Top 30 Military Powers in the World

[Commander Rasseru]

Based from http://www.globalfirepower.com/ list.

1

U.S.A.

2

China

3

Russia

4

India

5

U.K.

6

France

7

Germany

8

Brazil

9

Japan

10

Turkey

Rank 1-10 Observations: The United States (GFP formula value of 0.184) remains the undisputed leader of our list thanks to their staying "active" in global hot spots, showcasing the world's largest navy and continuing to poor in gobs of money into defense. Our formula sees China edge out Russia but only by the slimmest of margins (0.238 versus 0.241 respectively) with an edge in available manpower and financial capital. France (0.636) and Germany (0.672) are relative equals for the most part but the GFP formula gives a slight edge to France thanks to an aircraft carrier and capable navy as well as a bump in defense spending. Brazil (0.756) is the most powerful South American country on the list thanks to available manpower and a capable navy. Japan (0.920) is a "sleeper" power that sneaks into the top ten with a good navy, strong logistical infrastructure and capital.

11

Israel

12

South Korea

13

Italy

14

Indonesia

15

Pakistan

16

Taiwan

17

Egypt

18

Iran

19

Mexico

20

North Korea

Rank 11-20 Observations: Our formula provides for a good disparity between North and South Korea, placing South well-ahead of the North thanks to better infrastructure and capital. Mexico's placement this high on the list is interesting to note - it scored a good balance across the board in all major categories. Israel finally gets a proper placement on this year's list - just out of the top ten - sporting a strong land army with equally strong training, modern equipment and recent combat experience.

21

Sweden

22

Greece

23

Canada

24

Saudi Arabia

25

Ukraine

26

Australia

27

Spain

28

Thailand

29

Denmark

30

Poland

Rank 21-30 Observations: No surprises here. A basic collection of modern armies of generally equal strengths.

After fall of the Empires in the early 1900s. The USA been on top for the longest. A new Nation might take its place on top in the future.

Are you happy of your Nation's Military Rank?

Please no fighting on who can beat who.

[MCERT1]

That website is full of @#$%,

They don't show their formula, or truly explain their method of calculation.

Also their info is off, and I mean badly off.

Outside of that, I'm shocked at several of the results: Russia (Way too high), Israel (really beneath Brazil), North Korea (Low, but not too low), Iran (too low), Ukraine (low), France (Too high, not too high though), Japan (too high), Argentina (where is it?), Turkey ( a little high), and South Korea (too high)

[joachimnor]

Where's norway? *cry* lol

[Commander Rasseru]

That website is full of @#$%,

They don't show their formula, or truly explain their method of calculation.

Also their info is off, and I mean badly off.

Outside of that, I'm shocked at several of the results: Russia (Way too high), Israel (really beneath Brazil), North Korea (Low, but not too low), Iran (too low), Ukraine (low), France (Too high, not too high though), Japan (too high), Argentina (where is it?), Turkey ( a little high), and South Korea (too high)

You are forgetting Military Technology that each nation has. If a nation has a lot of soldiers and but poor technology. They may have the man power but the lack of ranges and types to attack a higher technology.

It is like you have a lot guys who can throw rocks at a small army of bow and arrow men. More likely the arrow men will kill more rock throwers.

Even that Russians don't have military like in the cold war. They still been building new technologies and all their aged weapons are still useful. Russua have recover a lot of the military system. Been like 20 years to recover.

Nations that ranked higher like France, Turkey, and Brazil. Its maybe because they have larger navives and technologies to boost systems.

North Korea has the man power... But technologies are very poor. Unkowning what moblie units still work, because lack of fuel or parts? If they enter a battle? They may run out of supplies fast.

Ukraine is lower because small navy most likely.

South Korea has a a lot of financies, support, technologies, and US Military Support.

Japan is higher in many factions. Most technologies in the military came from the US Miliitary and then improve by the Japanese. Thier are some technologies that Japanese have develop on their own. Japanese do alot of military training and have trained with American Soldiers. They form a Joint Military force with the US. Japanese Military has the US military in the background as extra support force. Defense Budget is a pretty good size too. I could go more on this. It is a fact Japan's Military is well-trained for today and future military battles.

Argentina ranked 33... I guess the goverment wanted to be more peaceful with their other nations. Because of the last war they have.

Iran is lower because of lack of some technologies.

[Commander Rasseru]

Where's norway? *cry* lol

Norway rank 35.

[joachimnor]

Omg, that sit IS bs.... CIA obviously is as well... Because the merchant marine is bigger than what they claim....

[MCERT1]

That's more my point, they're making their "analysis" based in inaccurate data.

Also they don't explain their method of evaluation.

Bottom line from my standpoint:

-No stated methods

-Poor data (also not the most timely)

That makes it bad intelligence "analysis"

But it is still fun to debate.

Russia I just find to be in a really poor position...They spend money like it grows on trees, but their military is a shell of what it once was both in size and tech. I think people tend to focus too much on their former glory (which is questionable as well) than the current reality.

Japan is an interesting case, my big issue is that they're largely untested, and their focus in procurement and expansion of forces has been on missile defense, not full scale war.

I just wish I knew their exact analysis method.

[MMT-Fan]

I miss... Holland ?

[MCERT1]

@joachimnor

Don't forget CIA breaks down the fleet 668 are registered in Norway, 923 are registered in foreign countries

Whoever runs that site was too inept to read the whole page...Not that the CIA World Fact book is all that accurate.

The Netherlands doesn't have a country study in the Library of Congress, which is why it isn't on the list or their site...It's also why many other countries aren't on their site, because they don't have a study or are too old (1990's). It looks like these were the only countries they had the relevant data on. Noting that there is at least one exception (Georgia).

Also for those curious the site was founded in 2005 by a person from Vancouver, WA

Also really interesting is looking at how the rankings have changed using archive.org

[joachimnor]

well according to norways ship register we have about 1700

EDIT: 1631 source: http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/10/12/4...1_en/tab/1.html

[MCERT1]

That about matches up with CIA statistic fairly close: 1591 ships total given 8 years or so and accounting for the decrease in international shipping.

Another source I have says in 2002 that it in 2002 The fleet registered in Norway had gone down to 693 ships, 441 of which owned by Norwegians.

CIA just breaks it all down in a different way that's a little more deceptive of the actual total.

[joachimnor]

The one i sent is from the norwegian central statistics bureau and their source is the norwegian marine directorate

[MCERT1]

It's old though... The last year listed is 2001

According to thishttp://www.ssb.no/handelsfl_en/tab-2009-08-11-01-en.html

The fleet is only 1,347 so it's actually lower than the CIA listed. But there's also additional 1.227 ships not registered as part of the fleet.

[joachimnor]

http://www.ssb.no/handelsfl_en/tab-2009-08-11-05-en.html 2008.... And about the navy, we are currently upgrading a major part of our ships... In the time 2005-2009 we are getting 5 new frigates... Within 2009 6 new MTB's should be on place. But, all of these seems to be delayed

[Hoppah]

I miss... Holland ?

The Netherlands is not even close to a superpower army with its small army. We have an obsolete airforce, which main force consist of about 30 AH-64 Apache's and 70 F-16's (30 years old) . Keeping them up-to-date is almost more expensive than replacing them. It's not really impressive. The government has plans to buy 85 F-35's which are going to replace the F-16's, but a final descision is still not made.

[MCERT1]

The government has plans to buy 85 F-35's which are going to replace the F-16's, but a final descision is still not made.

Well you'll just have to wait till after 2011 elections to find out for sure, unless something drastic happens. You could still end up with the Gripen's though.

[joachimnor]

Lol, norway was looking into gripens.. and under the demonstration flight they crashed xD noone died or got injured tho

[917893678251]

Wow,china beat russia already,have fun catching up to russia india,I don't even think russia helps india.Russia=brothers with china since the 1900s.They both are communist and used to have a red army.

[Ami89E1234]

Ahaha, Russia isnt Communist anymore. but they do act like it still

The only reason France beats Germany is because the stupid uselesses called NATO limits what they can have. The Germans have the best artillery pieces in the world. France also has like 20 nukes, since that the only way they could defend themselves lol. seriously, i bet i could walk into the French parliament with a scary mask on and they all run and cower in the corner and basically hand France over to me - not that id want it.

Lets see? how many wars have the French won or not been completely destroyed within two weeks? 1. against the Spanish. and that was an accident

[Hoppah]

France also has like 20 nukes,

+ an aircraft carrier which already makes it a superpower because of its great mobility.

[hunter42]

The only reason France beats Germany is because the stupid uselesses called NATO limits what they can have.

---

Lets see? how many wars have the French won or not been completely destroyed within two weeks? 1. against the Spanish. and that was an accident

That makes no sense. NATO has nothing to do with it - why would they restrict a country more than another? Germany is a big contributor to NATO.

If you read the (probably unreliable) source, then you would know France is above Germany because France has four more ships - one being an aircraft carrier.

Actually, the French have won quite a number of wars and battles. Such as the Battle of Hastings against the English in 1066. Or to be a bit more up to date, the Battle of Foochow against the chinese navy resulted in French victory.

The French played a major role in uniting Italy and securing American independence against Britain.

...The French are still terrible though

I think this website is rather inaccurate. Sure, the Russians have a big force, but can they fight well? Technology and manpower are important, but it's also the ingenuity of the commanders. China is considerably supirior in strength and fire power than Japan. It doesn't mean the Japanese would fail in a war against China.

EDIT:

Thread music?

[MCERT1]

I think this website is rather inaccurate. Sure, the Russians have a big force, but can they fight well?

The number they use is a high, I trust the one that Jane's uses. It also doesn't account for the shape of equipment, etc. ( The black sea fleet is literally rusting away)

[joachimnor]

Russia was communists like 40 yrs ago.... I concider myself as a modern communist, I belive in communism as long as its adapted to the time

[Guest Taylor]

Russia was communists like 40 yrs ago.... I concider myself as a modern communist, I belive in communism as long as its adapted to the time

Wow... you like a system that has killed over 150 million innocent people?

[MCERT1]

Russia wasn't communist, no country has been truly communist. He sides with the ideals of communism not the regimes that have claimed it.