World’s Armed Forces Ranked

From Strategy page. They also rank all the countries so I urge you yo go to site and read more

 

STRATEGY PAGE

Armed Forces of the World

Data current to 2002-2008

The charts shows key data on most of the world’s nations as of mid-2008.

One very important things to keep in mind is that a small number of nations possess the majority of the worlds economic power and population. Just eight nations (U.S., China, Japan, Germany, France, India, Britain and Russia) possess two thirds of the world’s economic activity (GDP), 51 percent of the population and 31 percent of the real estate. This small group of nations, out of some 200 on the planet, also possess nearly all nuclear weapons. Very few nations have armed forces that can do much more than fight internal foes, or neighbors.

Small nations not shown on the Charts; Bahamas, Bahrain, Belize, Bhutan, Cape Verde Islands, Comoro Islands, Cyprus (Greek and Turkish), Guyana, Iceland, Kosovo, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Suriname and Trinidad. All of these nations have miniscule armed forces (although the two halves of Cyprus can call on the armed forces of Greece and Turkey).

HOW TO READ THE CHART
For details on the nations in each continent, see the individual nation notes below.

These charts give evaluations of the quantity and quality of each nation’s armed forces. The quantity of each combat unit has been derived from various open sources. Quality has been determined by evaluating historical performance. All armed forces are not equal, and this inequality has been expressed numerically. In calculating the numerical value of total strength it is important to differentiate between what floats and what doesn’t. Aircraft carriers and tank divisions are very different instruments of destruction. Both cost about the same, but a carrier cannot march on Moscow, nor can a tank division hunt submarines in the Atlantic. For this reason, land force capabilities only are listed. In reality, they are not entirely separate. Naval forces, particularly carriers, can support ground combat. Tank divisions can seize ports needed by naval forces for their sustenance. Destructive effect was the main consideration in assigning values. This was modified by the mobility and flexibility of the system. Tank divisions can move over a wide area to fight while most air defense forces are limited in their capabilities and mobility. While the numbers of men and weapons are fairly accurate, estimates of quality factors are subjective. Readers may impose their own evaluations. The assessments given are based on current conditions and historical experience. Don’t underestimate the historical trends.

Naval power is difficult to compare to land power, as it is with land power that you ultimately defend yourself or overwhelm an opponent. For nations that are not dependent on seaborne trade, naval power is less important than those that are. For most industrial nations, and many third world countries that have periodic food shortages, loss of sea trade is a serious problem.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to most of the second largest fleet in the world rapidly decaying in the 1990s. Russia lost about 80 percent of its naval power. It’s still the second largest fleet in the world, but the U.S. Navy now has over half the naval combat power in the world, and even more of the kinds of ships that can be sent anywhere on the planet. We are now in the third century of either Britain or the United States as the dominant naval power in the world.

When the Cold War ended, all navies shrunk, even the U.S. Navy. But those of the European nations were reduced the most. In the Pacific, Japan, South Korea and China continued to expand their fleets. So did India. But the U.S. naval forces in the Pacific are still the major player in that region.

Column keylists every nation with a combat value of one or more. Nations with a combat value of less than 1 have little more than national police capability. Many smaller countries, especially those that lack a threatening neighbor, use their forces primarily for internal security. These lesser military powers often repel an invasion most effectively simply by arming the population. Nations are grouped into six regions:. European Nations, Middle East Nations, American Nations, East Asian Nations, African Nations, South Asian Nations.

 

is the ranking of each nation within its region

is the total combat capability of the nation’s armed forces except for their navies. Certain nations like Israel and Switzerland have a rapid mobilization capability which achieves the combat value shown within three days of mobilization. Their normal, unmobilized, combat value is less than one third of the value shown. As explained elsewhere, combat value is modified by geographical, climate and political factors. The value given here is a combination of the quantity and quality of manpower, equipment and weapons. This raw combat value is then multiplied by the force multiplier (see below) to combat value shown in this column.

NAVAL capability is separate from land value and is found on the naval forces chart

(total force quality) is a fraction by which raw (theoretical) combat power should be multiplied to account for imperfect leadership, component of force quality, support, training and other “soft” factors. Think of it as an efficiency rating, with “100” being perfect and “55” being a more common 55 percent efficiency.

(population in millions) indicates the nation’s relative military manpower resources. Population is also a more meaningful indicator of a nation’s size than territory. By our count, the world population is 6.6 billion.

(Gross Domestic Product, in billions of dollars) is a rough gage of the nation’s economic power. This does not translate immediately into military power because of the time needed to convert industry from civilian to military production. Mobilization of some types of military equipment takes years. Other types of weapons, especially those using electronics, can be brought to bear in months. By our count, the world GDP is $57.7 trillion (thousand billion).

 (active military manpower in thousands) is the total uniformed, paid manpower organized into combat and support units. Because of the widely varying systems of organizing military manpower, this figure is at best a good indicator of the personnel devoted to the military. Industrialized nations hire many civilians to perform support duties, while other nations flesh out skeleton units with ill-prepared reserves, uncertain effect on wartime strength. The use of reserve troops varies considerably. By our count, the world total of active troops is 20.6 million.

 (Military Budget in millions of dollars) is the current annual armed forces spending of that nation. All nations use somewhat different accounting systems for defense spending. Efforts are made to eliminate some of the more gross attempts at hiding arms expenditures. Some of the figures, particularly for smaller nations, may be off by 10 percent either way. By our count, the world defense spending is $1.35 trillion (2.34 percent of GDP).

is the annual cost per man for armed forces in thousands of dollars. This is an excellent indicator of the quantity and, to a lesser extent, the quality of weapons and equipment. Some adjustments should be made for different levels of personnel costs, research and development, strategic weapons and waste. The United States, in particular, is prone to all four afflictions. The precise adjustments for these factors are highly debatable. One possible adjustment would be to cut the US cost per man by at least one third. Other nations with strategic programs and large R&D establishments (Russia, Britain, France, China, etc.) should be adjusted with deductions of no more than 15 percent. Britain could also take another 5 or 10 percent cut because of its all-volunteer forces higher payroll. Most nations are willing to pay for a volunteer force, if they can afford it. That’s because volunteers tend to be more effective. At the other extreme, many nations produce a credible defense force using far less wealth. Low paid conscripts, good leadership and the sheer need to improvise enables many of these poorer nations to overcome their low budgets. However, most nations end up getting what they pay for.

(Armored Fighting Vehicles) These include tanks, armored personnel carriers and most other armored combat and support vehicles. AFV are the primary components of a ground offensive, and greatly enhance chances of success.

 are the number of combat aircraft available, including helicopter gunships and armed maritime patrol aircraft. This, like AFV, is a good indicator of raw power. The quality of the aircraft, their pilots, ground crew and leadership, air force are the most important factors in the air power’s overall value.

The Total Quality is calculated by assigning 0 (lowest) to 9 (highest) values for the following components of combat capability.

is leadership. The quality of officers and NCOs.

is equipment. The quantity and quality of military equipment.

is experience. Not just combat experience, but the quality of training.

 is support. This is logistics, the ability to get military supplies to the troops.

is mobilization. The ability to mobilize the national resources for combat.

is tradition. Military tradition, good military habits, based on practical experience.

Notes on National Military Power

(for those who are not keen on numerical analysis)

What follows is a brief comment on each nation covered in the chart. In alphabetical order.

Advertisements

Russian President Medvedev “NATO is nothing to us”

RUSSIA TODAY

Russia ready to ditch NATO – Medvedev

President Medvedev says Russia is ready to break off relations with NATO if necessary. His comments came after a meeting with Russia’s ambassador to the alliance, Dmitry Rogozin. NATO has been highly critical of Russia’s handling of the conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia.

Speaking after a meeting with Rogozin in Sochi, Medvedev said there could be no confusion about NATO’s plans. He also said that Russia could see through “the illusion of partnership”.

”When they are building up their military forces, surrounding us with bases and drawing into the alliance more and more countries – convincing us that everything is ok… Of course we don’t like it,” President Medvedev said on Monday.

NATO vessels are in the Black Sea to provide humanitarian aid for Georgia and give a helping hand. Russian views their presence with suspicion.

NATO had warned that relations with Russia would not improve until it pulled all its troops out of Georgia.

The future of joint Russia-NATO programmes remains unclear. One of them involves the delivery of humanitarian aid through Russia to Afghanistan.

”NATO is more interested in this partnership then we are. Even if it will mean the end of our cooperation, it’s nothing to us,” Medvedev said.

At the last meeting of NATO foreign ministers, the alliance was looking for ways to punish Russia.

In another development, Washington and Warsaw sealed a deal on the deployment of interceptors in Poland as a part of the US missile defense project. The talks ended years of negotiations, with Washington agreeing to all Poland’s conditions.

Western countries could bar Russia’s entry to the World Trade Organisation. Russia has been seeking to join the WTO for more than 10 years, but it’s not desperate for entry and is prepared to halt talks.

”Our economy, I mean some of its industries, including agriculture, bears a rather heavy load. It turns out we neither see nor feel any pluses from this membership of the WTO, if there are any at all, but we do bear a load,” Prime Minister Putin said

Afghanistan Report. Both sides try decaptiation strikes

STRATEGY PAGE

Decapitation in Afghanistan

August 25, 2008: Afghanistan is once more becoming a gathering place for special operations (commando) operators from dozens of countries. This has led to the development of a new strategy, of trying to destroy the Taliban and al Qaeda leadership. Several years worth of experience and information collected by the thousands of commandos has provided a way to do this. Commandos could track the terrorist leaders, and also use a network of informants they had developed along the border, on both sides, over the years. In addition, the U.S. had developed electronic and visual surveillance capabilities that provide the commandos with additional eyes, and weapons. The commandos are particularly fond of Predator and Reaper UAVs, which come operators describe as having a full time spy satellite overhead. Commandos, as well as smart bombs and Hellfire missiles.

These “decapitation” operations have increased this year, and are expected to keep increasing into next year. The Taliban and al Qaeda have already figured out what is going on, and are increasingly paranoid when it comes to informers, using their own cell or satellite phones, and any unidentified aircraft in the area. The terrorists keep changing the way they meet and communicate, yet they keep getting killed. While the terrorists can replace leaders and technical specialists, they cannot replace them with people of equal experience. And as they move into the shallow end of the talent pool, more mistakes are made. Al Qaeda operatives who have fled Iraq to Afghanistan, have noticed, and commented on, the lower level of technical expertise among their Afghan brothers. While most Iraqi terrorists were literate, and some even had formal technical training, most Afghans are illiterate, and any technical training they might have was acquired informally. This has led to more bombs that don’t go off on cue, or, worse yet, explode while being worked on, or emplaced. This sort of thing will happen more, as the talent pool gets diluted. The terrorists have a nearly inexhaustible supply of gunmen and suicide bombers from the hundreds of pro-terror religious schools in Pakistan. Plenty of cash is available from contributions and criminal activities (particularly working for the heroin gangs in Afghanistan). But leadership cannot be bought, nor can you hire technical people to work the high risk (and high death rate) border areas. You have to develop your own leaders and technical people. And if the enemy kills off those leaders and techies too rapidly, the terror operations will collapse. That’s how the Israelis crippled Palestinian terrorist operations several years ago, and how the Americans crushed al Qaeda in Iraq, and throughout the rest of the world. Now that solution is being applied to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and commandos from over a dozen nations are in charge.

From the beginning, in September, 2001, Afghanistan was very much a special operations war. The United States asked all of its allies to contribute their commando forces, and most eagerly obliged. This enthusiasm came from the realization that this part of the world was particularly difficult to operate in, and would be a welcome challenge to men who had trained hard for years for missions like this. In addition, most nations saw Islamic terrorism as a real threat, and knew that key terrorist leaders were still hiding out in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. Even after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which many Western and Middle Eastern nations opposed, they kept sending their commandoes to Afghanistan. But few commandos were allowed into Pakistan, where most of the Taliban and al Qaeda leadership were hiding. Efforts to operate in Pakistan created growing hostility from Pakistani intelligence agencies, which contained many al Qaeda sympathizers. The Pakistani government was reluctant to come down too hard on the Taliban and al Qaeda members on their Afghan border. So the commandos proceeded to learn all about the pro-Taliban tribes in Afghanistan, and secretly sneaked across into Pakistan as well.

Most of these commando operations have been kept secret. This is typical for commando operations, but in this case, many of the nations involved don’t want it known that they are involved. This has especially been the case with Arab nations that have contributed commando units. The only time any information gets into the media is, typically, when a commando contingent returns. In that way, the Norwegian media covered the return of their special forces from, as it was described, “another mission” to Afghanistan. Many nations have either sent their commandoes to Afghanistan in shifts, maintaining a near continuous presence, or send some in for a few months, or up to a year, then bring them home for a year or so, before sending them back. For many nations, this is the only combat experience any of their troops are receiving. These countries are often officially hostile to the U.S. effort in Iraq, and refuse to send combat troops to Afghanistan. But commandos in Afghanistan are another matter, partly because nearly all commandos are eager to go.

 Afghanistan has been called “the Commando Olympics,” because so many nations have contingents there. While the different commando organizations aren’t competing with each other, they are performing similar missions, using slightly different methods and equipment. Naturally, everyone compares notes and makes changes based on combat experience. That’s the draw for commandoes, getting and using “combat experience.” Training is great, but there’s nothing like operating against an armed and hostile foe. This is all a real big thing, as the participating commandoes are becoming a lot more effective. But you can’t get a photograph of this increased capability, and the commandoes aren’t talking to the press. So it’s all a big story you’ll never hear much about, except in history books, many years from now.

DNC Protestors “Shoot us German Police” and “We are in Bejing China”

Stupidity on display

Hillary Clinton releases Perfume “Catharsis” for women

Mayor holds “Car free day” only to see it washed out

Its SEATTLE WASHINGTON and they didnt expect RAIN ?

VIDEO HERE

KING NEWS SEATTLE

Rain washes out ‘car free’ day in Seattle

06:29 PM PDT on Sunday, August 24, 2008

By BERNARD CHOI / KING 5 News

SEATTLE – Only in Seattle could an event touted as a way to help the environment get washed out during what is supposed to be the driest time of the year.

Car-free days is part of Mayor Greg Nickels’ campaign to encourage people to walk, bike or take mass transit.

One neighborhood is closed off to car traffic during selected weekends this summer.

On Sunday it was the area around 14th and Republican on Capitol Hill, a residential area that’s normally quiet anyway.

“I think it promotes awareness of whatever we’re promoting awareness of,” said resident Thomas Hubbard.

“A car passes by every once in a while, just people trying to get home. And they don’t know how to get home,” said resident Matt O’Connor.

<!– –>”I think most people are scratching their heads. I’ve seen people move the signs and drive through anyway,” said Hubbard.

With more police officers diverting traffic than actual people, the city decided to end the event two hours earlier.

O’Connor said the idea was good in theory, “but in practice, it needs a little bit of work.”

Adding insult to injury, the cars owned by some residents in the neighborhood were towed because the city wanted to clear the streets.

Next weekend, car-free days moves to south Seattle. Rainier Avenue between Alaska and Orcas will be closed to car traffic during the afternoon.

DNC gets protection from terrorists that democrats say isnt a threat

I though terrorists werent a threat ?

Vodpod videos no longer available.