Largest Army, Navy, and Airforce

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

agentstahn

New Member
Hi I'm from the Philippines, I just want to say you cannot win with just numbers you must use strategies to win.. Yeah people may think that U.S have the advantage because of the advance technology, but consider the vietnam war, what happened to the U.S great power?
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
Patzek said:
I didn't found any source for now, i'll keep searching tomorrow maybe i'll found.

but its a known fact here in Israel that the number of Active troops is between 330,000 - 400,000, depends on the time, and the year ( including current active reserves ).

and the total number of available troops the IDF can recruit in a matter of hours ( again depends on the time ) is between 1,250,000 to 1,600,000, depends on the year.
Click to expand...
Lemme see . . . . Jewish population just over 5 million, proportion of military age both sexes) ca 35-40%, depending on how you define military age. Hmm.

I imagine the estimates you cite are actually the total numbers who have done military service & might still be reckoned capable of handling a gun. Calling up all of them would mean closing down most of the civilian economy, & there probably wouldn't be enough transport to deploy them, even with commandeered civilian vehicles. Not really an army, more like an armed population, with half confined to guarding their home towns in case the fighting gets that far.

BTW, your estimate of standing forces is contradicted by all the official, semi-official, & reputable private sources. They all agree on active forces of half what you say with mobilisation of first-line reserves taking it to ca 550000, & up to ca 700000 in dire need. The 330-400000 figures you give may be the total numbers who serve at some time in each year, including recalled reserves, not the numbers active at any one time. That would be consistent with the other figures.
 
P

Patzek

New Member
swerve said:
Lemme see . . . . Jewish population just over 5 million, proportion of military age both sexes) ca 35-40%, depending on how you define military age. Hmm.

I imagine the estimates you cite are actually the total numbers who have done military service & might still be reckoned capable of handling a gun. Calling up all of them would mean closing down most of the civilian economy, & there probably wouldn't be enough transport to deploy them, even with commandeered civilian vehicles. Not really an army, more like an armed population, with half confined to guarding their home towns in case the fighting gets that far.

BTW, your estimate of standing forces is contradicted by all the official, semi-official, & reputable private sources. They all agree on active forces of half what you say with mobilisation of first-line reserves taking it to ca 550000, & up to ca 700000 in dire need. The 330-400000 figures you give may be the total numbers who serve at some time in each year, including recalled reserves, not the numbers active at any one time. That would be consistent with the other figures.
Click to expand...

wow this is some old discussion.

Anyway, it really depends on what numbers those sources are reffering to.

Some reffer to active combat troops which is about 170,000, and I was reffering to all active troops, which is everyone who currently serve in the military. which is about 330,000 yearly.

And the reserve troops are the same, active combat reserve troops are about 550,000, I really have no exact figures those numbers are cllasified, but the number of reserves who have a job, this kind or another, is more then a Million, and it makes sense if the age of serving is 18-40+ ( depends ).

The front cannot operate without the neck.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
Patzek said:
wow this is some old discussion.

Anyway, it really depends on what numbers those sources are reffering to.

Some reffer to active combat troops which is about 170,000, and I was reffering to all active troops, which is everyone who currently serve in the military. which is about 330,000 yearly.

And the reserve troops are the same, active combat reserve troops are about 550,000, I really have no exact figures those numbers are cllasified, but the number of reserves who have a job, this kind or another, is more then a Million, and it makes sense if the age of serving is 18-40+ ( depends ).

The front cannot operate without the neck.
Click to expand...
You seem to be confusing two categories.
1) those in the armed forces now.
2) those who serve in the course of a year, including reservists recalled for part of the year.

1) is the usual measure. When it fluctuates as a result of 2) not being spread evenly throughout the year, the usual practice is to average it, e.g. 300,000 reservists at 3 months each = 75,000.

Are there estimates which you can post on those bases?

Then you start counting the mobilised strength. This is sometimes split into first line & total. The total is usually approximate, because the second line reservists often aren't tracked too well, & many, particularly older ones, are no longer fit for service (deteriorating eyesight, heart conditions, etc, etc).

Civilians doing jobs that are needed to keep the armed forces running aren't usually counted, regardless of whether they have a reserve obligation. This produces anomalies (for example, Royal Navy supply ships, & even some of our amphibious ships, are manned by civilians, while many other navies man them with sailors, so the RN looks smaller compared to some other navies than it actually is), but fewer than doing it the other way round, because of the near impossibility of deciding where to draw the line.
 
D

Defender

New Member
thegoldenhorde said:
The US is the most effective fighting force in the world because it has the capability to deploy tis troops anywhere. Who else can do that? No one!. Some European countries can, but not in multiple places at once and not in huge numbers. The same goes for Japan, China, and maybe India.
Click to expand...
As whats been emphasized... its never about size. Its about record.
 
C

contedicavour

New Member
Well if you are planning on sending troops overseas, it's all about how many well equipped easily deployable troops you have.
If you are on the defensive and reacting against an invasion of your own territory, it's all about numbers of motivated soldiers willing to go underground and fight guerrilla type wars, who are obviously inflicting huge pain on even the strongest of armed forces.

Anyway, did we really need to bring this old thread back to life :rolleyes: ...

cheers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top