empire, which allowed the Ottomans to conquer it. Then they backstabbed the Hungarians, which allowed the Ottomans to conquer them, too. Later on they suffered a bit of a setback when they attacked a Bulgaria that'd been independent for approximately five minutes and had fuckall for a military, but were still beaten back to the point where the Austrians had to intervene to prevent Serbia from being outright annexed by Bulgaria, then they had a bit of genocidal fun against turkish populations on the Balkans, then they started a world war that resulted in its complete occupation until the Anglo-French saved their asses, but they'd eventually recover and engage in another glorious campaign of raping and slaughtering muslim- and catholic women and children before being stomped by NATO, which, in all fairness, was a bit of an unfair fight, so we shouldn't hold it against them.

Truly, which nation or military can match their glorious record?

Though I'll never understand how Serbia went from the muslim's most useful allies in Europe to their most happy killers. Like a flag in the breeze... Well. Maybe it was the muslims turning from soldiers into women and children. That made killing them so much easier.

[United Marxist Nations]

While i'll Agree that the Red Army did accomplish some very difficult things there are several factors to where i would disagree with them being the best mainly because they required Shipments of supplies from the Allies and the atrocious amount of Casualties they sustained . Furthermore if Hitler had actually been intelligent he would have Tackled Russia first ( which Germany would have most likely won ) and then Progressed over to Britian after the Russian front was secure

That would have been a shitty idea, because then France & Britain would have seized the opportunity to force Germany into a two-front war.

[Imperial City-States]

While i'll Agree that the Red Army did accomplish some very difficult things there are several factors to where i would disagree with them being the best mainly because they required Shipments of supplies from the Allies and the atrocious amount of Casualties they sustained . Furthermore if Hitler had actually been intelligent he would have Tackled Russia first ( which Germany would have most likely won ) and then Progressed over to Britian after the Russian front was secure

That would have been a shitty idea, because then France & Britain would have seized the opportunity to force Germany into a two-front war.

Well im more so talking About Hitler waiting to conduct Operation Barbarossa until Britian was fully conquered , i phrased my suggestion very poorly and misconveyed my ideas , Brain didn't match what the fingers typed lol

[Marcurix]

-- My Choice for the Best fighting Force would be the German Wehrmacht before and During the Second World war .

Not only were they the Best Trained , Equip and Discipline Fighting force the world had ever seen

I wouldn't call them that. Good? Sure. The best ever in all those areas? Unlikely.

but they held off Three Super powers and Countless other Smaller nations for Four years

"Held off" isn't a position you want to be in as the attacking force.

and made Allied forces pay for Every inch of Soil they took dearly .

The same argument could be made for the soviets, and many other nations.

It has been suggested and Proven that the German Soldier in the Wehrmacht was 30-50% more combat effective then Their British and American Counter-parts .

Suggested, not proven.

from your source:

The difference between the referred effectiveness at the beginning of this report (20-30% in the West, more than 50% in the East) and inflicted losses (50% in the West, 400% in the East because of the additional thoughtless mass aussaults) is probably explained by the more improved equipment of the Wehrmacht (especially the Panther against the Sherman tank, 88 mm AA guns, rocket launchers, assault rifles, Panzerfaust and the MG42 machine guns which is still in use today) and has nothing to do with the fighting power of the individual soldiers or the individual units.

Further more a Single German division was able to Hold of Three Russian Divisions of Equal Strength and armament . This increased when German troops were defending to One German Division being able to hold off Seven Russian Divisions which a defensive war is what the German Armed forces fought for the Vast Majority of the Second World war .
Against American And British troops , German Forces inflicted Casualties 50% Higher then the losses they suffered . Against Russians that Ratio changed from 2:1 to 4:1 Leaving a margin that was More then 50% proving the effectivness of the German Military at this time .

All this with the note that the German army was much better prepared at the beginning of the war than those states at their entry.

Furthermore the Wehrmacht had Access to equipment late in the war that was years ahead of their Competitors . Including but not limited to -- The Panzerfaust ( disposable AT Rocket ) STG-44 ( Sturmgwether ) Jet Fighter ( ME262 ) and Tanks that were superior to allied counterparts in most aspects ( Panther's , Tigers ) They also had Access the the Single most effective anti-tank weapon in the entire war , the 8.8cm Flak 41 that could destroy any allied tank reliably at 16,250 Yards with use of long range spotting equipment or about 15 Kilometers .

I wouldn't say years ahead, but they were very well equipped. However, the modern US military holds the advantage in tech superiority in my opinion.

I could go on but i would be writing a tirade all day and would bore most of you . However though Superior Equipment , Training and Discipline is why i believe the German Wehrmacht was the Best Fighting force the modern world has ever seen

Again I disagree. In terms of capabilities for the time the German Wehrmacht certainly ranks high, but I wouldn't think it would win in absolute terms against the modern US military, the height of the British Empire and so on in comparison.

[The Nuclear Fist]

OT: Don't bash me for this, but The Wehrmact. They were an absolute machine, and had it not been for the Battle of Stalingrad and the spirit of the Red Army, they would have conquered the entirety of Europe.

Save for the parts of Europe they didn't have much of a chance of conquering, like the British isles.

[The Nuclear Fist]

While i'll Agree that the Red Army did accomplish some very difficult things there are several factors to where i would disagree with them being the best mainly because they required Shipments of supplies from the Allies and the atrocious amount of Casualties they sustained . Furthermore if Hitler had actually been intelligent he would have Tackled Russia first ( which Germany would have most likely won ) and then Progressed over to Britian after the Russian front was secure

I'm curious, under what circumstances do you possibly see a Nazi victory against the Soviets?

Even taking into consideration that about the time that Stalin stopped interfering and the Red Army recovered from the purges, which was coincidentally when the Germans stopped winning such stunning victories and the technological gap sharply decreased, the Soviet Union stretched from Poland to the Pacific Ocean, the European USSR stretching from Poland to the Ural Mountains.

And the Soviets were prepared to defend every meter of it.

There is no situation where Hitler wins that fight.

[United Marxist Nations]

While i'll Agree that the Red Army did accomplish some very difficult things there are several factors to where i would disagree with them being the best mainly because they required Shipments of supplies from the Allies and the atrocious amount of Casualties they sustained . Furthermore if Hitler had actually been intelligent he would have Tackled Russia first ( which Germany would have most likely won ) and then Progressed over to Britian after the Russian front was secure

I'm curious, under what circumstances do you possibly see a Nazi victory against the Soviets?

Even taking into consideration that about the time that Stalin [b]stopped interfering[/b] and the Red Army recovered from the purges, which was coincidentally when the Germans stopped winning such stunning victories and the technological gap sharply decreased, the Soviet Union stretched from Poland to the Pacific Ocean, the European USSR stretching from Poland to the Ural Mountains.

And the Soviets were prepared to defend every meter of it.

There is no situation where Hitler wins that fight.

Stalin remained a major force for not only propaganda and morale for Soviet troops, but was also involved in the reorganization of industry that fueled the war effort; he less stopped interfering, than just started applying his talents where they belonged.

[Shofercia]

The Red Army, since the Red Army was able to adopt, improve and innovate as the war went on. If your army can do that on the Red Army's scale, they'll win. Because if your job is just to keep fighting, you win. And in warfare, victory is what matters. When WWII began, Nazis were on the zenith, Red Army was on the nadir. Flipping tables on Nazis within a few years was an amazing feat, unrepeated in human history.