Best Army

Originally posted by Seekerof
Israel/IDF


regards
seekerof

Yep,

They are best all around..

Always at the end victorious..

Or at least avoiding disaster(s)..



Like i have already mentioned several times..

IDF/AF did beat the USN/USAF at ACM quite well..



And they do have good record from the bullying the Arabs also..

What does the Canadian Army rank?? probably somewhere behind high school ROTC...

Only a few countries can even try to do everything due to costs.

Large operation is US for sure.

Mid sized likely England or maybe annother European country.

Smaller would be Israel.

It is a combination of resources, number of trained personnel, and experience.

Thus, it is difficult to fault the US and Israel because they cover all three areas quite well.

Originally posted by nathraq

Huh? The only reason the Russians made it through was because of sheer numbers. The same goes for the American army. The German army, at that time, was unequalled in morale, discipline and technology. They just stretched themselves too thin, because that crackhead Hitler wouldn't listen to his fieldmarshalls.

If buttnugget Hitler wasn't in control at the time, you can damn well bett your a$$ that the war would have ended differently.

The German soldier (NOT the SS or Gestapo) was well respected and honored, as ALL soldiers should be.

fool...the unbearable winter defeated the goddam German army...The Blitzkrieg tactic didn't work cuz the more army they sent @ 1nce, the more food they need but the winter made the food rot and German army moral decreased.

Originally posted by groovyguru
What does the Canadian Army rank?? probably somewhere behind high school ROTC...

If you are talking in terms of military expenditures, Canada ranked 18th in the world.
www.geographyiq.com...


If you want to talk in terms of male population fit for military duty, then Canada ranks 28th.
www.geographyiq.com...

It should be noted that the US is first in terms of expenditures and it spends roughly 6 times what any other country in the world spends. So yes, it is the best military in the world.

China can field an army roughly 5 times greater than the US's based on population. So in the future, China is likely to be a real threat.

I believe the site I linked uses the CIA World Fact Book for a reference.



[Edited on 21-11-2003 by greenkoolaid]

Originally posted by quintar
Israeli Army.

4th largest in the world and one of the most technologically advanced.

I would also have to say that the Russian army is also a top contender. Back in WW2 they went through hell but emerged on top.

I would say Canadian Army is.. no wait, we don't have one

the russian army is by far, amazing......and u sit there comparing the israeli army with the RUSSIANS?????
america uses scare tactics....and a whole load of other cheats, play by the rules win by the rulz....use cheats and all efforts fail.
it all depends on risk as first mentioned....it simply depends on the type of risk you're prepared to take, are you prepared to fight some1 who is more than willing to use nukes to eliminate your army and then take a swipe at your city??nam.
i have an uneasy feeling the jews will be too terrified to fight properly, their aleged army would probably surrender the first chance they're given.
i have strong belief in the U.S.S.R and am sure they will come out on top eventually, no matter how hard they make countries' squeal.
another thing, it was virtually impossible for hitler to take over the U.S.S.R in total due to the fact that russia might just have been too big to ever fully take over it???
i have very little support for the american army, i for one, dislike cheating, especially when discussing a strategical war.
make sure u keep ur facts right quintar, i doubt israel has the 4th largest army in the world, really doubt it, but would like to be proved wrong
Cyrus

I admire your sense of honor, I for one don't believe in rules in war, I believe more in "either you or me" type fighting.


You are correct in saying that Israel doesn't have the 4th largest army, it's north korea I believe.

Israel has a long required service time (about 3 years) and most of their soldiers are conscripts, so I could see how people may mistaken them having the 4th largest.

[Edited on 21-11-2003 by gooking]

In the Yom Kippur war, the Israelis were caught with their pants down by the Arab aggressor states, then, after a few days of getting their rears kicked, started to cut the invaders to ribbons, pushing them further and further back...

Of course, BOTH sides were supplied by US / USSR. In terms of sheer fighting power and morale, I'd put the Israelis well near the top. Good old Great Britain also has a damn effective army, which is constantly on deployment around the world or training. Pound for pound, the UK has the world's most active military.

Originally posted by solomon6777
fool...the unbearable winter defeated the goddam German army...The Blitzkrieg tactic didn't work cuz the more army they sent @ 1nce, the more food they need but the winter made the food rot and German army moral decreased.

Yes, and also the Russians were prepared to die in large numbers. It's a legitimate tactic, it worked in Korea. Helluva war that - looks more like a game of soccer when you look at it on a map.

The Russians had T-34s and KV-1s and 2s. Lots of them. The Russians also had snipers. Lots of them, unlike the Jerries. The Russians also female combat units, way before anybody else thought of that!

[Edited on 21-11-2003 by Lampyridae]

The Israeli army would be nothing without funding from the US.

Originally posted by jetsetter
Even Russia says their military is crap. There may also be bumps in the road for them.

The moment the Soviet Union fell, Russia ceased to have a military.

Seriously, they technically have no military. It's so disorganized and has stuff lying all over the place. They don't even have desks!

Beney d'Elohim.

my chip in..........

War throws up surprises / plans never survive first engagment with enemy / no new "superweapon" bar the A-bomb has actually won a war and then only part of it. Technology is great but you must plan for what u do without it first, in small conflicts high-tech weapons can be supplied and maintained easily, in ww2 style scenarios with huge battles and numbers of men on massive fronts any weapon that can't be bashed/thrown/is lengthy to load/difficult to operate/hard to transport/hard to get etc will not form a major part of planning. Look at germany at end of ww2 best tech available at the time and it did them jack s#it except cost mony better spent elsewhere.

I've had a good think about this, here goes.

Nowadays, in a conventional conflict it depends on too many different things but.....................USA invades Russian continent and Russia would win (america could/would not commit that many troops to anything - american technology much less effective due to supplying the situation) and Vice Versa (supply probs for russia and american tech excellent vs invasion if russia invaded US). However in an epic battle of american army vs russian army confined to a continent, Russia definatly (american public opinion would crumble and US troops way too gung ho - look at some of the stuff that came out of IRAQ2, american soldiers blowing somthing up, jumping up and down and shouting WOOHO - also american commanders seem to favour tekkie tricks and fancy wepons which only work if everything is in place - russians better in cold/harsh conditions/tanks more reliable and more simple to repair in extreme conditions). If the american army was joined by the british and/or swiss army (british and swiss have by far best training in the world) then US would probably win (i don't say this coz im in the UK but becasue look at all the times british SAS has gone into a situation for the americans coz they knew the americam equivalent could not pull it off and america is too scared of using their special forces in case they loose them).

I'm not bashing the US army (i have no reason to favor russia either), i like the US (not the US gov though) but i have seen US training army training documentaries on the TV saying dicaplin rules were more lax than ever now as recruits will now run off back to parents if it gets too hard, people are getting softer, america faster than most sadly and this filters through every where even the army. US army admission standards have dropped since ww2, as have the UK a little but i bet the russian army training is still almost as hard as ever as its one of the few jobs they might pay wages for...sometimes and life in russia is tough anyway i imagine. Eventually same will happen with russian army, they will get lazier and softer compared to now.


AND

The US army does Hide behind "smartweapons" and Bully-boy methodology.....In an exactly equal and completley even battle the US would loose to UK,russia,china,korea,Swiss,germany...the list goes on, as these countries i belive would simply tolerate higher losses that the US public would (but it sort of depends whats at stake). Fighting on its own terms the US would be unbeatable but thats not realistic is it?

And i'm not promoting or bashing any country or army i mentioned, as someone else said on this thread almost all soldiers deserve respect..........thats just how i see it.

Oh Kobi..............you're obviousley not from the U.S. and aparently never served in the military. The U.S. does have a lot of "high tech" but in all the deployments I've ever been on the M-16, SAW, .50 Cal (M-2), claymore and hand grenade were the tools of trade. Russia merely had quantity of equipment and not quality. They also pay their troops squat and abandon them in the field like Chechnia........however they are fine soldiers I served with them in Bosnia....twice.

I've always been quite partial to Israel's military. Of course the U.S. has the strongest military by far, but in terms of being the most well-trained, I'd have to say Israel.

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by jetsetter
Even Russia says their military is crap. There may also be bumps in the road for them.

The moment the Soviet Union fell, Russia ceased to have a military.

Seriously, they technically have no military. It's so disorganized and has stuff lying all over the place. They don't even have desks!

Russian people are very patriatic.

So if someone attacks their motherland they will be

goning crazy over them!

Russian people are very patriatic.

If you attack their homeland then they will go crazy over

you.

No nukes will stop them!

OOPS sorry.

i forgot i just posted the same thing.

[Edited on 22-11-2003 by Russian]

Military or Army? I would have to say for army China definately by sheer numbers, and they have quite a bit of secrets I'll bet. But US definately has the best military because our airforce is so advanced, and we always have Israel backing us up.

[Edited on 22-11-2003 by TwItCh]

Israel backing the US up? Now that's a new one... I always thought it was a parasitic relationship, but then Israel does give the US more political presence and power in the Middle East. Interesting concept, I must say, now that you've raised it.

The russian army sucks dammit!

Outdated equipment, badly trained "troops", underpaid slaves. Antiquated aircraft and tanks, and their navy is nothing more than a rustbucket convention.

Pride in the motherland does not win you wars.


My vote: British Army and then the IDF as a close second.

Both can respond to situations extremely quickly with the british using commando style hit and runs and the israeli's with devastating airstrikes.

US Comes third because of the way force is delivered, i'd compare them to the lumbering giant, yes i know when the force is applied it is on a scale never seen before, but it can take months to prepare. The saving grace is the carrier battle groups, without those you'd have no force multipliers.