Jump to content


Modern Militaries of the World


  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

Poll: Modern Militaries of the World (37 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 5 battle in order to participate this poll.

Do you like this idea?

  1. YES! (27 votes [72.97%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 72.97%

  2. Umm...sure whatever. (9 votes [24.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 24.32%

  3. Oh God no... (1 vote [2.70%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.70%

Which nation would you like me to report on first?

  1. America! Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, Baby! (9 votes [24.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 24.32%

  2. Russia! We eat Americans for breakfast...and lunch...and dinner...and dessert. (15 votes [40.54%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 40.54%

  3. South Korea! The Tiger Nation! The Land of the Morning Calm! (5 votes [13.51%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.51%

  4. Israel! God's people, always kicking butt. (7 votes [18.92%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 18.92%

  5. United Kingdom! God save the Queen...and destroy our enemies. (1 vote [2.70%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.70%

Vote Hide poll

CrimsonMG #21 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:28 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 10780 battles
  • 2,585
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014

View PostGenClint10, on 18 August 2014 - 04:10 AM, said:

Not really china is a bunch of rice farmers.

Don't go there my friend.



Integrity125 #22 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:29 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3404 battles
  • 1,050
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

Okay.

 

Nuclear weapons aside.

 

When considering the outcome of a war between America, and Russia and China, there are many things to consider. Technologically, the US is superior, but China and Russia are closing the gap. China has the world's largest army, with USA coming in second and Russia in fifth place. As far as training goes, the US is very consistant and has an army of paid professionals. China and Russia, however, have a lot of conscripts. The training gap between their best units, and their worst is huge. Whereas in the US, even the national guard and reserve units have very good equipment and decent training.

 

Another important factor is this. The US has very good force projection capabilities. They have 10 aircraft carriers and 31 amphibious warfare vessels. They are very capable of launching an invasion. Also, their navy is the largest in the world with some of the most powerful warships in existence. The Arleight-Burke class guided missile destroyer that is the navy's backbone, for example, is very capable, outclassing most of what the Russians and Chinese have.

 

On the other hand, the Russians and Chinese have very few aircraft carriers and amphibious warfare vessels. China is pretty much incapable of launching an effective invasion on the USA. They have a huge army, but they don't have the means to get it across the Pacific Ocean safely. Same with Russia. They were focused on invading Europe during the Cold War, and playing a defensive naval war in the Atlantic. Not invading the USA.

 

Here's my conclusion: If America decided to invade Russia, they'd have a very hard time due to the weather and also Russia's considerable military strength. If America decided to invade China, they would probably succeed but not after a bloodbath. If America decided to take on the two countries simultaneously, it would be the stupidest decision ever made. China is incapable of invading America because of their lack of force projection capabilities and control of the seas. Russia might be able to invade Alaska and Canada...but I'm not so sure if they could invade America. If Russia and China decided to invade America together...remember that they'll have to worry about the entirety of NATO, including Great Britain, France, and Germany, as well as South Korea and Japan. My personal opinion is that they'd fail mainly because they don't control the seas. Likewise, I think one of America's chief advantages is that they control the oceans, and what goes through them. Anyone who wants to invade America has to destroy her navy first. AND THEN they have to take on the ground forces.


Class II Closed Beta Tester

Community Pledge Signer

Tier Xs: IS-7. I know I know. I'm working on getting more.

"The object of a fight is not to win. It is to give your opponent no choice but to lose."


CrimsonMG #23 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:34 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 10780 battles
  • 2,585
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014
+1 :great:

GenClint10 #24 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:42 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5827 battles
  • 1,139
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013
Also if russian and chinese forces do invade America and accually enter America they would loose miserably.  Most Americans would fight until the death to defend against a foreign invasion or at least i know i would. Hunters are basicly sharpshooters. They would loose a lot of men and armor since some Americans have grenades or stock piles of ammo and guns. A invasion would either be pushed back, all but obliverated from the face of the earth or succeed but at a cost.

GenClint10 #25 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:45 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5827 battles
  • 1,139
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View PostCrimsonMG, on 18 August 2014 - 04:28 AM, said:

Don't go there my friend.

 

 

 Even if they arent they couldn't beat the American army. Also integrity forgot to mention how are Air Force would pummel there advance if we did gain a foot hold in russia or china.

 

 



Integrity125 #26 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:48 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3404 battles
  • 1,050
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostGenClint10, on 18 August 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

Also if russian and chinese forces do invade America and accually enter America they would loose miserably.  Most Americans would fight until the death to defend against a foreign invasion or at least i know i would. Hunters are basicly sharpshooters. They would loose a lot of men and armor since some Americans have grenades or stock piles of ammo and guns. A invasion would either be pushed back, all but obliverated from the face of the earth or succeed but at a cost.

 

Let me guess. You're from Texas or some other Southern USA state, am I right?

 

I've heard this same argument from every single Texan I've ever met. The problem is that they don't realize the majority of the population do not own firearms. Those who do carry mostly concealed firearms aka .22 caliber pistols or maybe a .45 ACP at most. The majority of the rest own hunting bolt-action rifles or shotguns. Only a minority will own high quality weapons such as AR-15s, FN SCARs, M1As, H&Ks.

 

It's important to remember that it takes more than a good shot to make a good soldier. Hunters may be great as snipers, but can they follow orders? Can a bunch of civilians armed with semi-automatic weapons fight cohesively against a real military? Will those civilians help or hamper real military operations? There is a reason soldiers receive harsh and difficult training before seeing combat.

 

However, despite all this, I do indeed think that America would be very hard to invade because of the large amount of privately owned firearms that exist there, as well as the large amount of motivated people. American civilians have a history of fighting for themselves. Against the native americans, against the mexicans, and so on.


Class II Closed Beta Tester

Community Pledge Signer

Tier Xs: IS-7. I know I know. I'm working on getting more.

"The object of a fight is not to win. It is to give your opponent no choice but to lose."


charlie9797 #27 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:51 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5703 battles
  • 1,103
  • Member since:
    05-17-2011

View PostGenClint10, on 17 August 2014 - 08:10 PM, said:

Not really china is a bunch of rice farmers.

Really brah?


T2 Light =  T34T18 = T82 = M36 Jackson = Pz.38(t) nA = Tiger (P)  = E50=  E75 = Jagdtiger M3 Lend Lease = T-44 Cromwell

Tier Xs - E100

wow


Integrity125 #28 Posted 18 August 2014 - 03:57 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3404 battles
  • 1,050
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostGenClint10, on 18 August 2014 - 12:45 PM, said:

 

 

The US Air Force is indeed very powerful. And you know what the second largest Air Force in the world is? The US Navy.

 

The biggest drawback of the US military equipment-wise is their lack of anti-air weapons. No other high-level military lacks self-propelled air defense vehicles to travel with their tanks. This is because the US military relies on air superiority when it fights. It requires its Air Force to control the skies. This means that if US forces do lose air superiority, whether over the entire battlefield or just locally, their ground forces are VERY vulnerable. The only anti-air they would have are short-range man portable air defense weapons such as the stinger. These are effective, but will prove grossly inadequate against high-end fighter craft such as the Su-30, MiG-35, and the new Sukhoi PAK FA T-50.

 

The US Air Force is superbly equipped and trained, and I think they will be able to defeat their counterparts in the Russia and China, however, it takes time to achieve air superiority. During that period where nobody owns the skies yet, US ground forces are vulnerable to airstrikes. Also, planes need airfields to operate from. If the US fails to take control of one, their planes will have nowhere to base except for the aircraft carriers. Aircraft carriers are great assets, but they are limited in capability when compared to a dedicated airbase.

 

The US Air Force could easily provide air support to ground forces against Russian and Chinese ground forces, but in the opening stages of a war they will most likely be preoccupied in achieving  and maintaining air superiority.


Class II Closed Beta Tester

Community Pledge Signer

Tier Xs: IS-7. I know I know. I'm working on getting more.

"The object of a fight is not to win. It is to give your opponent no choice but to lose."


GenClint10 #29 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:11 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5827 battles
  • 1,139
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013
Actually integrity im not im from New York State. I will die for my country those who live by the sword die by the sword. Also the us military has anti air weapons a decent amount at least. i believe the us military could take a airport or airfield to launch air operations. Then after that pretty much laying waste to china or russia. Also why does having the biggest military to do with  anything. For example during the American revolution the patriots held out for a few years while benjamin franklin negotiated with France. I believe if im correct we held out until 1778 or 1779 which i think is amazing because the british were far superior to the patriots. The british soldiers where dumb though to walk out into open fields and get ambushed , i know walking in lines was the tactic back then but i would think they would have  common sense to know that patriots did that. Also now that i type this we could follow orders or at least form a army if a invasion happened. The patriots did it and formed there own government. Anyways this is what i believe however i respect also everyone's opinions except for any democrat opinion or decison.

charlie9797 #30 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:14 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5703 battles
  • 1,103
  • Member since:
    05-17-2011
Yeah cause the Brits had muskets, rifles are way more effective in ambushes due to their accuracy but much longer reload time

T2 Light =  T34T18 = T82 = M36 Jackson = Pz.38(t) nA = Tiger (P)  = E50=  E75 = Jagdtiger M3 Lend Lease = T-44 Cromwell

Tier Xs - E100

wow


Integrity125 #31 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:35 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3404 battles
  • 1,050
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostGenClint10, on 18 August 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

Actually integrity im not im from New York State. I will die for my country those who love by the sword die by the sword. Also the us military has anti air weapons a decent amount at least. i believe the us military could take a airport or airfield to launch air operations. Then after that pretty much laying waste to china or russia. Also why does having the biggest military to do with  anything. For example during the American revolution the patriots held out for a few years while benjamin franklin negotiated with France. I believe if im correct we held out until 1778 or 1779 which i think is amazing because the british were far superior to the patriots. The british soldiers where dumb though to walk out into open fields and get ambushed , i know walking in lines was the tactic back then but i would think they would have  common sense to know that patriots did that. Also now that i type this we could follow orders or at least form a army if a invasion happened. The patriots did it and formed there own government. Anyways this is what i believe however i respect also everyone's opinions except for any democrat opinion or decison.

 

Now realize that I did not say the US doesn't have anti-air weapons. I said that their anti-air weapons are inadequate as a result of their doctrine which happens to rely on air superiority. It's just how the US fights. No military doctrine is perfect, and they all have their pros and cons.

 

Yes I do think that the US would be able to take an airfield, but I do not think America would have an easy time invading Russia or China. You're so willing to die for your country. You're so confident that your countrymen will defend their homes and obey orders and be good soldiers. What makes you think that the Russians or Chinese are any different? One could also say that Russians are tougher people than Americans because they grow up in a harsh environment. The Chinese are a communist state, which means they politically indoctrinate their citizens. While there will always be believers and nonbelievers, I've visited China personally, and there are just as many fiercely patriotic Chinese as there are unhappy rebels, much like America. Also remember that China alone contains a third of the world population, and that's a lot of people.

 

Having the largest army in the world is a very important factor. Admittedly, it's only one factor in deciding victory. Numbers do not win a battle, but they certainly help. Quality over quantity? Quantity is a quality of its own. And while the US Military may be the 2nd largest in the world, their manpower is scatter all over the globe. The Chinese military's manpower is concentrated in one part of the globe. This means that America has to spend time and resources to get all their troops togethers, while China has a major advantage in local numerical superiority from the start.

 

Also take into account the home ground advantage. Whoever is fighting in their home ground automatically has another factor in their favor, whereas whoever is invading is unfamiliar with the territory. It's like when you play hide-and-seek at your friends house for the first time. Your friend knows all the good hiding spots, while you're still figuring things out. This works vice versa. Americans would have another advantage in their homeland when fighting invaders.


Class II Closed Beta Tester

Community Pledge Signer

Tier Xs: IS-7. I know I know. I'm working on getting more.

"The object of a fight is not to win. It is to give your opponent no choice but to lose."


TwistedMetal_ #32 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:38 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 14191 battles
  • 2,741
  • [DFNT]
  • Member since:
    06-26-2014

View PostCommander121, on 17 August 2014 - 07:47 PM, said:

Really? Kid 1-2 months. Of course if [edited]countries like the US use atomic bombs they will win in 1-2 months. But if they actually fight then they will lose. US is just picking on little countries for no reason. 

The U.S military decimated and obliterated obsolete Russian hardware all over the sands of Iraq! Our stealth technology was the straw that broke the camels back! Communism was defeated with out even one shot fired! The thugs that you see today...Kim J Un, Putin and those D bags in the Middle East would be wiped clean if we wanted them gone! And since you brought up picking on small countries I guess Ukrain doesn't count when Putin and the rest of the Russian mafia are doing the pushing right? Or shooting down civilian aircraft? All thugs!! The American military is battle tested and proven!  



dddqqq #33 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:43 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 10289 battles
  • 896
  • Member since:
    06-27-2014
Us Air Force has the largest array of planes in the world. The us navy has the second....


GenClint10 #34 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:47 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5827 battles
  • 1,139
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View PostIntegrity125, on 18 August 2014 - 05:35 AM, said:

 

Now realize that I did not say the US doesn't have anti-air weapons. I said that their anti-air weapons are inadequate as a result of their doctrine which happens to rely on air superiority. It's just how the US fights. No military doctrine is perfect, and they all have their pros and cons.

 

Yes I do think that the US would be able to take an airfield, but I do not think America would have an easy time invading Russia or China. You're so willing to die for your country. You're so confident that your countrymen will defend their homes and obey orders and be good soldiers. What makes you think that the Russians or Chinese are any different? One could also say that Russians are tougher people than Americans because they grow up in a harsh environment. The Chinese are a communist state, which means they politically indoctrinate their citizens. While there will always be believers and nonbelievers, I've visited China personally, and there are just as many fiercely patriotic Chinese as there are unhappy rebels, much like America. Also remember that China alone contains a third of the world population, and that's a lot of people.

 

Having the largest army in the world is a very important factor. Admittedly, it's only one factor in deciding victory. Numbers do not win a battle, but they certainly help. Quality over quantity? Quantity is a quality of its own. And while the US Military may be the 2nd largest in the world, their manpower is scatter all over the globe. The Chinese military's manpower is concentrated in one part of the globe. This means that America has to spend time and resources to get all their troops togethers, while China has a major advantage in local numerical superiority from the start.

 

Also take into account the home ground advantage. Whoever is fighting in their home ground automatically has another factor in their favor, whereas whoever is invading is unfamiliar with the territory. It's like when you play hide-and-seek at your friends house for the first time. Your friend knows all the good hiding spots, while you're still figuring things out. This works vice versa. Americans would have another advantage in their homeland when fighting invaders.

Numbers dont always matters. Take the winter war for example the russians had extreme numbers but still couldn't beat the finish army. They instead took some of there land as part of the peace treaty. Also i said that we could take orders or at least organize an army.



Integrity125 #35 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:47 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3404 battles
  • 1,050
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostTwistedMetal_1, on 18 August 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

The U.S military decimated and obliterated obsolete Russian hardware all over the sands of Iraq! Our stealth technology was the straw that broke the camels back! Communism was defeated with out even one shot fired! The thugs that you see today...Kim J Un, Putin and those D bags in the Middle East would be wiped clean if we wanted them gone! And since you brought up picking on small countries I guess Ukrain doesn't count when Putin and the rest of the Russian mafia are doing the pushing right? Or shooting down civilian aircraft? All thugs!! The American military is battle tested and proven!  

 

Aside from the political aspects of this post, I largely agree, except that the "Russian" hardware that the Americans obliterated during the Gulf War was not the real stuff.

 

The Soviet Union had a strategy where whenever they sold military hardware to an ally, they took out all the good stuff and gave the buyer a much less capable piece of junk instead. This kind of hardware was what the Coalition encountered in the Persian Gulf. The real Russian hardware is probably much more capable, though still inferior in some aspects to NATO equipment. Russian missile technology is largely unmatched, only recently being overtaken by US weapons systems as more advanced sensors and electronics were developed. Things like helicopter gunships, tanks, etc. however, are lacking.


Class II Closed Beta Tester

Community Pledge Signer

Tier Xs: IS-7. I know I know. I'm working on getting more.

"The object of a fight is not to win. It is to give your opponent no choice but to lose."


Integrity125 #36 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:52 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3404 battles
  • 1,050
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostGenClint10, on 18 August 2014 - 01:47 PM, said:

Numbers dont always matters. Take the winter war for example the russians had extreme numbers but still couldn't beat the finish army. They instead took some of there land as part of the peace treaty. Also i said that we could take orders or at least organize an army.

 

Yes, numbers don't always matter, but you can't ignore it. Numbers are just as real as equipment and training. It's not the deciding factor of a battle, but it helps. My point was that America can't ignore the extreme numbers that China has, even if it does not make a difference in the outcome.

 

I think that American citizens would do better to just enlist and fight as real soldiers if you ever get invaded. Or join the national guard. You already have an army, and that army will fight, while civilians will be evacuated from the combat zone using choppers. Unless you're behind enemy lines or stuck in the middle of a battle, I don't think American civilians will get much of a chance to fight until/unless they enlist. Or get drafted as the result of a new law.


Class II Closed Beta Tester

Community Pledge Signer

Tier Xs: IS-7. I know I know. I'm working on getting more.

"The object of a fight is not to win. It is to give your opponent no choice but to lose."


GenClint10 #37 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:58 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5827 battles
  • 1,139
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View PostIntegrity125, on 18 August 2014 - 05:52 AM, said:

 

Yes, numbers don't always matter, but you can't ignore it. Numbers are just as real as equipment and training. It's not the deciding factor of a battle, but it helps. My point was that America can't ignore the extreme numbers that China has, even if it does not make a difference in the outcome.

 

I think that American citizens would do better to just enlist and fight as real soldiers if you ever get invaded. Or join the national guard. You already have an army, and that army will fight, while civilians will be evacuated from the combat zone using choppers. Unless you're behind enemy lines or stuck in the middle of a battle, I don't think American civilians will get much of a chance to fight until/unless they enlist. Or get drafted as the result of a new law.

As you said numbers dont matter but sometimes they do. i would like to think that American civilians would be given the chance to fight.



Integrity125 #38 Posted 18 August 2014 - 04:58 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3404 battles
  • 1,050
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostGenClint10, on 18 August 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

As you said numbers dont matter but sometimes they do. i would like to think that American civilians would be given the chance to fight.

 

Okay. I guess we'll never know until it actually happens. BTW, what country did you vote for?


Class II Closed Beta Tester

Community Pledge Signer

Tier Xs: IS-7. I know I know. I'm working on getting more.

"The object of a fight is not to win. It is to give your opponent no choice but to lose."


OperationOstracis #39 Posted 18 August 2014 - 05:50 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8359 battles
  • 962
  • Member since:
    05-21-2014

View PostGenClint10, on 17 August 2014 - 10:40 PM, said:

America is the best and most advanced military in the world no doubt. However im skeptical about how the dumb democratic liberal obama is depleting our military letting so many soldiers and officers go for no reason at all.

View PostGenClint10, on 17 August 2014 - 10:44 PM, said:

Thats the American people not the American military. The us military could take any country in about 2 weeks and countries like china and russian in about 1 or 2 months. All i wish is the Muslim obama would get out of office and get a good republican in office. However knowing the democrats they will find some way to impeach him or her or assassinate them.

What's wrong with you, Obama, and Muslims? 


For(u)mer Englisher.


Epicwinner21 #40 Posted 18 August 2014 - 06:50 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 1754 battles
  • 401
  • Member since:
    07-19-2013
Guys i brought popcorn feel free to take some :popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

 

Blitz beta Tester 

The rare Canadian 

I'm pretty trash at this game





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users