Top Ten Armies of today

me262 wrote:

Where does this information come from, please? Where, who and when in regard to these results you refer to?
If you are referring to the Cope India 04 exercises then you have been misled by the news media.

1.All the results(win/loss e.g.) were classified.

2. What ever may have happened the US wasn't using it's cutting edge, best aircraft. The latest model F-16s and F/A 18s were not used for instance. The F-15cs used did not possess the latest longe range radar.

3. No AWACs were used by the US.

4. At Indias request the engagements were at 3 to 1 odds against the US.

5. The long range misssles AIM-120 Amraams that would have given beyong visual range kills were omitted , again at the request of the Indians.

4. "hints" were released that the US wasn't entirely happy with all the results..however the decision of whether or not to cut the F-22 and the F-35 program was being decided around the same time...that might tell you something

The deck was stacked against these guys from the beginning and they didn't do as well with one hand tied behind there back as they expected to, it appears...I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

ps..there was a "rematch" a few months later at Cope Thunder 04 held in Alaska yet very little has been made of the these results in the press...I wonder why that is? Since 2001 the IAF and the USAF have held these kinds of exercises 4 times.
It is healthy that the USAF not become too complacent..they lose their edge that way. They need something to shake them up some every so often.

 

I imagine the Swiss army is quite superiour in tactics, although since they haven't been in a war in like 500 years they haven't actually been able to battle train its troops.

"I like the Swiss, they're neutral."

 

btw - nobody has really made mention of India, who possess much up-to date weaponry from around the world, including a few home-grown pieces, and have the 3rd largest army...

 

What they don't pocess is a large number of well-trained troops(only a portion of their army has good training.) and matching uniforms, and many uniforms consist of a store bought winter jacket and a green tuque, and boots wrapped in cloth.WEll there pakistani foes have US support(weapondry,training,and some uniforms). Well the india army has the numerical advantage , and they aren't cannon fodder

 

Any extremely large army (China, India, USSR) suffered dearly in quality of weapons and troop training. Its either quantity or quality, hard to have both. The British in WWI are an example of a small, highly trained army.

 

The US has a large army...

 

But the US can pay for it, with Defense budgets equalling the GDP of a small country. India and China aren't likely to have the funds ready to finance good equipment and training for all the soldiers they command.

 

Oh, you and your inconvenient fact. I was just making a sily joke based on a palpably unsound foundation

 

Roel wrote:

Or a medium size country/economy like... the Netherlands (close but Netherlands GDP larger)..or Sweden or Norway and Denmark combined

 

Yeah like the United States Military Budget is larger than canadas GNP.

 

No, actually it isn't. Canada's GNP is over 1 trillion dollars now. You might be thinking of Canada's total budget $150 billion rather than GDP

 

I hadn't expected otherwise, just didn't have the numbers at hand.

 

my god what a sensles waist of money
spending trillons of dollars world wide just to improve the way to kill and destroy humans and infrastructure
but unforunatly military stuff is my passion what would i do and play and read if not

 

Yes, it would be a lot better for humanity if everyone would put away such dangerous "toys" and spent the money on more needful things. But as long as mankind is ruling the Earth, that won't happen.

 

The best army is the midget army i will eventually raise and take over the world with , I'll pick on weak countries like Figi and I might take over Wyoming (who cares about wyoming) and maybe France (it's not like they'll fight back ) and maybe the dutch , just to occupy some more land, and maybe belgium cause they have great waffles.

The soldiers have low profiles , they can handle weapons , they don't have to eat as much , and they can headbutt you in the gonads in hand to hand combat

 

:roll:

 

alot of people here dont like the usa for some reason

1.USA
2.GB
3.Isreal
4.china
5.germaney
6.russia
7.Japan
8.canada
9.france(i really don't like putting them this high up)
10. el salvador

 

And it seems that you don't like France for some reason....

 

TD: pretty much everyone so far has placed the US at the top of their list for purely objective reasons. I don't see why this would mean they don't like the US. And I would like to take this opportunity to warn you and all members that this topic is in constant danger of becoming a nationalist FFA, so be careful.

 

TD - why el Salvador?