Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 45
Thanks Tree26Thanks

Thread: 2017 Military Strength Ranking

  1. #21
    Veteran Member Pragmatist's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    46,052
    Thanks
    13394

    Quote Originally Posted by Miller47 View Post
    I agree with you.

    Too much emphasis of sheer numbers of troops, and not enough on what those troops can do.
    Apparently our troops can't defeat Afghanistan after 15 years.

  2. #22
    The Un-Holy One The Man's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    33,879
    Thanks
    19398

    From
    Toronto
    Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
    If that's true how come Russia is number 2?
    That's exactly my point. Russian military is big. But they are still using lots of outdated Soviet era equipment. I am jot so sure they are good enough for #2...

  3. #23
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    60,220
    Thanks
    17949

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
    The USA record.......
    Korean war: fought to a tie
    VietNam war: Lost
    Desert Storm: Kinda won but since we had to go back that's questionable.
    Iraq War: Lost
    Afghanistan: Lost or will eventually be.

    We no longer know how to win wars so our past record is meaningless just like France's. Forget your silly rankings, we are currently at war in Afghanistan who has jack shit for a military and we have been there 15 fucking years. If China wanted Afghanistan they could probably take it inside of a week.

    Yes if the ranking is military strength we are #1 but if the question is one of record we aren't.
    We need to stop entering unwinnable wars where neither we or an ally have been attacked by another nation-state and we can't even define what "winning" means.
    We can't win civil wars in the ME, "Wars" against drugs, crime, poverty, etc.

    We also need to stop letting Congress avoid it's constitutional duty to formally DECLARE war!
    Authorizations to use military force (AUMF's) lets Congress critters avoid adding their name to a declaration. (voting for an AUMF sounds so much more innocuous)
    Last edited by Devil505; 14th July 2017 at 07:50 AM.

  4. #24
    Established Member
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    5,564
    Thanks
    4311

    From
    In my mind
    Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
    Apparently our troops can't defeat Afghanistan after 15 years.
    Should have learned from the Russians, through their Afghanistan adventure, and Vietnam on that one. Hard to win a war when the enemy is among the people, not wearing uniforms, easily going to and from their civilian lives without our knowing it.

  5. #25
    Sally Sitter Paris's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,604
    Thanks
    2681

    From
    EU
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    [B]–*Gallic Wars
    – Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

    –*Hundred Years War
    – Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; “France’s armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman.” Sainted. (Joan of Arc)
    I stopped reading at this point knowing the rest might just as well be factually incorrect.

    1. The French nation state didn't exist at the time of Caesar.

    2. The Hundred Years War is an overall win for France. One just has to look at the territorial losses suffered by England at the end of the war.

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerre_de_Cent_Ans

    Last edited by Paris; 14th July 2017 at 09:13 AM.

  6. #26
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,463
    Thanks
    10872

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    Conveniently left out Napoleon and the Napoleonic Wars. Napoleon considered by many historians as the Greatest General that ever lived and in the top four or five by all the rest. And ignoring the fact that France fought Germany to a standstill with half the population and sacrificed an entire generation of young Frenchman to hold the Germans in World War One. Their loss in WWII was not the fault of the French soldiers, it was the fault of the flawed strategy of the French High Command. The Free French fought and died in North Africa, Italy and Normandy...along side Americans and British. Hatred of the French seems to be a right wing fringe extremist popsicle for them to lick on as they tally their hate and despise lists.
    Dude its the 12th one listed, don't you even read before you post your dribble?

    Napoleon was great in terms of the French because they set the bar so low but on the world stage he got his ass kicked all over the place.

    He got beat by the weather in Russia, a bunch of slaves threw out his "elite" forces in Haiti, twice, and the British stomped on him.

    Sure he beat up a bunch of Italians....whoo hoo, and some Egyptians....big yeah!

    lol

  7. #27
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,463
    Thanks
    10872

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by Paris View Post
    I stopped reading at this point knowing the rest might just as well be factually incorrect.

    1. The French nation state didn't exist at the time of Caesar.

    2. The Hundred Years War is an overall win for France. One just has to look at the territorial losses suffered by England at the end of the war.

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerre_de_Cent_Ans

    Because people ignored the French in the 100 year war.

    They were that irrelevant.

  8. #28
    Sally Sitter Paris's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,604
    Thanks
    2681

    From
    EU
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War
    Result

    Overall French victory

    The Valois retained the French throne

    English claims to the French throne de facto abandoned

    Strengthening of the French monarchy
    What a loss! lol
    Thanks from Dangermouse

  9. #29
    Wrinkly Member Dangermouse's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    21,455
    Thanks
    19297

    From
    Sunny Bournemouth, Dorset
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    They are designed to be home defense forces, not world conquerors, looking to steal natural resources.
    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt! Only slightly less so if we exclude Britain. well, half?
    Quality and quantity both seem to be factors. I know Britain's right up there as an arms exporter, but our armed forces are numerically a shadow of themselves. The Falklands war was touch and go, with a lot of civilian shipping commandeered to get us there. It simply couldn't be done today. I'm surprised we're so high in the charts.

  10. #30
    Veteran Member Eve1's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    14,223
    Thanks
    9410

    From
    My own world
    Apparently the strongest army is the one that has people that are suicidal. Strap a bomb to your chest and walk into a military base and all your tanks and missiles are worth shit.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Apollo - The Strength of Humanity
    By godlessheathen in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 8th December 2014, 07:30 AM
  2. How About Attacking AQ Where They are Located In Strength?
    By Hollywood in forum Current Events
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 16th January 2013, 10:22 AM
  3. Top-ranking officer warns U.S. military to stay out of politics
    By Robodoon in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 27th May 2008, 01:23 PM
  4. Al Sadr gains strength through US aid.
    By Raoul Duke in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 1st February 2007, 08:32 PM

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed