NationStates Jolt Archive

Most Powerful Country in the world and why?

Jesusland.

The US:

- biggest economy
- great influence in international politics
- biggest military
- historically seen as leader of the Western world

I'd like to see who comes up with an alternative.

The US:

- biggest economy
- great influence in international politics
- biggest military
- historically seen as leader of the Western world

I'd like to see who comes up with an alternative.

I completely agree with your answer for the most part except the US has the 2nd largest army after China
The US- 1.5 million toops
China- 2.2 million troops

still the US is the most technelogically advanced nation, especially when it comes to military

New Zealand.

I completely agree with your answer for the most part except the US has the 2nd largest army after China
You know just as well as I do that numbers don't count. Indeed, they never did. Sun Tzu knew it too.

As for the actual numbers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_size_of_armed_forces

1. India
2. People's Republic of China
3. United States
4. Russia
5. N. Korea
6. Pakistan
7. S. Korea
8. Iran
9. Turkey
10. Vietnam

This only counts troops in active service though.

New Zealand.
New Zealand seems great but never herd of it being the slightest bit powerful.

America, FUCK YEAH!....Coming to save the MOTHER FUCKING DAY!.....lol anyone seen Team America?

It's - it's - the tiny republic of Togo!

Mexico.

do you really think its mexico.

Please put what you really think and not just where you live.

Any vote other then America is probably just an "ah who gives a damn" vote, I wouldn't get too worked up about it :D

U.S. for a few more years.

do you really think its mexico.

Please put what you really think and not just where you live.

The US runs on mexican labor. If the mexicans down tools and go home, the economy will collapse.

'He who can destroy a thing, controls that thing.'

As the US is the most millitarly powerful nation, and mexico can destroy it, mexico controls it.

It's clearly what Frank Herbert was talking about in Dune.

The US runs on mexican labor. If the mexicans down tools and go home, the economy will collapse.


Not only is it more likely that Bush would turn Commie before the Mexicans leave their jobs, even if it did happen at most it would have the same effect that other tragic events like 9/11 had before the market revives itself.

As the US is the most millitarly powerful nation, and mexico can destroy it, mexico controls it.

Yes, but along those lines, the U.S. could militarily wipe Mexico or nearly any other country off the map.

All right, who said Germany?!

All right, who said Germany?!

me

Nah, Leonstein, you know my American pride wouldnt allow me to pick anything besides America.

All right, who said Germany?!

You could always, you know, look at who actually voted? ;)

It was Bevosnia btw :D

It was Bevosnia btw :D
Silly bugger.

You could always, you know, look at who actually voted? ;)

It was Bevosnia btw :D

That bastard....:p

There's a reaseonable argument there for China but in my opinions its currently the USA particularly based on those criteria, anyone who says anything other than China/USA aint taking it seriously.

Personally i would rank New Zealand as third behind China and the USA, perhaps with time we will grow to claim our 'place in the sun' :D

We spend more money on our defense budget then the next 19 combined. The U.S. by a landslide

This thread isn't even up for debate. We have the money, the manpower (we had the brains a few administrations ago), we have the world's biggest/expensive/effective/powerfull blue water navy. And of course, the nukes.

The only nation that comes close would be Russia since they have the second biggest navy. Then comes China, but they cannot project their power beyond their boarders.

Yes, but along those lines, the U.S. could militarily wipe Mexico or nearly any other country off the map.

Pshaw, that's what the padishah emperor told paul maud'dib too, and it didn't work out then either.

It's all in Dune: Frank Herbert foresaw the whole thing.

Well, luckily the Mexicans don't have a Muad'dib who can do funky stuff with his voice and move really fast 'n shit, so no fears there :D

Of course the Dune series predicts everything....so our future is to be controlled by sexually dominating psychic women with martial arts, after a giant worm-man Emperor is cast down by touching water?


I'm convinced.

All right, who said Germany?!
Forget who said Germany, who said France?

Well, luckily the Mexicans don't have a Muad'dib who can do funky stuff with his voice and move really fast 'n shit, so no fears there :D

Oh Really?

How do think they can regularly commute across that butt-huge desert so easily? Its because they're getting Maud'dib's training. (Though his name is actually Jesus, not Maud'dib).

Of course the Dune series predicts everything....so our future is to be controlled by sexually dominating psychic women with martial arts, after a giant worm-man Emperor is cast down by touching water?


And that's a bad thing why?

And that's a bad thing why?

No judgement calls here, heh. Then again, I say that Roddenberry had it better and we will end up federating and exploring the galaxy. I suppose if you need your kink, there is always the holodeck.

Forget who said Germany, who said France?

Skarpsey - and he should be laughed off the monitor for it. If it was supposed to be funny, don't quit your day job.

Amerika Is Wunderbare!!!

No judgement calls here, heh. Then again, I say that Roddenberry had it better and we will end up federating and exploring the galaxy. I suppose if you need your kink, there is always the holodeck.

I pray every day for the invention of the holodeck.

(Lazy egghead science boffins :mad:).

Now - America
25 years from now - China
50 years from now - India
100 years from now - Jamaica :p

America, FUCK YEAH!....Coming to save the MOTHER FUCKING DAY!.....lol anyone seen Team America?

America FUCK YEAH american off to save the MOTHER FUCKING DAY yeah America FUCK YEAH america off to save the MOTHER FUCKING DAY yeah
So lick my balls and suck on my nuts!

America, Fuck yeah! And 83% of people agree with me! America rules!

I voted US. Why? I'm sure everyone knows the reasons.

China and India might be able to out do us in a couple years, but that "is not this day." Russia could be there, too, if they weren't so fucked up.

Vote for India they never win anything the poor little fellas

America, Fuck yeah! And 83% of people agree with me! America rules!

...the 48 Continental States, the two Extraneous ones, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam?

I voted US. Why? I'm sure everyone knows the reasons.

China and India might be able to out do us in a couple years, but that "is not this day." Russia could be there, too, if they weren't so fucked up.

Russians have goot vodka, so watch out they'll drown you in it!

Actually now i think of it, the reason they are so fucked up is probably because of the Vodka :)

Most Powerful Country in the world and why?
You needed a poll to figure this out? :eek:

You needed a poll to figure this out? :eek:
true, its all about the US of A!

Now - America
25 years from now - China
50 years from now - India
100 years from now - Jamaica :p
Let me fix those numbers for you:

Now - America
5 years from now - China
5 years + 1 day - cockroaches

You needed a poll to figure this out? :eek:

It's like me and my "Most Influential Firearm" thread. I expected more controvesy than people just voting for the AK-series. Only controversy there was, was one person seemed to think that German guns are crap.

China is the most powerful nation, they have saved the america people 500 billion dollars in this post ww2 era, their economy is growing rapidly, a few days ago they found another 300 billion to its worth, and oh they have a great work ethic something that we as western nations are losing

Fels']China is the most powerful nation, they have saved the america people 500 billion dollars in this post ww2 era, their economy is growing rapidly, a few days ago they found another 300 billion to its worth, and oh they have a great work ethic something that we as western nations are losing

I must admit, it does take a very special sort of worker to do 12 hour shifts with no regard for your personal safety working for a government to whom you're just another number and if you die, it only means that some other number didn't die.

Everyone who looks at this from an unbiased perspective has to admit that America is currently the most powerful nation in the world, China and Russia are regional powers but they do not have the ability that America has in bringing the fight to the enemy (aka carriers) and would pose little threat to the US outside of Europe or Southeast Asia.

Now, if you want to make it interesting make a poll asking for the second most powerful nation in the world (don't forget to include Israel and excluse the US), that's when the fur really starts to fly. I did that on a military forums I am a member of and here are the results:

United Kingdom. 20 22.99%
Russia. 23 26.44%
Israel. 4 4.60%
China. 17 19.54%
North Korea. 2 2.30%
France. 1 1.15%
Germany. 5 5.75%
India. 7 8.05%
South Korea. 0 0%
Canada (if you vote for this I will find you and slap you.) 8 9.20%

I kind of came to regret putting Canada on there. That's another piece of advice I would like to give you, DO NOT ADD CANADA TO THE LIST! Some people just can't resist the opportunity.

I thought the most interesting thing was that North Korea received two votes versus South Korea's zero. The United States is supplying South Korea's military, who is supplying North Korea's military? North Korea and we all know they don't have the means to do much. (By supply I mean selling equipment to.)

<snip>

What do you mean Canada doesn't have the second best military on earth? They're a large, semi-autonomous branch of the American armed forces. :p

Who in the world voted for France? They couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper sack. They would rather try to buy their enemy off with shady trade deals.

Everyone who looks at this from an unbiased perspective has to admit that America is currently the most powerful nation in the world, China and Russia are regional powers but they do not have the ability that America has in bringing the fight to the enemy (aka carriers) and would pose little threat to the US outside of Europe or Southeast Asia.

Now, if you want to make it interesting make a poll asking for the second most powerful nation in the world (don't forget to include Israel and excluse the US), that's when the fur really starts to fly. I did that on a military forums I am a member of and here are the results:

United Kingdom. 20 22.99%
Russia. 23 26.44%
Israel. 4 4.60%
China. 17 19.54%
North Korea. 2 2.30%
France. 1 1.15%
Germany. 5 5.75%
India. 7 8.05%
South Korea. 0 0%
Canada (if you vote for this I will find you and slap you.) 8 9.20%

I kind of came to regret putting Canada on there. That's another piece of advice I would like to give you, DO NOT ADD CANADA TO THE LIST! Some people just can't resist the opportunity.

I thought the most interesting thing was that North Korea received two votes versus South Korea's zero. The United States is supplying South Korea's military, who is supplying North Korea's military? North Korea and we all know they don't have the means to do much. (By supply I mean selling equipment to.)

So france, with its hundreds of nuclear warheads and ICBMs; navy and the foreign legion, recieved less votes than germany? I mean, germany has a lot of tanks, sure, but they're kinda stuck there.

And you know, given the parity in technology, and economic advantage of 10:1, I would imagine that they would just nose past isreal in the power race too.

I think people taking the poll weren't thinking about it properly.

Oh yah, the UK is clearly no.2 in the world. (For the record).

With the your trade deficit, I'd give you only a few more years.

Anyway, patriotism here I come!

Oh yah, the UK is clearly no.2 in the world. (For the record).

Then go take on China. :p

So france, with its hundreds of nuclear warheads and ICBMs; navy and the foreign legion, recieved less votes than germany? I mean, germany has a lot of tanks, sure, but they're kinda stuck there.

And you know, given the parity in technology, and economic advantage of 10:1, I would imagine that they would just nose past isreal in the power race too.

I think people taking the poll weren't thinking about it properly.

Oh yah, the UK is clearly no.2 in the world. (For the record).

Damn, well at least you saved me the effort of writing my own post. ;)

Then go take on China. :p

Don't be fooled, they're just resting up right now.

Don't be fooled, they're just resting up right now.

The entire military of the UK is gonna consist of SAS and Royal Marines!? :eek:

So france, with its hundreds of nuclear warheads and ICBMs; navy and the foreign legion, recieved less votes than germany? I mean, germany has a lot of tanks, sure, but they're kinda stuck there.

I asked that nuclear weapons not be taken into account, as I always do when discussing military power. Nuclear weapons in the long run don't matter because if they are used everyone loses, so it doesn't matter how many France has versus how many Germany has, or doesn't have, because if France used them they will have already lost and will be taking the rest of humanity down with them.

In fact my opinion of nukes is that to use them is to admit defeat. Plus I think and hope that the people with their finger on the button will decide that it is better to live under a government not of their choosing then to take out all life on this planet.

And what is France doing with that powerful navy that they have?[/sarcasm]

I asked that nuclear weapons not be taken into account, as I always do when discussing military power. Nuclear weapons in the long run don't matter because if they are used everyone loses, so it doesn't matter how many France has versus how many Germany has, or doesn't have, because if France used them they will have already lost and will be taking the rest of humanity down with them.

In fact my opinion of nukes is that to use them is to admit defeat. Plus I think and hope that the people with their finger on the button will decide that it is better to live under a government not of their choosing then to take out all life on this planet.

And what is France doing with that powerful navy that they have?[/sarcasm]

Do you even bother to do research?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-08-28-franceterrorism_x.htm

http://www.un.int/france/documents_anglais/041022_armee_facts_sheet.htm

As to those who have been doubting French military capability, you have to realize that Germany has little chance in conventional warfare against France, no allies. While the German army is more capable in some aspects, such as more numerous armoured forces, they lose quite bad in the airforce category.

Germany: The "Luftwaffe" has some 400 combat aircraft in 9 wings, including 195 Tornado IDS (plus 42 ECR recce version) and 148 F-4F, which are being phased out due to the imminet arrival of the first Eurofighter Typhoons (Germany has ordered 180 units). The 23 MiG-29G/GT (inherited from former East Germany) will join the Polish Air Force once the Eurofighter has arrived.
The Marineflieger (navy air wing) operates 53 Tornado IDS in anti-ship/naval attack roles.

France: The air mobility force (CFAP) includes about 150 aircraft (C 160s, C130s, A310s, Falcons…) and 80 helicopters (Super Puma, Fennec, Ecureuil…).

The 330 fighter aircraft equip 19 squadrons with different types of mission-specific aircraft, such as Mirage 2000Cs, Mirage-5Fs, Mirage Ds and Ns, Mirage F1s (Combat Recce and Tactical Combat) [The Jaguar and Mirage IVs are withdrawn from service in 2005]. Finally, the Air Force has a fleet of training aircraft including Alphajet, Xingu, Epsilon and Tucano to meet all the training requirements. The air tasking as a whole amounts to approximately 270 000 annual flying hours.

That is just the armee De l'air. The Navy has about 12 rafale's in service, as well as like 52 super etendards.

Now, the F-4's of the germans are pretty much like the AMX-30's the french use. Sure, they might do some damage to the enemy, but if it tries to go toe to toe with the big boys, its dead in the water. Iraqi Mirage F1's were taking down Iranian F-14's, much less Iranian F-4's. The successor of the F1, the 2000, should have no problem taking out german F-4's.

The tornado's are more of a challange; but the French still edge it out. The Mirage 2000 is a quite proven aircraft in the air, the French have some of the best trained airforce pilots in the world(lots of training, real and excercise), French missiles are usually considered pretty good(some people don't like mica's, but meh). The tornado's will have to try to gang up on french fighters, which will be hard...

The French use an AWACS, the germans don't. This right here gives the French a huge upper-hand in aerial combat. The French can almost leisurely watch for german aircraft, while using laser-guided, gps guided(thanks to an autonomous french space program), or Scalp EG weapons to take out german AA weapons, etc. The Scalp EG is probably the most advanced cruise missile in the world right now, something the germans cant even use.

With this ability to gain air control, it would be a turkey shoot for the french. German tank formation? Bomb it. Supply lines? Bomb it. You get the point.

Especially in the long run, the French would be able to keep their airforce equipped and flying much longer than the Germans. The germans would have to find a way to get parts from america and britain, despite the very likely ability of the french to blockade german ports with their superior navy. France, on the other hand, can completely supply its own military, and has been able to export large numbers of aircraft before to nations, no reason why those dassault factories couldn't turn up production easily.

It wouldn't be a quick war, but France could defidentally defeat germany conventionally. If you want to bring up the eurofighter, realize that not only will germany only have 180 of them, plus 125 tornado's. France will have, before the germans can even fill their inventory, 300 Rafale's, plus whatever other aircraft they keep, which will probably be a number of Mirage 2000's for backup, plus AWACS, plus more modern missiles. Tigers, France will be recieving a larger number. Which reminds me to mention that French helicopter forces vastly outpower german ones at current, though its to late to get into it.

Germany really wouldn't stand a chance against France, conventionally. The only one who could win for sure would be the US, and that would be very grueling(iraq is costing us like 12 billion a month as is). The UK/France battle is a closely debated subject, one which we will hopefully never have to find the answer too, though neither could decisively win most likely. Germany would be beat by France, though it would be grueling. Russia, nor china or india, etc, have enough force projection to act against France, so its a tie or better for France by default.

Its sad that people underestimate the French so.

United States, but it wont last long.

I think some people might be confusing how good a country's military is on a unit to unit basis with overall power. Israel probably has anyone licked in the unit to unit comparison, but Israel has less ability to project its forces than a less efficient military such as Russia has.

If you take size, quality, and the ability to actually use these forces outside of your own borders, the US is the clear winner, hands down.

Saudi Arabi should be up there, they've got Bush by the balls. Damn foriegn oil.

US most poweful in military terms
EU in terms of economy and culture
Switzerland, in terms of only country that'll stay out of WW3

Switzerland, in terms of only country that'll stay out of WW3

wW3 already happened, remember the Cold War. As far as WW4 the only country to stay out of it would be N. Korea, as long as they don't start it.

wW3 already happened, remember the Cold War. As far as WW4 the only country to stay out of it would be N. Korea, as long as they don't start it.Nah. WW3 hasn't happened yet. The Cold War was just that: A cold war. If there had been conventional warfare between global powers all over the world at the same time, then it would have been a world war. That didn't happen, so the Cold War never made it to the World War category.

The US is much, much less powerful than people realise. Certianly less than Europe. This is due to the distinction between soft power and hard power. Hard power is the millitary might and power of a country, where as soft power is the cultural produce and its level of ubiquitxy. The more America uses its hard power, the more its soft power becomes tainted and erroded. Since soft power is far more powerful in the long term, Europe is in a much better position.

-ranty rant rant of German doom by arial French garlic bombing-
Its sad that people underestimate the French so.
People underestimate the French and think German owns because they still think Germany somehow will always own, as they "owned" in WWI and WWII.

Every country tries to take over the world once.
Except Germany. They tried twice.
That's not exactly correct, but it sure is funny when breaking up discussions such as this in person.

America, Fuck yeah! And 83% of people agree with me! America rules!

It's just a fact, it doesn't mean everybody that voted likes it (I don't like, but would be stupid to say any other thing....by the moment)

At this moment in time, I would have to say America, but as we all know quantity does not mean quality (you just have to look at vietnam and Iraq for evidence of that).

Although in about 10 years, I feel my answer will change from America to China. Apart from its massive soldier numbers (apparently there are 342,956,265 people for military service, according to the CIA world factbook). Its economy is one of the fastest growing in the world, so it is only a matter of time before it passes America in power.

In my backyard, we have a nuke, a castle and FOUR YACHTS. I think that sums the question up... wait... I used my nuke on that guy with 6 yachts... Either way man... My house is the worlds greatest country...

United States of Australia ... err ... America

Yeah, this poll was pretty pointless - all it does is give jerk off material to the ultra nationalists.

Second most powerful country - that sounds like a far more interesting poll. I agree.

As in technology and troops, the US is the most powerful nation, in particular since they have proven recently that they're still capable to use their military to win wars (which, of course, doesn't means that every country should go and start a war just to prove it can win).

The problem is to win the peace, too. The US hasn't managed to put down resistance in Iraq, so if they fought against an equal opponent, say, China or Russia, they would be able to destroy all the strategic targets and control the big cities, but they wouldn't be able to properly occupy the country. The low-tech lifestyle of rural China or Russia could actually be a big advantage in war. The only way to maintain control there is to actually send soldiers into every little village and to every nomad tribe. If you don't, you get the same mess as in Afghanistan, where the cities are controlled by the NATO forces, but in the rest of the country, the warlords rule unhindered as they did before the war.

Of course, that doesn't means that any other country would be more capable to occupy such a large nation, but it does show that even military power is relative.

Something which would really interest me is which nation you consider to be the most influential. A nation doesn't necessarily needs a big military and a billion citizens to influence other nations. For example, a nation which donates a lot of money to poor nations has some measure of control over those nations by simply threatening to cut all aids (as the EU likes to do).

Saudi Arabia... you can't touch them. It would be jihad on an unprecedented scale. And plus, economically they could do much to strangle the west.

Belguim

1. they have waffles
2. their army is entirely made of medics

America, FUCK YEAH!....Coming to save the MOTHER FUCKING DAY!.....lol anyone seen Team America?

yes

hilarious movie

freedom costs a buck oh five

i wonder what the rankings would look like if, instead of simply looking at standing army size per se... we did a ranking of the countries with the largest percentage of its citizens in the standing armed forces.

i would imagine countries like Pakistan, North Korea would be near the top of that list.

The US has about 300 million people (total population), India is near a billion and China is at something like 1.25 billion

yaddy yaddy yaddy.


Yes, I did my research, the Mig-29 is the best dogfighter in Europe, it has gone toe to toe with the American Air Force's F-15's and the Navy's F-18's and come out victorious as often as not. When I get time I will even get a link for you.

Plus, Leopard 2, best tank in the world. (As per the result of a poll I conducted on the same forums as the poll I posted earlier.)

Canada;

second biggest country in world

we have the best economy

are special forces and everything else is pretty good, probably better then most.

And finally, we are so peaceful, people wouldn't see us coming.

Yes, I did my research, the Mig-29 is the best dogfighter in Europe, it has gone toe to toe with the American Air Force's F-15's and the Navy's F-18's and come out victorious as often as not. When I get time I will even get a link for you.

Plus, Leopard 2, best tank in the world. (As per the result of a poll I conducted on the same forums as the poll I posted earlier.)

The Mig-29 is the best fighter my ass(if you are talking dogfighting, as in using actual guns, thats very irrelevant). The Su-30, Rafale, and Mirage 2000-5 all have a good chance of defeating the old ass 29. No 29 has beat an F-15 or F-18 in actual combat, and I would like to see where you get your statistics from. Besides, Germany only has like 24 of them, and will be getting rid of them soon. And again, French pilots have self-sustained industries(have fun paying out of the ass to russia for parts), must more training(actual combat + exercises), and AWACS, meaning German planes can be downed before they know what hit them.

Leopard 2 being the best tank in the world is quite subjective. The 2a6 is really nice, but the LeClerc would defidentally give it a run for its money, with its autoloader, digital system, galix, etc. But it really doesn't matter. France would have air superiority, allowing it free reign to bomb german armour with aircraft and helicopters.

Just stating two pieces of equipment as why someone win really shows the depth, or lack thereof, of your argumentive ability.

Leopard 2 being the best tank in the world is quite subjective.
Nope, they did a big test recently, and the Leopard 2A6 EX came up at the top, mainly because of its gun.

EDIT: Found a link...not as recently as I thought, but the tanks involved are the same.
http://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/print.php?lang=3&fid=810

Yes, I did my research, the Mig-29 is the best dogfighter in Europe, it has gone toe to toe with the American Air Force's F-15's and the Marine Corps's F/A-18's and come out victorious as often as not. When I get time I will even get a link for you.

Plus, Leopard 2, best tank in the world. (As per the result of a poll I conducted on the same forums as the poll I posted earlier.)

Fixed it for ya. :p

The Mig-29 is the best fighter my ass(if you are talking dogfighting, as in using actual guns, thats very irrelevant). The Su-30, Rafale, and Mirage 2000-5 all have a good chance of defeating the old ass 29. No 29 has beat an F-15 or F-18 in actual combat, and I would like to see where you get your statistics from. Besides, Germany only has like 24 of them, and will be getting rid of them soon. And again, French pilots have self-sustained industries(have fun paying out of the ass to russia for parts), must more training(actual combat + exercises), and AWACS, meaning German planes can be downed before they know what hit them.

Actually, given that you aren't allowed to engage a target without visual comfirmation (ie: with your eyes), the range of missiles is effectively a non-issue.

Leopard 2 being the best tank in the world is quite subjective. The 2a6 is really nice, but the LeClerc would defidentally give it a run for its money, with its autoloader, digital system, galix, etc. But it really doesn't matter. France would have air superiority, allowing it free reign to bomb german armour with aircraft and helicopters.

Actually, autoloaders for tanks are pieces of shit. Only two countries us them: France and Russia. We all know the track-record of the former and the piss-poor tank designs that come out of the latter.

Just stating two pieces of equipment as why someone win really shows the depth, or lack thereof, of your argumentive ability.

Leopard IIA6 with its L.55 cannon can blast any piece of French armor into the stoneage.

The MiG-29, Tornado, and F-16 are as much, if not more of, a match for any aircraft the French currently field. If we add near future technology to this, then the Germans also get the EF2000 Typhoon, arguably the second best Western fighter following the F/A-22 Raptor and possibly also the F/A-35 (which also contends for second best Western fighter).

The German G36 is a battle rifle far and above the FA MAS in terms of quality.

The only thing that France has on Germany are these: Arrogance, and nukes.

You're aware that France and Germany can't fight each other since 1951? They integrated their vital coal and particularly steel industries to prevent them from ever going at it again.

The EU eventually grew from that treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Community). And then there is still NATO. In other words, not only can the two countries not go to war with each other, but both their militaries are designed to work in NATO context - that's why Germany doesn't do much in the air force or naval department.

You're aware that France and Germany can't fight each other since 1951? They integrated their vital coal and particularly steel industries to prevent them from ever going at it again.

The EU eventually grew from that treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Community). And then there is still NATO. In other words, not only can the two countries not go to war with each other, but both their militaries are designed to work in NATO context - that's why Germany doesn't do much in the air force or naval department.

Er... except France isn't part of NATO, remember? DeGaul decided that they would go off on their own and form the world's third super-power.

Er... except France isn't part of NATO, remember? DeGaul decided that they would go off on their own and form the world's third super-power.
They are sorta members, just not in the integrated command. They changed bits and pieces, but they are still part of the votes and so on.

The French military is certainly more of an entire package than the German one, but it still relies on support from its Allies to really make the most of it.

Nope, they did a big test recently, and the Leopard 2A6 EX came up at the top, mainly because of its gun.

EDIT: Found a link...not as recently as I thought, but the tanks involved are the same.
http://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/print.php?lang=3&fid=810

A story from rheinmetall proves that the Leo2a6 is the best tank in the world? At least its unbiased.

There is no proving what tank is best in the world. One group has decided they think the 2a6EX is. Doesn't mean thats some sort of fact.

Actually, given that you aren't allowed to engage a target without visual comfirmation (ie: with your eyes), the range of missiles is effectively a non-issue.

Wtf are you talking about? I'm talking real war, not exercises or something. In real war, you can certainly fire missiles beyond visual range(commonly denoted as BVR).

Actually, autoloaders for tanks are pieces of shit. Only two countries us them: France and Russia. We all know the track-record of the former and the piss-poor tank designs that come out of the latter.

Another case of underestimation. In modern warfare, most tank battles are over for the tank when they get hit. So the reliability of an autoloader isn't very important, as if you get to the point where the autoloader is disabled, you are pretty much screwed anyways.

On the otherhand, the autoloader on the leclerc allows the tank a 12 rounds a minute firing rate, which is very fast(human autoloaders greatly vary on speed, and most decrease on the move, while the autoloader is consistant).

Mix that with a great stabilization platform, and the Leclerc can be firing and reloading at 65km/h, while most tanks could only effectively do the same at 20.

People who are afraid of autoloaders are like the people who are afraid of bullpup rifles. They sound too good, there must be some huge flaws!

(Besides, neither country has a reputation for bad tanks. French tanks were great from ww1 till 1940, some of the best in the world. After world war two, they declined, but the whole of the french war machine declined in the decades after ww2, having to reinvent the wheel a number of times. In the last few decades, they have been doing very well again, in firearms, aircraft, and armour).

Leopard IIA6 with its L.55 cannon can blast any piece of French armor into the stoneage.

Yes, and the Leclerc MKII with its L.52 cannon can blast any piece of german armour into the stoneage. The Leclerc can do it while evading german shots much better, and firing more accurately at the german tank(Leclerc has great electronics, french laser rangefinders are valued pretty high irl).

The MiG-29, Tornado, and F-16 are as much, if not more of, a match for any aircraft the French currently field. If we add near future technology to this, then the Germans also get the EF2000 Typhoon, arguably the second best Western fighter following the F/A-22 Raptor and possibly also the F/A-35 (which also contends for second best Western fighter).

No, not really. Just look the foreign market.

Greece? 2000's and F-16's. India? 2000's and Su-30's. Taiwan, 2000's and F-16's. Egypt, 2000's and Mirages. UAE, same thing. Qatar, 2000's and alpha jets.

Obviously, the F-16 is pretty popular too, but I'm not talking about the F-16 for the moment.

Tornado exports? Britain, italy, germany, saudi-arabia. Three of the four being countries who helped develop the aircraft.

Doesn't really matter about the Mig-29, they were sold to poland in 2004.

As for the typhoon and Rafale, realize a couple things.

A. The Rafale has been in service for a few years with the french navy already, getting training against the US navy(and beating the pants off of F-14's and 18's). The first eurofighter squadren only came about 7 months ago for germany. The French have the time advantage already, and I expect them to keep it.

B. The French will have 300 Rafale's, the germans will have 180 Typhoons. Thats a 5:3 advantage in numbers, with very similar aircraft.

C. French pilots are typically more experienced then german ones.

D. The typhoon will use mostly british armaments. France has the ability to blockade german ports fairly easily, so it will be pretty hard for britain to ship germany munitions, etc.

E. The French have a much larger airforce industry than the germans. In wartime, they could produce a much larger one than germany could, so number disparity would increase.

F. AWACS, those typhoons would often be downed before they had a chance to fire back.

G. The rafale made it further in trials in singapore than the Eurofighter did.

The German G36 is a battle rifle far and above the FA MAS in terms of quality.

And you base this on what, exactly?

The Famas, for starters, is bullpup. Longer barrel, shorter over-all range. Its got an excellent RoF for CQB, but is fine in long range in single fire. Its sights aren't great, but I quite often see G2's with reddots on them. I hear great things from people who use the Famas in actual combat.

Not that the G36 is bad at all, but the Famas is on an equal level at the least.

The only thing that France has on Germany are these: Arrogance, and nukes.

Nice ignorant country bash with the arrogance part(what countries don't have arrogant leaders?), and yes, nukes play a part. But the French airforce still would win the day, you ignore so many factors.

A. French pilot training

When was the last time the german airforce got actual combat training? Since 1950, only bosnia.

The French have been flying in Afghanistan, bosnia, chad, the gulf war, ivory coast, and many other places. They have both much more real combat experience, as well as many more training hours.

B. AWACS

AWACS are a huge part of aerial warfare. The use of one could make or break an entire aerial war, if the other side has none.

C. French airforce industry

France could produce more aircraft than germany, as germany would have to retool industries to be able to match french numbers. Same with aircraft munitions.


The german airforce just couldn't last against france, and losing the airwar would mean they are pretty much screwed in conventional land warfare.

Yes, I did my research, the Mig-29 is the best dogfighter in Europe, it has gone toe to toe with the American Air Force's F-15's and the Navy's F-18's and come out victorious as often as not. When I get time I will even get a link for you.

Plus, Leopard 2, best tank in the world. (As per the result of a poll I conducted on the same forums as the poll I posted earlier.)
Yeah, but how is it against the F/A-22 Raptor (http://www.f-22raptor.com/index_gallery.php) and the F-117A Nighthawk (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=104) Stealth Fighters?

Yes, and the Leclerc MKII with its L.52 cannon can blast any piece of german armour into the stoneage. The Leclerc can do it while evading german shots much better, and firing more accurately at the german tank(Leclerc has great electronics, french laser rangefinders are valued pretty high irl).
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/leo2.htm
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/leopard/

The Armour Rating of the Leo is the best of any tank bar the Challenger (which is getting on and sorta slow), its gun is the most powerful tank cannon to date, it's one of the fastest (certainly faster than the Leclerc) and it's got all the modern electronics you could hope for.

http://members.tripod.com/collinsj/protect.htm

One on one, the Leclerc will pretty much always lose. Apart from the fact that France fields only about 400 of them. And that Germany and France cannot go to war, not diplomatically, not economically and not physically.

Yeah, but how is it against the F/A-22 Raptor (http://www.f-22raptor.com/index_gallery.php) and the F-117A Nighthawk (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=104) Stealth Fighters?
It'll kill the Nighthawk, so much is clear. In fact, it could probably kill it without using missiles.
The F-117 doesn't have the radar necessary to use anti-air missiles. And it doesn't have a gun. And the Russians say they are about to figure out stealth - plus an F-117 was already shot down over Serbia, using some innovative tactics and a powerful radar.

Yeah, but how is it against the F/A-22 Raptor (http://www.f-22raptor.com/index_gallery.php) and the F-117A Nighthawk (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=104) Stealth Fighters?
You realize the F-117 is just a bomber, right? No AA missiles?

And nothing can compete against the F-22

It'll kill the Nighthawk, so much is clear. In fact, it could probably kill it without using missiles.
The F-117 doesn't have the radar necessary to use anti-air missiles. And it doesn't have a gun. And the Russians say they are about to figure out stealth - plus an F-117 was already shot down over Serbia, using some innovative tactics and a powerful radar.

If by innovative, you mean "circa 1944", then yes!

The problem I assume you're trying to underline here, is that our super-modern 'stealth' "fighter" (F-117) and bomber (B-2) are insanely vulnerable to anything from Korea or earlier.

You realize the F-117 is just a bomber, right? No AA missiles?

And nothing can compete against the F-22

Except possibly the MiG-1.44 and/or the Su-47.

http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/leo2.htm
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/leopard/

The Armour Rating of the Leo is the best of any tank bar the Challenger (which is getting on and sorta slow), its gun is the most powerful tank cannon to date, it's one of the fastest (certainly faster than the Leclerc) and it's got all the modern electronics you could hope for.

http://members.tripod.com/collinsj/protect.htm

One on one, the Leclerc will pretty much always lose. Apart from the fact that France fields only about 400 of them. And that Germany and France cannot go to war, not diplomatically, not economically and not physically.


The armour rating of the Leo is high, I will give you that. However, most modern tanks are close(and the figures for the Leclerc are quite hard to find, and even harder to verify).

The L55 is the most powerful, but its so close to the French L52 that its pretty much pointless to argue that one. By faster, if you mean reloading speed, certainly not. If you mean vehicle speed, again, no. The Leo has a max road speed of 72km/h, while the Leclerc has a 71km/h max road speed. Insignifigantly different.

The Leclerc has an unusually high power to weight ratio of 28.3 hp per ton (21 W/kg), making it one of the fastest main battle tanks in the world's major armies: it can accelerate from 0 to 32 km/h within 5 seconds.

As for electronics, care to explain?

The Leclerc uses the ICONE system, which along with the abrams, is one of the two MBT's in the world with such advanced electronics systems. The Leopard 2 has some, but not nearly to the level of ICONE.

The Leo vs the Leclerc depends completely on situation. If one is on the defense and one offense, the offensive one will probably get taken out first. If its one on one, I agree that the Leo has a good chance of winning. But in groups, say 13-17 each, the Leclerc would win, with the high, sustained ROF, incredible mobility and fire on the move capacity, and its electronics.

And this is an argument like US vs China. It won't happen, we are talking about if it did.

If by innovative, you mean "circa 1944", then yes!
In 1999, that is innovative. And cheap too.

The problem I assume you're trying to underline here, is that our super-modern 'stealth' "fighter" (F-117) and bomber (B-2) are insanely vulnerable to anything from Korea or earlier.
Not necessarily - but there are ways to get around it.

I'm starting to think that this whole "stealth" craze is a mistake. The Russians say they can spot them, the French say they have an electronic radar-blocking device (a "stealth in a box") for a fraction of the price. And such a box could be fit into any jet, making it stealthy, presumably even a Mig 21, if you so desired.

The L55 is the most powerful, but its so close to the French L52 that its pretty much pointless to argue that one. By faster, if you mean reloading speed, certainly not. If you mean vehicle speed, again, no. The Leo has a max road speed of 72km/h, while the Leclerc has a 71km/h max road speed. Insignifigantly different.

You, sir, know nothing about tanks. The autoloader on tanks are insanely slow. Human loaders are much faster. And they don't jam! :p

In 1999, that is innovative. And cheap too.

Where's a bloody SdKfz 7/1 when ya need it!?

You, sir, know nothing about tanks. The autoloader on tanks are insanely slow. Human loaders are much faster. And they don't jam! :p

Obviously, I know nothing about tanks. Hence why I've been giving much, much more data about them than you. Its not like I was an 11M in the army or anything(11B technically, but still bradley crewman. CANG is getting screwey).

The Autoloader on the Leclerc loads 12 rounds per minute.

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/leclerc/

Human crews deviate greatly in loading, but 6-12 per minute for loading is common for a human loader. Less if they are moving, especially over bumpy ground, or being fired at, etc.

You don't have to train, feed, and keep an autoloader healthy. An autoloader has standard abilities, as opposed to greatly varying tanker ones.

If you want to dispute my points, please do. Currently, you are showing the equivilent of verbal diahreaa.

I can't believe Israel wasn't in the original short-list!

As for electronics, care to explain?

The Leclerc uses the ICONE system, which along with the abrams, is one of the two MBT's in the world with such advanced electronics systems. The Leopard 2 has some, but not nearly to the level of ICONE.
As far as rangefinding, tactical awareness, fire control and so on is concerned, the two are pretty much equal, if the Leo isn't better.
As for the ICONE System, I don't know what the Leo's equivalent is right now, and what is planned. I suppose they probably are working on something.

The Leo vs the Leclerc depends completely on situation.
It always does.

You don't have to train, feed, and keep an autoloader healthy. An autoloader has standard abilities, as opposed to greatly varying tanker ones.
Or as one dude on a German Bundeswehr Forum put it...it's just one more thing to break.

Except possibly the MiG-1.44 and/or the Su-47.
Mig 1.44 will never be used in combat. It is a prototype. Next:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35_Joint_Strike_Fighter

Mig 1.44 will never be used in combat. It is a prototype.
...and a testbed for technology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_stealth) the Russians are working on to be put into real jets. And the Indians are deeply involved.

Plus, the Su-47 does look like it could pack a punch or two, and the Russians have superior missiles to the Americans at almost any range.

Then there is the Chinese J-10, which is probably based on the Israeli Lavi, and incorporates some pretty new features.

Not to forget the Indians and the Su-30 MKI.

And they all cost a lot less than the American designs.