Since this keeps coming up in threads, let's make a definitive list on the world's best militaries.
US is #1. It's not a debate, no other country comes remotely close, India/China/Russia can shut the fuck up and fight for second place.

1) US
2) China
3) Russia
4) India
5) Israel
6) South Korea
7) Turkey
8) Pakistan
9) France
10) UK
11) Japan
12) Germany
13) Italy
14) Ukraine
15) Poland

>>64004522
>tiktok tier list

>>64004529
I can defend it, if you can bring more substantial criticism than that.

1. USA
2. China
3. India
4. France
5. Pakistan
6. Israel
7. Best Korea
8. Ukraine
9. Russia
10. Finland

You cannot dispute this.

>>64004574
you overrate Finland massively and underrate Russia massively. France and Pakistan are too high too.

1. United States
2. United Kingdom
3. France
4. China
5. Russia
6. South Korea
7. India
8. Japan
9. Germany
10. Israel
Any other list is a lie based on false notions of technological advancement and logistical capability.
Thank you for your attention and /thread

>>64004541
no you can't.

>>64004522
Jeet hands typed this post.

>>64004481 (OP)
>india
>russia
>anywhere near the top 5
lol

>>64004918
>Russia in top 5
Solely because they have nuclear weapons. Without nuclear weapons, they're not even in the top 15.

>>64004930
Even without nukes they still outnumber the majority of the world in tanks and jets.

>>64004990
>outnumber the majority of the world in tanks and jets.
>outnumber
Remember when the Iraqi army was one of the largest in the world and was taken out in a single week.
Numbers do not mean efficacy.

>>64005018
Doesn't matter. It still puts them above everyone else. Just because 1 country is vastly superior to others doesn't mean those numbers don't mean anything to everyone else.

>>64004481 (OP)
1. China
2. US
3. Japan
4. Germany
5. Russia
6. South Korea
7. Vietnam
8. United kingdom

>>64005046
>Has largest army in the world
>Equipment may or may not work
>Real world testing shows they're maybe 50% as effective as they claim
>Other world examples of similiar situations show these types of countries get BTFO very quickly
>anon says this doesn't matter
lol. lmao even.

>>64005108
You overestimate other countries. They are in worse condition than Russia with less equipment.

>>64005133
you overestimate China.
Russia was supposed to be the #2 military in the world, and it can't even win a war against ukraine.
Ukraine has had 3 years to learn and implement western tech, and their grand strategy is to throw drones into Russia and hold the line.

>>64005157
>Russia was supposed to be the #2 military in the world

Won't you laugh when you speak this?

>>64005217
I laugh at foreign countries daily.

>>64004905
why even enter this thread then you dumb faggot?
>>64004908
I'm German. Jeets have mass and nukes and access to estern and Israeli tech.

>>64004481 (OP)
This is the definitive list. Not robotic USA stronk take. No autocracy shilling.

1. US
2. China
3. France
4. South Korea
5. UK
6. Turkey
7. Russia
8. India
9. Israel
10. Pakistan

Bump. Faggots discuss this instead of muh gunz. Fucking American morons

>>64004522
>>64004574
>india
cant even make a domestic rifle worth a damn and they want to do a gen 5 plane? their boxes smell like poop too, not even trying to meme

>>64004900
>>64006515
from world class navy to rented nukes for their handful of boats. uk packaging is shit tier as well
-distribution

Packaging Power rankings
Germany / Japan
China / TW
Mexico
US
India
UK

>>64004481 (OP)
America takes such a number one spot that it mostly depends on who's a closer ally to America than their own strength.

>>64004522
>7) Turkey
>>64006515
>6. Turkey
I figure they need to be in the top 10. They scare me, bros.
https://youtu.be/Odl2qwbrFwg

>>64006795
Indian tech may be shit, but their army is massive and they have access to foreign tech, plus they have nukes.

>>64004481 (OP)
1. Proto-Finngolian Khaganate
2. Great Hwan Empire
3. Hyperborean Ascendancy
4. Commune of Lemuria
5. Iberian Federation
6. Switzerland
7. Swahili Confederacy

>>64004481 (OP)
>US is #1. It's not a debate,
the usa hasnt won a war in 80 years and have never won a war without help from at least half a dozen allies (including the revolution). Hell even swedish diesel subs kill aircraft carriers during war games. I would say even for $1t a year, they arent even in the top 10

>>64006916
this is nearly identical to Best Korea

>>64006941
skeptic comment has a point about the listing in general. US has force projection but cannot say they have the million man army. the human wave hordes are great for defense as bullet sponges. The majority of China's growth has been aimed directly at kicking the US out of the S.China sea, not foreign adventurism. IDK much about France but they seem be a good mix of foot soldering and modern tech. Russia is on an active 'war' footing but was hopelessly corrupt to start and has become a meme from what their reputation was. Not sure why anyone thinks they are going to invade the EU when they dont even have the manpower for their not-war as is. The jews are great at spending US money, shooting even poorer people than America and selling western tech to china. Whats the funniest to me is that we're pushing Germany to rearm like everyone forgot the 40's while the asians still vividly remember japan and dont want to see them return

>>64004522
The only smart anon

>>64004574
>India
When they consistently get fought to a draw by the smaller, poorer Pakistan? Absolutely not

>>64004522
>>64004574
>India anywhere near the top

>>64004481 (OP)
Completely unofficial medium effort opinion coming through

In a vacuum (i.e. Israel has to build its own shit for once):
1. US
- power gap -
2. China
- power gap -
3. France
4. UK
- power gap -
5. Russia
- power gap -
6. South Korea
7. Turkey
8. Japan
9. Germany
10. Ukraine
- power gap -
11. Pakistan
12. India
- power gap -
13. Italy
14. Israel
- power gap -
15. Iran
16. North Korea
- power gap -
17. Poland
18. Australia
19. Finland
20. Brazil

If you include US protection then the top X list is just every member of NATO, then China then Russia.

>>64007239
France and the UK don't have large enough militaries or stockpiles to be in the top 5. they would lose a war against Pakistan, India or Russia. Disregarding nukes, they'd lose against South Korea or Turkey too.

>>64007242
Pakistan, India and Russia couldn't even get close to the UK or France to win a war. Their expeditionary capabilities are non existent. China could get physical assets nearby but then get bodied by naval and air power.

UK and France both have the capability to force entry into any country in the world and successfully accomplish limited goals, which 'wins them the war' and makes them stronger in this dumb semi-arbitrary game.

The US is the only country that can arbitrarily body any other nation on the planet and stay indefinitely.

>>64007250
obviously we're not saying they have the logistical capability to fight around the world, in that case those lists don't make sense because you can't compare militaries. But in raw combat power, Russia or India definitely have more than France or the UK by sheer numbers.

>>64007250
>The US is the only country that can arbitrarily body any other nation on the planet and stay indefinitely.
I doubt they can do that with China at this point, but maybe we will see about that sometime.

>>64007334
The lists don't make sense anyway. Nations set their militaries up to fulfil strategic goals. The UK & France are both very large economies with techologically advanced industrial bases which don't have immediate threats on their borders. Their militaries as a consequence are set up to support allies and interests further afield.

Russia and India have large but very low quality land armies that would die in droves to UK/French air or sea power. You can even look back at the Crimean war in the 19th century to see how an extremely large and powerful Russian land army gets fucking bodied by smaller but highly professional and technologically advanced UK/French militaries in the field. The Anglo-French forced entry, fulfilled their objectives and withdrew. Winning the war. That makes them a better military than Russia at the time, despite paper strength far below them.

A modern equivalent would go much the same. Russian airpower is a joke, France or the UK could unilaterally enforce a no-fly zone in Ukraine if they wanted to and completely change the reality on the ground while Russia can't do anything but periodically bomb civilians against the poorest, weakest nation in europe that functionally has no air force and no navy. Similarly India can't even beak Pakistan, on paper 1/10th of the size. This further proves these globalfirepower style lists are useless.

>>64007367
UK and French air forces are not capable enough to establish air superiority against India or Russia on their own. Russia and India have the production capablity to overwhelm French and British air defenses with strike drones, cruise and ballistic missiles though. Ground forces isn't even a debate.

>>64007376
>Russia and India have the production capablity to overwhelm French and British air defenses with strike drones, cruise and ballistic missiles though.
>and India
War with first world nations is not Ukraine 2, sar.

>>64007376
My dude, A single squadron of F35s flying from a Brit carrier is enough to chase Russia out of Ukrainian airspace, let alone several squadrons of Rafale/Typhoon.

and Russia can't even produce enough cruise to keep Ukrainian infrastructure down. I'll casually remind you as well that either UK OR French economic output is roughly double that of Russia alone and should they decide to start producing cruise and interceptor missiles en masse they could easily outproduce Russia.

and you're correct. Ground forces isn't a debate. Russia's numbers are a weakness as they cannot afford to train or supply them properly but must nevertheless maintain such large numbers in order to secure their large land borders. A single UK/French division landing near sevastopol could seal off the entire peninsula before the demotivated, undersupplied Russian troops were even aware they were under attack. Hell, you could even argue the no-fly zone raiding force to fuck with the rear lines in donbass would go a long way towards forcing a Russian withdrawal from eastern Ukraine. It'd certainly give Ukraine cover to clear mines and reattempt an offensive in the south east.

>>64007393
>>64007400
Ukraine took 8 years since 2014 to get its shit together and form a mass army, also they'd already be conquered without western supplies. France and the UK aren't the US, they have quality but not numbers. If they got 5 years to prepare, yes they'd hold themselves/win, as of now, they'd get overwhelmed. They have some 200 tanks each, and 200 jets with limited numbers of pgms are not enough to deal with Russia or India who both have triple or more that number plus more air defense, more ballistic missiles (UK/France lack any non-nuclear ones).

>>64007415
also, reminder that France/UK don't have the SIGINT on their own that the US has and Ukraine has access to.

>>64007416
>reminder that France/UK don't have the SIGINT on their own that the US has and Ukraine has access to.
Uhhh...

>>64004481 (OP)
>USA
>A bunch of irrelevant nobody vassals
>sneed cope dilate

>>64007420
they just don't. We're comparing national militaries in this thread, not considering alliances.

>>64007427
>not considering alliances.
I'm not. The UK is a sigint powerhouse.

>>64007429
not nearly to the extent the US is
plus they don't have the level of deep strike capability to make full use of it
they would struggle hard against Russia or India.

>>64004481 (OP)
>US
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>powergap
>UK/France/Germany
>China
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>powergap
>SK/israel/Australia
>>>>>>powergap
>turkey/india/pakistan/japan

>>64007437
UK would win in any isolated battle, either 3 would have major difficulties trying to invade each other.

>>64007454
putting UK/France/Germany over Israel, let alone China, is pure delusion.

>>64007455
China lacks experience or technology.

UK/France/Germany are bigger than Israel with comparable standards of training. What don't you understand?

>>64007437
M8 what the fuck are you posting about at this point?
>Make some outlandish claims about the UK not having a credible SIGINT capability
>Get told
>Start muttering some random shit about deep strike against India or Russia
India or Russia couldn't even conduct a meaningful strike against the UK without Whitehall knowing about it before the Indian or Russian General Staff did, and the latter getting existentially sidetracked by hitherto unforseen strategic exigencies in Kashmir and the Donbass indefinitely.

>>64007415
You're literally just looking at numbers and ignoring everything else like a thirdie retard. I am not talking about UK/Fra teleporting to the Indian or Russian border and crunching against them like some retarded toddler.

The fact remains that the UK and France have the capability to do expeditionary violence to other nations at distance to fulfill national objectives while themselves being safe from repurcussion. That easily puts them ahead of every nation on the planet barring the US who are able to do the same. They also have the economy to scale their forces if the international landscape changes. It literally doesn't mean shit if there's ten million gutter oil drinkers, street shitters and krokodil addicts under arms if they're easily kept in their tard pen by air and naval power.

There's no guidelines to this debate, whether to consider alliances, nuclear capabilities, space capabilities and level of satellite tech, population and size of military, level of SOF capabilities, etc etc.
And just asking for a ranking without clarifying what metrics to go by ensures a thread full of shit flinging based solely on opinions.
Maybe the better question would be "rank the top 10 militaries by competency" or "rank the top 10 militaries by logistical capability" because the real measuring stick is by what they can do, not what they appear to do.

>>64007250
>The US is the only country that can arbitrarily body any other nation on the planet and stay indefinitely.

Nah, America can't invade China anymore, maybe a decade ago.

>>64007458
>china lacks technology
delusional
also Israel has a larger, more experienced and better equipped military than either UK, France or especially Germany.
>>64007465
>Make some outlandish claims about the UK not having a credible SIGINT capability
no i didn't, you just can't read. All i said is they wouldn't have the situational awareness that even Ukraine has at this point if they were on their own without us support, that made you butthurt apparently.
>>64007503
>That easily puts them ahead of every nation on the planet barring the US
no, it doesn't. Very limited expeditionary capability does not put them ahead of countries with actual large and well equipped militaries.
>>64007553
true

>>64007250
>>64007211
>>64007206>>64006795
>>64007503
This is assuming total war where both countries go at it in a vacuum until one collapse. In those cases, large countries and economies will have the advantage to last longer. India is scary because they can soak an insane amount causalities and outscale production of everyone else with enough time

>>64007250
>China could get physical assets nearby but then get bodied by naval and air power.

They would struggle, but they would eventually get though with enough time due to their production speed. They also have the tech advantage.
>>64007458
>>64007454
People still think that China isn't a tech powerhouse are living in 2010

>>64007415
If numbers are everything, how come Russia struggles hard against Ukraine? Do you even realize what would happen if they faced an actual first world armed forces?

>>64007582
because Ukraine has the second largest army in Europe and receives a large amount of western support
>Do you even realize what would happen if they faced an actual first world armed forces?
yes, those western armies would inflict painful casualties but get overrun, that is if they have adapted to the kind of warfare learned in Ukraine yet, otherwise it'd be a cakewalk for Russia.

>>64007613
>but get overrun
which would imply that russia still has the capacity to execute mobile warfare left

I hope China goes for it so we can declare WWIII and make them fight two fronts. Paper ahh tiger.

>>64007613
I'm reasonably certain I could guess your ethnicity, anon. If I walk into a room full of pre-schoolers, they'd massively outnumber me, but I'd still kick their asses since I'm a 6"2 225lbs grown man. That is exactly how a Russia/UK confrontation would feel like, for example.

>>64007622
That's what Pakistan is for. To keep India on a leash

>>64007574
>People still think that China isn't a tech powerhouse are living in 2010
China literally hasn't developed a single homegrowm technology. They can only copy poorly what the west or Japan does.

>>64007656
I don't care about your size and I already wrote above that I'm German. Does the UK even have a full combat division? russia produces hundreds of ballistic missiles every year, and despite a tech disadvantage the British military is nowhere near large enough or has deep enough stockpiles to fuck up the Russian military solo. If we disregard the logistics, the UK would lose

>>64004585
The only reason Russia is even on the list at this point is that they supposedly have nukes.

>>64007682
Probably what the British said about America once.

>>64007689
>If we disregard the fundamental strategic assumption around which the UK military is designed, funded and wargamed and instead set up an arbitrary scenario where I get to feed them into a wood chipper with one arm tied behind their back, the UK would lose.
Thankfully we live in the real world where retards like you get rightfully called out. I literally don't care how many tanks Russia, India or China have because they can't fucking swim or fly.

>>64004900
>>64005105
>>64006795
>>64007214
>>64007454
anyone that puts UK or germany above france is retarded
germs have a great industry and equipment but their soldiers are so fucking bad on the field, they have so much rights as well to them the military is like any other civi job, overpaid hours, tons of paid vacations and shit, their army is small as shit, 2 paratroopers regiment really ? and for having trained with them theyre so bad

UK isnt much better the AS80 as well as their doctrine is from the 80's, again compare stuff like airborne troops with france it's insane, their navy is rusting away, you ever saw those retards on the field dudes aint used to not have a truck to help them walk 3 miles

Depends on what objective they're trying to accomplish. Invade a neighboring country? Invade a country on the other side of the planet? Defend your country from invasion? Kill as many people as possible? Tank biathlon? Flashy parades?

>>64004522
russia isn't 3rd

>>64008159
This is the real answer, but autists don't like not being able to put numbers and rankings to things. If we're ranking global power projection, it's USA 1 everyone else literally 0 because they can't. But defense is a whole other story.

>>64005108
>Real world testing shows they're maybe 50% as effective as they claim
Real world testing against a coalition of global superpower with multiple technologically advanced armies from the world's top 5 list, if you're still referring to Saddam's Iraq in the OG Gulf War.
Would France alone have beaten Iraq that quick? Would France alone beat Iraq at all? Would France alone have been able to launch a land attack on Iraqi army in the first place? Would any of that make Iraqi army more powerful than French?

>>64004481 (OP)
>>64004522
>Implying Russia is even in the top 10 anymore
North Korea is a better fighting force than the Russoids in their present state and deserves their spot instead. Change my mind.

Russia isn't top 3 anything lmao

>>64011751
NK's dogshit performance in Kursk doesn't do anything for you?

>>64007367
Are we including fifth column? Any west Yuro country would fall without a shot.

>>64007425
>40% and dropping
lmao

usa was cool before 2000 when it was majority White

>>64013343
akshually the norks did better than the russians in kursk according to the ukes

>>64013454
I think the statistics proved otherwise, but maybe things have changed

1. USA (world's greatest in terms of technology, budget and global reach with bases in most nations on this earth)
2. China (rapidly catching up to the USA in terms of tech, managed to go from being supplied inferior models of Russian vehicles to making their own that are much better)
3. Israel (copy and pasted from USA, handheld by USA, infinite money from USA, they even get/make better versions of USA gear)
4. Russia (maybe 4th is too high but they still got the numbers and some good tech)
5. South Korea

>>64007998
Nigger Frogs have to get the Bongs to do their air and sealift for them lmao

>>64004481 (OP)
Who the fuck knows
What I do know is that US is a league of its own, and the """"second most powerful military in the world"""" met total logistical breakdown not even 50 miles over their border, while a bunch of buck tooth tea sipping limeys managed to deploy all their own assets in force 3 times in the middle east and fought a war over a little rock 8000 miles away from their border
So who the fuck cares, China is without a doubt the lead claim to number 2 but until they do something more impressive than letting their soldiers, citizens and locals get hacked to death by machetes during shitty UN ops then who the fuck cares

Up

>>64004481 (OP)
1. US
2. Israel
3. Finland
4. Denmark
5. Norway
6. Germany
7. Japan
8. South Korea
9-?. Don't care

China: Army of malnourished conscripts. They steal anything of value and have no actual training, basically just bullet sponges. leadership is incompetent. No real cooperation between air and ground units, no engineers. No asymmetric warfare capabilities, no tier one equivalent units. Joke military thats only merit is having wave after wave of rural meat puppets to throw at a superior force
Russia: Sorta same as above but has SOF and irregulars and has a rudimentary "ground air task force" doctrine. Currently burning through stockpiles of cold war era garbage that will expire and leave them with nothing. Russia 10 years ago was still behind those top 8 in everything except numbers

UK and France do not have real militaries besides their SF. Basically just numbers on a piece of paper. France has not fought a war since indochina and I really do not understand why people feel the need to consider them competent or well equipped.

>>64015208
>4. Denmark
Denmark is having trouble fielding one (1) combat brigade.

>>64015208
>Denmark
>Norway
>Germany
Come the fuck on. Roachland alone mogs all three of them.

>>64011638
The only country globally capable of doing the Iraqi invasion to that success was the US.

>>64004522
>India
>No best Korea
555-

>>64005371
They aree still poos though.

>>64006941
>the usa hasnt won a war in 80 years
For reasons completely unrelated to their military.
How many battles have they lost over that 80 years? There's probably a few, but not many.

>>64006941
US hasn't fought a war since WWII technically.
>>64007338
>>64007555
TBF, US would never invade china. It would be missile spam to decimate the PLAN, then PLAAF, which wouldn't go easy but they would come out on top.
Then they would just airstrike the fuck out of them.
Realistically that conflict goes nuclear as soon as one side starts to lose. Which again means US wins but theybare not doing it without WWII amounts of loss.