Most powerful military in the known world? (Today)

[Costa Brilla]

USA by an landslide

[Gig em Aggies]

Now here's the real question

Who in the near-future or the future will be able to challenge the US.<---- In terms of military tactics and training.

And who in the near-future or the future will be able to challenge the US in terms of military technology only.

[Pagan Hungary]

Now here's the real question

Who in the near-future or the future will be able to challenge the US.<---- In terms of military tactics and training.

And who in the near-future or the future will be able to challenge the US in terms of military technology only.

Russia, China and India have the possibilities for both questions I believe. I'm unaware of the training of these three but it can always be brought up to par; while China and India have already made some decent breakthroughs technologically compared to what they used to have.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Designed to be 100 megatons but only ever test detonated at 50 megatons.

In soviet russia 50 is 100.

Fair enough, but considering it was the cold war and america had even mor nukes than russia did, having a 50 megaton nuke isnt exately proof that the USSR was the evil empire.

I am not siding with the ussr, i hate communism, just fail to see whats bad about a nuke that was never used in a real war.

Russia generally maintained a lead in number of nuclear weapons through (and after) the 70s.

The reason they didn't use the Tsar Bomb, or mass produce it, was that it was too powerful. Most of the explosion's force was dissipated into space. They literally built a bomb so powerful that it blew most of its energy off into orbit.

[Lemanrussland]

In soviet russia 50 is 100.

Fair enough, but considering it was the cold war and america had even mor nukes than russia did, having a 50 megaton nuke isnt exately proof that the USSR was the evil empire.

I am not siding with the ussr, i hate communism, just fail to see whats bad about a nuke that was never used in a real war.

Russia generally maintained a lead in number of nuclear weapons through (and after) the 70s.

The reason they didn't use the Tsar Bomb, or mass produce it, was that it was too powerful. Most of the explosion's force was dissipated into space. They literally built a bomb so powerful that it blew most of its energy off into orbit.

That, and the concept behind it became obsolete with the introduction of sufficiently accurate ICBMs and later MRVs/MIRVs.

[Imperializt Russia]

In soviet russia 50 is 100.

Fair enough, but considering it was the cold war and america had even mor nukes than russia did, having a 50 megaton nuke isnt exately proof that the USSR was the evil empire.

I am not siding with the ussr, i hate communism, just fail to see whats bad about a nuke that was never used in a real war.

Russia generally maintained a lead in number of nuclear weapons through (and after) the 70s.

The reason they didn't use the Tsar Bomb, or mass produce it, was that it was too powerful. Most of the explosion's force was dissipated into space. They literally built a bomb so powerful that it blew most of its energy off into orbit.

Even if it hadn't, it would use too much material and have inefficient blast and flash characteristics.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

1. UK
2. China
3. India
4. USA
5. Germany
6. South Korea
7. Russia
8. Turkey
9. Japan
10. Pakistan
11. Israel
12. Egypt
13. Brazil
14. Ukraine
15. Indonesia

Your list is all kind of fucked up.

I have to agree, he does give me an idea for a Civilization II run

[Baltenstein]

Hope this is sarcastic.

No. North Korea might not be the biggest country, and it won't conquer the world but nobody wants to mess with it. It's like a porcupine-not the biggest animal but not even lions will dare mess with it.

Though not because it is badass but because it has rabies.

[Desmendura]

I'm stuck between US, China, and Russia. The three of 'em have equally powerful armies IMO.

[Napkiraly]

It would still be able to defeat the PLAN, which is almost entirely brown-water.

Royal Navy: In total there are 79 commissioned ships in the navy. 19 of the commissioned vessels are major surface combatants (6 guided missile destroyers and 13 frigates) and 11 are nuclear-powered submarines (4 ballistic missile submarines and 7 fleet submarines). In addition the Navy possesses an aircraft carrier (though without fixed-wing aircraft), an amphibious assault ship, two amphibious transport docks, 15 mine countermeasures vessels, 24 patrol vessels, 4 survey vessels and two historic warships (Victory and Bristol). The total displacement of the Royal Navy is approximately 362,000 tonnes (or 797,000 tonnes including the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and Royal Marines).

PLAN:
1 aircraft carrier
3 amphibious transport docks
26 landing ship tanks
8 attack submarines (SSN)
40 attack submarines (SSK)
6 ballistic missile submarines (SSBN)
2 experimental submarines
23 destroyers
41 frigates
11 corvettes
105 missile boats
131 gunboats
67 mine countermeasures vessels
7 replenishment oilers
178 auxiliaries (various) *

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... Navy_ships

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... Navy_ships

Yeah, looks to me like the PLAN would kick the Royal Navy's ass.

If British military history is anything to go by, it has an amazing tendency to do well and even win while outnumbered. Plus, Britain has a secret weapon. A picture of Philip and Elizabeth in the nude. Enough to cause any person to lose their sanity.

[Soviet Russia Republic]

I'm stuck between US, China, and Russia. The three of 'em have equally powerful armies IMO.

All extremely powerful, but the USA is the most powerful for sure. It has a strong advantage in force projection especially...with China having the worst of the three.

[Gyrenaica]

1. USA
*big gap*
2. China
3. Russia
*small gap*
4. UK
5. India
*medium sized gap*
6. Germany
7. France
*puny gap*
8. South Korea
9. Turkey
*small gap*
10. Japan
11. Israel
*small gap*
12. Brazil
*big gap*
13. Egypt
14. Taiwan
*small gap*
15. Italy

[OMGeverynameistaken]

1. USA
*big gap*
2. China
3. Russia
*small gap*
4. UK
5. India
*medium sized gap*
6. Germany
7. France
*puny gap*
8. South Korea
9. Turkey
*small gap*
10. Japan
11. Israel
*small gap*
12. Brazil
*big gap*
13. Egypt
14. Taiwan
*small gap*
15. Italy

From what I've heard, most of the EU states are having serious trouble with their militaries. Germany is going through another "OMG WERE NOT NAZIS" crises and recruitment is suffering, the UK is likewise having trouble maintaining manpower. France is probably the most effective of the 'former great powers' club at the moment, although theirs is somewhat underfunded IIRC.

General opinion seems to support Poland, of all places, as the up and coming military power in Europe, backed up by NATO of course.

[Desmendura]

I'm stuck between US, China, and Russia. The three of 'em have equally powerful armies IMO.

All extremely powerful, but the USA is the most powerful for sure. It has a strong advantage in force projection especially...with China having the worst of the three.

Okay, considering the fact that China doesn't have any aircraft carriers. You may be right.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

If British military history is anything to go by, it has an amazing tendency to do well and even win while outnumbered. Plus, Britain has a secret weapon. A picture of Philip and Elizabeth in the nude. Enough to cause any person to lose their sanity.

You are forgetting that use of those photos is banned by international obscenity laws.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

Military power is not determined by the numbers nor by equipment. This poll is useless. It all comes down by several factors.

[Darwinish Brentsylvania]

Military power is not determined by the numbers nor by equipment. This poll is useless. It all comes down by several factors.

Sorta. But it can be decided via statistics.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

Sorta. But it can be decided via statistics.

Never. Military power is never decided via statistics but rather the capacity of a nation to project its force.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Sorta. But it can be decided via statistics.

Never. Military power is never decided via statistics but rather the capacity of a nation to project its force.

That's what the statistics measure. We can make safe assumptions based on existing training, equipment, and numbers.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

That's what the statistics measure. We can make safe assumptions based on existing training, equipment, and numbers.

Training is not measured by statistics. Equipment and numbers are subject to several factors. A nation does not win a war by just having more tanks and guns.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

That's what the statistics measure. We can make safe assumptions based on existing training, equipment, and numbers.

Training is not measured by statistics.

It can be, and it is. We can determine what nation has superior training for its enlisted and officers.

Equipment and numbers are subject to several factors.

I know that.

A nation does not win a war by just having more tanks and guns.

I never said that. I just said a nation's military strength can be measured in statistics. And besides, while numbers on their lonesome are pointless, the ability to move and supply them can let them make a huge difference. Greater numbers let you be in more places at once, enables greater volume of firepower, and opens up maneuvers not feasible with smaller numbers. Of course, as said above before the bold, you can't rely on the numbers alone. Other than the above points, I agree numbers aren't everything.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Royal Navy: In total there are 79 commissioned ships in the navy. 19 of the commissioned vessels are major surface combatants (6 guided missile destroyers and 13 frigates) and 11 are nuclear-powered submarines (4 ballistic missile submarines and 7 fleet submarines). In addition the Navy possesses an aircraft carrier (though without fixed-wing aircraft), an amphibious assault ship, two amphibious transport docks, 15 mine countermeasures vessels, 24 patrol vessels, 4 survey vessels and two historic warships (Victory and Bristol). The total displacement of the Royal Navy is approximately 362,000 tonnes (or 797,000 tonnes including the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and Royal Marines).

PLAN:
1 aircraft carrier
3 amphibious transport docks
26 landing ship tanks
8 attack submarines (SSN)
40 attack submarines (SSK)
6 ballistic missile submarines (SSBN)
2 experimental submarines
23 destroyers
41 frigates
11 corvettes
105 missile boats
131 gunboats
67 mine countermeasures vessels
7 replenishment oilers
178 auxiliaries (various) *

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... Navy_ships

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... Navy_ships

Yeah, looks to me like the PLAN would kick the Royal Navy's ass.

If British military history is anything to go by, it has an amazing tendency to do well and even win while outnumbered. Plus, Britain has a secret weapon. A picture of Philip and Elizabeth in the nude. Enough to cause any person to lose their sanity.

If British military history is anything to go by, they tend to win by having the best financed allies to supply them with the numbers they need to win, while possessing a hilariously incompetent officer corps held together by the egos of the few madmen in charge who actually know what they're doing.

[Costa Fierro]

If British military history is anything to go by, it has an amazing tendency to do well and even win while outnumbered. Plus, Britain has a secret weapon. A picture of Philip and Elizabeth in the nude. Enough to cause any person to lose their sanity.

If British military history is anything to go by, they tend to win by having the best financed allies to supply them with the numbers they need to win, while possessing a hilariously incompetent officer corps held together by the egos of the few madmen in charge who actually know what they're doing.

And usually conquering bringing the glories of Western civilization to people who lack firearms.

[Napkiraly]

If British military history is anything to go by, it has an amazing tendency to do well and even win while outnumbered. Plus, Britain has a secret weapon. A picture of Philip and Elizabeth in the nude. Enough to cause any person to lose their sanity.

You are forgetting that use of those photos is banned by international obscenity laws.

All is fair in war.

If British military history is anything to go by, it has an amazing tendency to do well and even win while outnumbered. Plus, Britain has a secret weapon. A picture of Philip and Elizabeth in the nude. Enough to cause any person to lose their sanity.

If British military history is anything to go by, they tend to win by having the best financed allies to supply them with the numbers they need to win, while possessing a hilariously incompetent officer corps held together by the egos of the few madmen in charge who actually know what they're doing.

Things have gotten better on the officer front, from what I can see. Ending the purchase of commissions was rather good.

If British military history is anything to go by, they tend to win by having the best financed allies to supply them with the numbers they need to win, while possessing a hilariously incompetent officer corps held together by the egos of the few madmen in charge who actually know what they're doing.

And usually conquering bringing the glories of Western civilization to people who lack firearms.

Exactly.

[Alcase]

Pakistan.