Most powerful military in the known world? (Today)

[Napkiraly]

Actually, and again no offence, I would have to say any Country that has been militarily active longer than the U.S. so any country that has been in wars for more than 300 years. You see I don't look at it so much as technology and budgets, but experience. Countries that have longer military history, they have more experience fighting, they've picked up tricks and tips, developed special tactics for certain situations, I look at it a matter of experience. These countries will know what to do and when to do it.

So my favor would go to countries like Great Britain, Japan, Germany, Russia, China, Turkey, Italy, Spain, Austria, Egypt, Greece, and Israel. No offence to the U.S. but all these countries just have more experience, more knowledge of war, better tactics. Brain over Brawn.

By your logic, Mongolia is better than the US.

[Roski]

But these vessels are shitty.

Agreed. I mean a couple French Navy Frigates could sink a whole North Korean Fleet. North Korea should stick to land instead of the sea's.

A couple? You doubt the might of the French Navy?

[Washington Resistance Army]

The DPRK, based on number of vessels has the largest navy in the world.

Which is not only grossly incorrect, but inherently misleading.

False, by number of active and reserve vessels the the KPAN is the largest navy in the world. This is supported by the CIA and South Korean defense ministry people.

[Gotengo]

But these vessels are shitty.

Never said they weren't, the majority are just short range submarines. Nothing comparable to the USN.

Or the Royal Navy, the Marine Nationale, Russian Navy, or any other navy.

[The Sotoan Union]

Actually, and again no offence, I would have to say any Country that has been militarily active longer than the U.S. so any country that has been in wars for more than 300 years. You see I don't look at it so much as technology and budgets, but experience. Countries that have longer military history, they have more experience fighting, they've picked up tricks and tips, developed special tactics for certain situations, I look at it a matter of experience. These countries will know what to do and when to do it.

So my favor would go to countries like Great Britain, Japan, Germany, Russia, China, Turkey, Italy, Spain, Austria, Egypt, Greece, and Israel. No offence to the U.S. but all these countries just have more experience, more knowledge of war, better tactics. Brain over Brawn.

Tactics learned over 300 years ago aren't comparable to modern tactics. Wars like WWII, Vietnam, Korea, and Desert Storm are where modern tactics would be tried and tested, and the US has been in all those wars.

By your logic China, Greece, and Egypt should be the strongest countries.

[Roski]

1. Russia
2. Russia
3. Russia
4. Russia
5. Russia
6. Russia
7. Kazakhstan
8. North Korea
9. Sweden
10. Lanver ( Actually does exist i declared my own house as a independent nation )
11. UK
12. USA
13. China
14.Ukraine
15. Netherlands

Thanks, and no haters about my Russian Dominance

Бережливость хороша, да скупость страшна Tranlation - Economy is a good servant but a bad master

Please tell me you are being sarcastic.

[Gotengo]

Which is not only grossly incorrect, but inherently misleading.

False, by number of active and reserve vessels the the KPAN is the largest navy in the world. This is supported by the CIA and South Korean defense ministry people.

Um, there is no such thing as the KPAN. I looked it up and all I could find was a Radio Station.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Different countries, same nukes.

The ipod is a small device that holds hours worth of music. A significant innovation in the field of commercial entertainment.

Then where are their robots? Hmm? I don't know about you, but it looks like they don't have as many drones as the US.

Look it up and anytime you search you will see Russia has the most nukes and Japan is the most technologically advanced.

Actually Russia has lost a fair amount of nukes since it has no longer been the USSR, mostly because it no longer has it's Nuclear Submarine Fleet, but it still has the world's largest Nuclear Arsenal.

Good for Russia. And I just read that tengib article, and it doesn't seem to so much actually compare what the average tech is so much as put the nation where it is based on some tiny new innovation. For example, it puts Japan at first because it apparently invented a teleporter, and they apparently have a gun that shoots lasers (BS).

[Washington Resistance Army]

False, by number of active and reserve vessels the the KPAN is the largest navy in the world. This is supported by the CIA and South Korean defense ministry people.

Um, there is no such thing as the KPAN. I looked it up and all I could find was a Radio Station.

KPN* My bad.

[Napkiraly]

Actually, and again no offence, I would have to say any Country that has been militarily active longer than the U.S. so any country that has been in wars for more than 300 years. You see I don't look at it so much as technology and budgets, but experience. Countries that have longer military history, they have more experience fighting, they've picked up tricks and tips, developed special tactics for certain situations, I look at it a matter of experience. These countries will know what to do and when to do it.

So my favor would go to countries like Great Britain, Japan, Germany, Russia, China, Turkey, Italy, Spain, Austria, Egypt, Greece, and Israel. No offence to the U.S. but all these countries just have more experience, more knowledge of war, better tactics. Brain over Brawn.

Tactics learned over 300 years ago aren't comparable to modern tactics. Wars like WWII, Vietnam, Korea, and Desert Storm are where modern tactics would be tried and tested, and the US has been in all those wars.

By your logic China, Greece, and Egypt should be the strongest countries.

And Iraq, Syria and parts of Turkey.

[Gotengo]

Actually, and again no offence, I would have to say any Country that has been militarily active longer than the U.S. so any country that has been in wars for more than 300 years. You see I don't look at it so much as technology and budgets, but experience. Countries that have longer military history, they have more experience fighting, they've picked up tricks and tips, developed special tactics for certain situations, I look at it a matter of experience. These countries will know what to do and when to do it.

So my favor would go to countries like Great Britain, Japan, Germany, Russia, China, Turkey, Italy, Spain, Austria, Egypt, Greece, and Israel. No offence to the U.S. but all these countries just have more experience, more knowledge of war, better tactics. Brain over Brawn.

Tactics learned over 300 years ago aren't comparable to modern tactics. Wars like WWII, Vietnam, Korea, and Desert Storm are where modern tactics would be tried and tested, and the US has been in all those wars.

By your logic China, Greece, and Egypt should be the strongest countries.

Not exactly. Most old tactics still would work. Because those countries that have developed them, keep adapting them. Why do you think no one has successfully invaded England since the days of William the Conqueror. Also the United States technically lost the Vietnam war in a sense since it backed out of it. And most of the true tactical genius of WW2 belonged to the Germans and the Japanese. I'm not insulting the tactical capability of the Allies it's just the Germans and Japanese had a lot of great strategists among them like Goering, Yamamoto, Rommel, and Von Rundstedt.

[Marcurix]

Which is not only grossly incorrect, but inherently misleading.

False, by number of active and reserve vessels the the KPAN is the largest navy in the world. This is supported by the CIA and South Korean defense ministry people.

Well shit i guess that changes everything.

oh, wait, no it doesn't. Because the vast majority of those ships wouldn't even be seaworthy. That's the problem with GlobalFirepower, I could go out and buy a fishing boat and claim to have a navy by their standards.

[The Sotoan Union]

Tactics learned over 300 years ago aren't comparable to modern tactics. Wars like WWII, Vietnam, Korea, and Desert Storm are where modern tactics would be tried and tested, and the US has been in all those wars.

By your logic China, Greece, and Egypt should be the strongest countries.

Not exactly. Most old tactics still would work. Because those countries that have developed them, keep adapting them. Why do you think no one has successfully invaded England since the days of William the Conqueror. Also the United States technically lost the Vietnam war in a sense since it backed out of it. And most of the true tactical genius of WW2 belonged to the Germans and the Japanese. I'm not insulting the tactical capability of the Allies it's just the Germans and Japanese had a lot of great strategists among them like Goering, Yamamoto, Rommel, and Von Rundstedt.

Tactics change, and warfare evolves.

Spain is a great example. The Spanish Empire fell from power because they didn't evolve new tactics or technology. In the end the rest of Europe eclipsed them.

Besides the United States has had numerous military geniuses since its creation.

[Gotengo]

Look it up and anytime you search you will see Russia has the most nukes and Japan is the most technologically advanced.

Actually Russia has lost a fair amount of nukes since it has no longer been the USSR, mostly because it no longer has it's Nuclear Submarine Fleet, but it still has the world's largest Nuclear Arsenal.

Good for Russia. And I just read that tengib article, and it doesn't seem to so much actually compare what the average tech is so much as put the nation where it is based on some tiny new innovation. For example, it puts Japan at first because it apparently invented a teleporter, and they apparently have a gun that shoots lasers (BS).

You never know what people are hiding. I mean it wouldn't be that hard. And I don't mean to open any wounds for anybody here, Hitler managed to hide everything that was happening to the Jewish People from the German Populace for years without anybody finding out, so if the slaughter of an entire religion can be hidden, how hard would it be to hide a few pieces of tech.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Tactics learned over 300 years ago aren't comparable to modern tactics. Wars like WWII, Vietnam, Korea, and Desert Storm are where modern tactics would be tried and tested, and the US has been in all those wars.

By your logic China, Greece, and Egypt should be the strongest countries.

Not exactly. Most old tactics still would work. Because those countries that have developed them, keep adapting them. Why do you think no one has successfully invaded England since the days of William the Conqueror. Also the United States technically lost the Vietnam war in a sense since it backed out of it. And most of the true tactical genius of WW2 belonged to the Germans and the Japanese. I'm not insulting the tactical capability of the Allies it's just the Germans and Japanese had a lot of great strategists among them like Goering, Yamamoto, Rommel, and Von Rundstedt.

What Britain does in this case is not tactics, it's strategy. And yes, some strategies can be used again and again in some regions because of the geography. Tactics, on the other hand, constantly change in light of new technology and tactics.

[Napkiraly]

Why do you think no one has successfully invaded England since the days of William the Conqueror.

You mean apart from Henry IV and Henry VII?

[The Sotoan Union]

False, by number of active and reserve vessels the the KPAN is the largest navy in the world. This is supported by the CIA and South Korean defense ministry people.

Well shit i guess that changes everything.

oh, wait, no it doesn't. Because the vast majority of those ships wouldn't even be seaworthy. That's the problem with GlobalFirepower, I could go out and buy a fishing boat and claim to have a navy by their standards.

The Somalian pirates are a good example.

[Washington Resistance Army]

False, by number of active and reserve vessels the the KPAN is the largest navy in the world. This is supported by the CIA and South Korean defense ministry people.

Well shit i guess that changes everything.

oh, wait, no it doesn't. Because the vast majority of those ships wouldn't even be seaworthy. That's the problem with GlobalFirepower, I could go out and buy a fishing boat and claim to have a navy by their standards.

Do you have a source that most of them aren't seaworthy? I've studied the DPRK a lot, and by all accounts the majority of the submarines they operate are active with the possible exception of the missile subs they purchased from Russia which, following DPRK tradition were most likely cannibalized and reverse engineered.

[Gotengo]

Not exactly. Most old tactics still would work. Because those countries that have developed them, keep adapting them. Why do you think no one has successfully invaded England since the days of William the Conqueror. Also the United States technically lost the Vietnam war in a sense since it backed out of it. And most of the true tactical genius of WW2 belonged to the Germans and the Japanese. I'm not insulting the tactical capability of the Allies it's just the Germans and Japanese had a lot of great strategists among them like Goering, Yamamoto, Rommel, and Von Rundstedt.

Tactics change, and warfare evolves.

Spain is a great example. The Spanish Empire fell from power because they didn't evolve new tactics or technology. In the end the rest of Europe eclipsed them.

Besides the United States has had numerous military geniuses since its creation.

Well actually if you consider it, some WW1 style tactics would still work in modern day, such as Trench Warfare. And with modern automatic weaponry that would actually make a Trench Line Defense more efficient.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Tactics change, and warfare evolves.

Spain is a great example. The Spanish Empire fell from power because they didn't evolve new tactics or technology. In the end the rest of Europe eclipsed them.

Besides the United States has had numerous military geniuses since its creation.

Well actually if you consider it, some WW1 style tactics would still work in modern day, such as Trench Warfare. And with modern automatic weaponry that would actually make a Trench Line Defense more efficient.

Key word some.

[The Sotoan Union]

Tactics change, and warfare evolves.

Spain is a great example. The Spanish Empire fell from power because they didn't evolve new tactics or technology. In the end the rest of Europe eclipsed them.

Besides the United States has had numerous military geniuses since its creation.

Well actually if you consider it, some WW1 style tactics would still work in modern day, such as Trench Warfare. And with modern automatic weaponry that would actually make a Trench Line Defense more efficient.

But your statement that a military is magically stronger because it is really old makes no sense. Spain is not stronger than the US because it is older, nor does it necessarily have better tactics. Besides its not like newer countries can't simply learn established tactics, especially if said tactics are frequently used.

[Napkiraly]

Not exactly. Most old tactics still would work. Because those countries that have developed them, keep adapting them. Why do you think no one has successfully invaded England since the days of William the Conqueror. Also the United States technically lost the Vietnam war in a sense since it backed out of it. And most of the true tactical genius of WW2 belonged to the Germans and the Japanese. I'm not insulting the tactical capability of the Allies it's just the Germans and Japanese had a lot of great strategists among them like Goering, Yamamoto, Rommel, and Von Rundstedt.

Tactics change, and warfare evolves.

Spain is a great example. The Spanish Empire fell from power because they didn't evolve new tactics or technology. In the end the rest of Europe eclipsed them.

Besides the United States has had numerous military geniuses since its creation.

Not to mention that past glory does not mean present glory.

[Caninope]

Tactics change, and warfare evolves.

Spain is a great example. The Spanish Empire fell from power because they didn't evolve new tactics or technology. In the end the rest of Europe eclipsed them.

Besides the United States has had numerous military geniuses since its creation.

Well actually if you consider it, some WW1 style tactics would still work in modern day, such as Trench Warfare. And with modern automatic weaponry that would actually make a Trench Line Defense more efficient.

Trench warfare wouldn't work against the US or any Western coalition (or for that matter, Russia, either) because of the heavy emphasis on combined arms and mobility. These nations would not let themselves get bogged down in trench warfare, and if they did somehow magically get bogged down, it would largely be fought out until some aspect (notably air supremacy) would end that particular warfare.

In other words, trench warfare is all but obsolete for major, conventional conflicts.

[Napkiraly]

Tactics change, and warfare evolves.

Spain is a great example. The Spanish Empire fell from power because they didn't evolve new tactics or technology. In the end the rest of Europe eclipsed them.

Besides the United States has had numerous military geniuses since its creation.

Well actually if you consider it, some WW1 style tactics would still work in modern day, such as Trench Warfare. And with modern automatic weaponry that would actually make a Trench Line Defense more efficient.

Apart from when you're blown into flying mince due to air strikes.

[Marcurix]

Well shit i guess that changes everything.

oh, wait, no it doesn't. Because the vast majority of those ships wouldn't even be seaworthy. That's the problem with GlobalFirepower, I could go out and buy a fishing boat and claim to have a navy by their standards.

Do you have a source that most of them aren't seaworthy? I've studied the DPRK a lot, and by all accounts the majority of the submarines they operate are active with the possible exception of the missile subs they purchased from Russia which, following DPRK tradition were most likely cannibalized and reverse engineered.

I'm going to see if i can dig up one of my more academic books in the subject, i'll get back to you on whether i can find it or not.

But read this article to get a sense of what i'm saying.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/06/16 ... e-in-1961/