Top 10 Military Nations

Taiwan is a difficult point here. Though it's technicly and probably expertise wise (I realize that is controversal here) on a rather high standart, I think it's not in a position to sustain a full-scall, high-intensity military campaing for any longer time. Wich, as a result, puts it lower in that list. Since I think the ability to sustain such a campain is an essential part of a countries military power.
That also to a certain extand is a point with Isreal, but much less important, IMO. Since Israel has a much broader base to start from, and military outside support is much more secure. However, this again makes the determination of it's isolated power more difficult again.

I'll recognize military power as the possibility to act outside of ones own borders. Therefore projection capabilities are important. That will make the ranklist in a scenario that just looks at the ability to defend ones own land from a conventionall attack different. I will also not look at nukes, since that list is pretty clear as Jeff stasted already.

A detailed list is very hard to make, but if the conflict is to happen near the countries borders, something like:
USA
Russia/China
Japan/UK/France/Israel
Germany/Italy/Spain/India/Brasil

If the power is to reach rather wide, especially over water:
USA
UK/France
Japan
India/Italy/Spain
Germany/Brazil
Israel

So far, it's really hard to tell. Though the military of Russia and China are big, and partly really strong already, they lack the capability to move greater distances.

Looking into the future, perhaps:
USA
EU/China
Japan/Russia
India/Brazil

I'm not really sure with Russia, depends on how they come along with their economy.
And EU of course how the countries will actually come together.

kickars said:

I see what you mean. But I just feel that except Brazil the other two countries just have more independent military industries than Taiwan. And in a case of real war, I'm sure they would build up their military power much more than they have now. However, without the US Taiwan is much less capable than Spain and Italy. What's more, Taiwan just doesn't have enough financial backing for their military when compare to those European countries. I mean what it can do and have now is pretty much all it has. Unlike Spain and Italy, they can have more if they really want to. I hope that makes sense.

Click to expand...

Well, that gets into economics. And I think that this thread specifically did not have economics involved - that this was purely a thread about pure military strength only. But you are right in some points.


One thing though - you said that "Without the US, Taiwan is much less capable than Spain or Italy." I think that Taiwan is plenty capable on its own without US support; in fact I don't think anyone on this thread took the US into account when discussing Taiwanese military strength.

kickars said:

What's more, Taiwan just doesn't have enough financial backing for their military when compare to those European countries. I mean what it can do and have now is pretty much all it has. Unlike Spain and Italy, they can have more if they really want to.

Click to expand...

Taiwan certainly has the money to do so, if it only had the will. In recent years, Taiwan's defense spending has been on the decline.


If Taiwan spent just 1% more of its GDP on defense over the next upcoming 10 years, that adds up to possibly nearly $52 billion USD extra for national defense.

Clouded Leopard said:

Taiwan certainly has the money to do so, if it only had the will. In recent years, Taiwan's defense spending has been on the decline.

If Taiwan spent just 1% more of its GDP on defense over the next upcoming 10 years, that adds up to possibly nearly $52 billion USD extra for national defense.

Click to expand...

I think an important point made by Scratch was that Taiwan does not have the vast material and rhetorical support that the US has consistently given to Israel. Unless they stockpile VAST quantities of weaponry and fuel, they will have to rely on outside shipments to sustain a defense for more than a week, possibly less. While Israel was still bombing the shit out of Lebanon, the US eagerly shipped more laser guided bombs over even before really debating it in Congress. There's no way they'd be willing to do something so easily like ship AMRAAMs to Taiwan should conflict arise.

The_Zergling said:

Unless they stockpile VAST quantities of weaponry and fuel, they will have to rely on outside shipments to sustain a defense for more than a week, possibly less.

Click to expand...

It's not that hard to build up a large fuel and ammo reserve (although in the past 7 years, Taiwan's fuel reserve has dwindled.) Taiwan does have over 11,000 missiles in its inventory, although there are deficiencies in some AAMs and SAMs.

Gollevainen said:

1. Finland
2. Sweden
3. Switzerland
4. Israel

Migth seem bit odd list but those all are small (or mediocore), non super power nations that still can be reasonably expected to be able to deter any military agression against them by keeping up army that is actually mented to figth the opponent, not just be some link in some alligment chain or some political comfort factor.

Click to expand...

I concur, small industrial nations determined to defend themselves would be the thoughest opponents. In general my list would be:

1. USA, best equipped large army with unparalled power projection
2. Great Britain, best trained professional army
3. France, good combination of equipment and professionalism
4. Russia, large army and good reserves of equipment
5. China, largest army

well My list deliberatly outcluded superpowers, and leading indstrial and economical migths, becouse to them, it really isent a burden to maintain military power. But for the countries in my list, its a different matter and mostly to do with the will. Maintaining strong armies that actually have any meaning in battle-field can really be a burden to small nations, and its a huge sacrification also. But if there is a will to have strong military, then the nation really is "military nation" from the deep...

But if you start counting the real top, the list would propaply be
1) USA
2) Russia
...and propaply third place would be tied with France, UK and China....rest, led by India and other strong NATO countries would be too difficoult to rank in a list, as almoust every one of them are different, someone having somthing and other not. If we begun to determ what are the crucial elements in militaries that makes one better than the other, we can do that untill the sky falls...

IMO, US tops it.

Russia for me does not earn second. It has a low budget compared to its size, has not downsized enough, could barely pay salaries, has not evolved its doctrines from the Soviet days, has barely modernized, even though it sits in squabs of cash from oil exports, and much of its tank/air/ship fleet is mothballed and still inoperable from age. Also showed a lack of professionalism when dealing with conflicts like Chechnya. I don't really know where to put Russia now. For me its just a big mess.

In second, Britain for its professionalism, France being a great all around, China for its fast growing potential, but I would also add Japan for its professionalism and having the world's second biggest navy, and Germany for having the best land army in Europe man to man. 2nd place is a 5 way tie.

3rd place is I would go with India, Brazil, South Korea, Israel, Taiwan, and Sweden.

I will give my rank in two ways:
First, is just compare the current military build up:
1.US-best in quality and quantity
2.Russia-with all those nukes, they can destroy planets
3.French and British are tied at this position. Mainly because French seems have some better equipment and a big aircraft carrier. Those are good at power projection.
5.China-A large and decently equipped army and airforce, but navy really could expand.
6-Isreal, real combat experience
7-India-lower than China mainly because they need find a way to supply themselves with good weapons and not just buy many different kind weapons.
8-Saudi-Trainings aside, they have got some good equipment going, but the tiny navy could beef up a little
9-Japan-A very powerful navy in east asia, respectable airforce.
10-many can take a spot here, I will go with germany, just because I like their soccer team and the WWI+II record are impressive.

For going into real and long bloody battle:
1-US-same reason as above
2-China-can just overwhelm people with his impressive size
3-Russia-once the war really gets going, I think they can destroy many countries
4-British-they really seems know what it takes to win
5-Germany-the record speaks for itself
the list gets hazy after this, because it really depends on the whether the citizens of a particular nation wants to fight to keep their government.

The premise is that no nukes are used.
1.U.S
2.Russia
3.China
4.Britain
5.France
6.Germany
7.Italy
8.India
9.Israel
10.Japan

I wanna talk more about Japan. Though it's a country rich in economy, and its navy and air force seem advanced. But its fate is grasp by U.S. So i think it is its pity.
And i want to add another item, a real military country has the ability to design and build its weapons.