best military force in history
- Thread starter megas iskander
- Start date
My personal #1 has to be Helmeuth von Moltke's German army that decimated Austria and France's army in days
This is true, because the USA was not even a country for almost half of that time.
If you look at it for each area it think it would be:
9-7 century B.C.: Assyria,Persia
600-323 B.C.: Greece
322B.C.-476 : Rome
700-1000.: Franks and Vikings
1000-1500.: don't know much about this period but I think England and France were the strongest
1600-1700.:France
1700-1900.: U.S
1900-1945.: Germany
1945- till now: U.S but some military blunders like Vietnam and Korea don't count.
Based on your time line I would tend to agree with all, but I don't know much about the 700-1000 era. But I would have to say in the 1000 to 1500 you would have to give the hand to England over France, and Spain. There is a difference between shear power and the ability to use it. In the age of Imperialism having a superior navy was necessary. However I can say that by extending the 1500s to 1861 when the American Civil War began. Yes the United States defeated the British twice, but lets be honest the Americans had home field advantage and Britain had its hands tied with multiple conflicts with other colonial possessions, Spain, and France so I wouldn't have called it a decisive victory but more a timely one. The War in 1812, saw no true victor, and if you needed to argue one mine goes to the British as they repelled the invading opponent. Granted my fellow Canadians would argue that "Canadians" kicked the US's ..., but that is a grave over reaction. Lastly, an honourable mention to the Soviet Union in the Cold War era, China is an emerging force that won't rival the US for sometime but could very possibly become a competitor do to size of force. But at the moment the US is the undisputed ... kicker in the world.
Joined Jul 2009
8,895 Posts | 15+
Bulgaria
No, i would never say that Franks and Vikings are the strongest during 700-1000 year, the Umayyad Caliphate is far far superior then any military power in the world that time, at least until 750. Here is a map - here
Usually arabs are aways discriminated, but if we had a time machine i would love to get you back to your ancestors, and you will understand that arabs were a big treat to Europe, and the christian world. You should understand that an empire so big, which is holding the most wealthy zones of the world Egypt, todays Jerusalem and Messopotamia, has unsufficiant ressources.
During the siege of Constantinople 717-718 they used 200,000 army in numbers, i dont think that there was a country during that period which would be able to mobilize so much.
Besides megas, the periods you wrote are too big, for 100 year the situation in Europe and the rest of the world, was changing dramaticlly
For instance, you cant place franks and vikings from 700 until 1000 because the franks were divided after 840 making them far-far weaker.
Around 11 century i could say that the strongest empire is the Holy Roman Empire, and not England or France. How ever i don't want to write a top 10 list or something like many folks did, because i don't think that the idea of compering nations which never fought against each other is a good idea. I dont know what criteria you guys used to chose the strongest military countrys, but i dont approve it at all.
Besides many people are addicted or hung up or whatever the word was, for there countrys, now i would never post US as the greatest power in 1700-1900, because during that period the balance was between England and France, lets not forget that this was the time gap, when Napoleon had a strong empire (1804-1814). Just beacuse North beat the South dont mean that USA is the strongest. I could agree that USA is the strongest at present time, but that could be placed under arguments.
Usually arabs are aways discriminated, but if we had a time machine i would love to get you back to your ancestors, and you will understand that arabs were a big treat to Europe, and the christian world. You should understand that an empire so big, which is holding the most wealthy zones of the world Egypt, todays Jerusalem and Messopotamia, has unsufficiant ressources.
During the siege of Constantinople 717-718 they used 200,000 army in numbers, i dont think that there was a country during that period which would be able to mobilize so much.
Besides megas, the periods you wrote are too big, for 100 year the situation in Europe and the rest of the world, was changing dramaticlly
For instance, you cant place franks and vikings from 700 until 1000 because the franks were divided after 840 making them far-far weaker.
Around 11 century i could say that the strongest empire is the Holy Roman Empire, and not England or France. How ever i don't want to write a top 10 list or something like many folks did, because i don't think that the idea of compering nations which never fought against each other is a good idea. I dont know what criteria you guys used to chose the strongest military countrys, but i dont approve it at all.
Besides many people are addicted or hung up or whatever the word was, for there countrys, now i would never post US as the greatest power in 1700-1900, because during that period the balance was between England and France, lets not forget that this was the time gap, when Napoleon had a strong empire (1804-1814). Just beacuse North beat the South dont mean that USA is the strongest. I could agree that USA is the strongest at present time, but that could be placed under arguments.
Mongols under Genghis Khan. Nobody every beat them and they fought more advanced army's and were outnumbered 10 to 1 most the time.
Joined Aug 2009
3 Posts | 0+
Bucarest
I think that their first serious defeat was Ain Jalut (1260).
But, to answer at the question, Roman Army.
Joined Jun 2009
6,987 Posts | 17+
Glorious England
Joined Jul 2009
334 Posts | 0+
Joined Jul 2009
334 Posts | 0+
seems like the cold war did it for the US., after 1945. Capitalism produced better tech, then communism.
Joined Jan 2007
16,359 Posts | 31+
Nebraska
Sargon of Akkad,
If you'd said "since the middle of WWII" I might agree.
Except I think US participation in WWI was significant. We'll never really know how significant. I think it ended the war quicker. Some famous general once said something about time - about how if you lose ground, you can counter-attack and get it back. If you lose time, you can't. The Germans had run out of time.
Joined Mar 2009
73 Posts | 0+
Either Nazi Germany or current US. Nazi Germany was so far ahead of everyone else, their blitzkriegs were the most devastating thing in history. With current America, our technology is so far above everyone else in the world, we can wipe countries out in days with our navy, army, marines and air force.
Genghis khans mongols and Roman empire aswell.
Genghis khans mongols and Roman empire aswell.
Joined Jul 2009
334 Posts | 0+
Yea, beating up all those weaker Asian nations took talent. The Philippines was a juggernaut.
Joined Jul 2009
334 Posts | 0+
The Nazi did not even invent the "Blitzkrieg" and their naval forces were crap compared to Briton's naval force. The Soviet t-34 was pretty good also.
i agree with you on all the rest but the part that i dont agree with is that afta genghis khan the empire kept on growing till kublai khan died in the 1300s then there empire started to fall apart. i also think that no army in europe would survive a battle with the mongols they had beaten the russians the polish and conquered hungary and it was only cause the khan died is the only reason they didnt conquere the rest of europe and the rest id o agree with you on
The point of a military is to be able to cope with the pressures of the age in which they are living in, and achieve the goals they set out to.
The British Military (especially the navy) in the C18th/C19th was one of the best. The fact it was able to control 1/4 of the world is testiment to this fact.
In the modern era, the US and Russian forces are the most powerful, but are they all that useful? I'm sure both would consider themselves the best military powers on earth, and yet both have lost wars to relativley minor nations in recent years. Russia and Afghanistan, US and Vietnam.
One could argue that the American and Russian militaries are good for killing, but have serious problems when tasked with anything that does not involve killing. Nation building for example.
The fact the British were able to conquer and control nations like Iraq when on paper their military force was considerably weaker than modern America, speaks volumes.
The British Military (especially the navy) in the C18th/C19th was one of the best. The fact it was able to control 1/4 of the world is testiment to this fact.
In the modern era, the US and Russian forces are the most powerful, but are they all that useful? I'm sure both would consider themselves the best military powers on earth, and yet both have lost wars to relativley minor nations in recent years. Russia and Afghanistan, US and Vietnam.
One could argue that the American and Russian militaries are good for killing, but have serious problems when tasked with anything that does not involve killing. Nation building for example.
The fact the British were able to conquer and control nations like Iraq when on paper their military force was considerably weaker than modern America, speaks volumes.
sorry but who eva thought russia was betta then britain in the 1700 to 1918 is wrong we didnt rule quarter of the world cuz we was good at making t yeah we didnt have a big army but we had the only professional army in europe maybe the world the rest had conscrips and are navy was unmatched and ur comparing land between britain and russia u would always lose mate no 1 has came close other than the mongols funny enough they ruled some of russia to we havnt lost a war at sea in 300years can russia claim that? we still have the best army not tech wise but trained wise yes and thats cuz we have had years and years of pratice
More History Discussions
Trending History Discussions
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 7- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 861
-
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 5
- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 3K
-
The Diversity Of Early African Architecture/Ruins Thread- Started by Kilwa Sultanate
- Replies: 2K
-