# Top 10 Military Powers 20 years from now



## akiboy

*The Top Military Powers 20 Years From Now *
by Harold C. Hutchison
May 18, 2005
Discussion Board on this DLS topic 

Who will be the big world powers twenty years from now? This is a difficult prediction to make, largely because in 20 years, many unexpected changes could take place. For example, two decades ago, the United States and Soviet Union were locked in a Cold War. Nobody expected that in five years from then, the Berlin Wall would fall and the Soviet Union would literally disintegrate. That said, there is an idea of who is emerging, and who is fading.

*10. Brazil* &#8211; This country is emerging as the dominant military and economic force in Latin America. It operates the only aircraft carrier outside the US Navy in the Western Hemisphere. Currently, Brazil is trying to build up its forces still more, and is pursuing a program to build a nuclear-powered attack submarine and could be pursuing nuclear weapons development as well.

*9. South Korea* &#8211; This country has an indigenous naval program that is quite solid, and one of the better armies in the world. The only thing holding it back is a reliance on foreign designs for aircraft, although it is manufacturing F-16s locally.

*8. Germany* &#8211; Despite reductions in the German defense budget after the end of the Cold War, this military has several quality systems (like the Leopard 2 main battle tank and the Type 212 submarine). Germany also has had a tradition of effective military forces (just ask the Romans).

*7. Japan* &#8211; This is a country which has, with one hand tied behind its back, developed the number two navy in the Pacific Rim, and arguably the second-best air force (tied with China). The only thing that holds Japan back is an apparent lack of desire. Things could rapidly change on that front, though.

*6. Russia* &#8211; This country has a lot of nukes, and a lot of bombers. While naval designs (like the Kirov-class battlecruisers and Oscar-class submarines) are good on paper, they still have quality issues, and accidents are not unheard of. Still, this is a country that has some advantages, and is no pushover.

*5. France* &#8211; Probably in better shape than what one would expect. This is largely because of the quality of the troops (due to career NCOs). Has remained self-sufficient in terms of producing major weapons systems (see the Rafale), and operates the only CVN outside the U.S. Navy (even though it has had problems).

*4. China* &#8211; This is a force that has quantity on its side, and is rapidly trying to improve its quality. Their air force will probably have the largest force of Su-27 fighters in the world (at least 580, compared to the 550 in Russian service). The Chinese navy is rapidly introducing new classed of destroyers and frigates that are close to the quality of American and Japanese surface combatants. That said, it is still behind, and the Chinese financial situation could go downhill rapidly.

*3. UK* &#8211; While small, this is a force that not only had a tradition of high quality, it has proven as recently as 1982 that it can operate half a world away and still accomplish a difficult mission. Sailor for sailor, there is no better navy than the Royal Navy.

*2. India* &#8211; Probably the most dynamic country in terms of the leaps. India is rapidly becoming self-sufficient in a number of areas, and what it cannot produce, it is able to buy. Currently reasearching the Surya ICBM series with a range of 13,000 km and equipped with a 250 kiloton warhead beating any Chinese ballistic missile in terms of range and yield. Plus , India is developing the Sagarika Cruise Missile which will be second only to the American Tomahawks.It also has some of the best training in the world, and can give an unsuspecting opponent a surprise. Probably the next superpower due to a more firm economic footing, and the fact that its Navy is much more advanced than China&#8217;s.

*1. USA* &#8211; Even while fighting a war on terrorism, the United States is pursuing new technology (such as UCAVs) to maintain an edge over any potential challenger. The forces are well-trained, and the United States Navy is still the most powerful in the world. The term superpower almost understates what the United States can do &#8211; it is arguably a hyperpower.


----------



## Dirt McGirt

An interesting topic but I don't buy the author's reasonings. Only the top 4 are going to be considered mega superpower armies. I'll call it a tie between the US and China for the top spot 20 years from now.

1. US
1. China
3. Russia
4. India
5. France
6. Japan
7. South Korea
8. Israel
9. Germany
10. Ukraine, Brazil, Iran, and the UK all tied here.

North Korea is a top 10 military power today but 20 years from now I don't know if they'll even be around.


----------



## akiboy

*


Dirt McGirt said:



			An interesting topic but I don't buy the author's reasonings. Only the top 4 are going to be considered mega superpower armies. I'll call it a tie between the US and China for the top spot 20 years from now.

1. US
1. China
3. Russia
4. India
5. France
6. Japan
7. South Korea
8. Israel
9. Germany
10. Ukraine, Brazil, Iran, and the UK all tied here.
		
Click to expand...




Dirt McGirt said:



			North Korea is a top 10 military power today but 20 years from now I don't know if they'll even be around.
		
Click to expand...

*
Russia can no longer be considered in the top 3. Maybe in the top 5 but definitely not in the top 3. Russia's military is facing a severe budget cut and cannot expand/upgrade their huge arsenal. The Russian Navy which was so formidable during the Cold War is silently degrading after the breakup of the Soviet. One can find many Cold War era ships rotting away in the ports of Russia. Plus , Russia hasen't come up with any new subs or missiles. They don't even have enough money to upgrade their old nuclear facilities. I recently read in the news that Russia is planning to re equip its mobile lauchers with old Topol M warheads..I don't know how much of that is true but one thing is for certain Russia can never become the military powerhouse it once was. Yes , I know they still have enough warheads , bio/chem weapons facilities to blow the world thrice but their Air Force and Navy are in bad shape. There is practically no organization in their huge land based army. But , yes they still can destroy any nation's economy and civilian population.


----------



## ekrem

akiboy said:


> *
> 
> Russia can no longer be considered in the top 3. Maybe in the top 5 but definitely not in the top 3. Russia's military is facing a severe budget cut and cannot expand/upgrade their huge arsenal. The Russian Navy which was so formidable during the Cold War is silently degrading after the breakup of the Soviet. One can find many Cold War era ships rotting away in the ports of Russia. Plus , Russia hasen't come up with any new subs or missiles. They don't even have enough money to upgrade their old nuclear facilities. I recently read in the news that Russia is planning to re equip its mobile lauchers with old Topol M warheads..I don't know how much of that is true but one thing is for certain Russia can never become the military powerhouse it once was. Yes , I know they still have enough warheads , bio/chem weapons facilities to blow the world thrice but their Air Force and Navy are in bad shape. There is practically no organization in their huge land based army. But , yes they still can destroy any nation's economy and civilian population.*


*

That is not true.
Russians have very good military projects ongoing like T-95 and Black Eagle in MBT areas
http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/

S-47 and MIG 1.44 test-projects with Plasma Stealth experiments to counter F-22 and F-35 will be implemented on 5th Generation fighter Suchoj T-50 which is in development.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/plasma/index.htm

Besides Russians are modernizing especially their tactical Missiles and Navy Fleet (25 modern ships being constructed).
http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1720&catid=243&pending=true

Also the Russians have GLONASS, the Russian GPS, for military use.


Also Russian defense budget grew from 2004 to 2005 by 27&#37;.
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/08/20/defensebudget.shtml

And from 2005 to 2006 by 22%.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...cial-fy-2006-russian-defense-budget/index.php

From 2006 to 2007 budget will raise again by 29%.
http://warfare.ru/?lang=&linkid=2279&catid=239

Never underestimate the Russians, in areas like defensive and offensive Missile Technology they are leading and in all other areas they do not need to hide from any other state.
Russia has Know-How and what is more important, with constant high prices of oil and natural gas the neccassarily Dollars to make use of that Know-How.
Russian Know-How can cope with armed conflicts of the 21st century.
I think Russia will be for next or 2 decades still Number 2 military power behind
USA.

Only China can kick Russia from that position, India never.
Both India and China still are biggest importers of Russian military hardware and Technology Know-How Import.*


----------



## ekrem

Russia rules the world's arms bazaar
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HJ31Ag02.html


----------



## Said1

And don't forget the rootin', tooting, cowboy shotin Canucks. I mean really, somebodies a gonna getta hurt with that giant acme sling shot, eh. one of these days, pow, right in the kisser.

And while I'm at it, take off, eh!


----------



## ekrem

This is very speculative, as many factors have to be considered, such as Know-How, economy, ressources, changeing security threats (like Japan) etc.

But, for next 20 years without considering nuclear capability i would say:

1. USA
2. Russia and China
3. UK and Japan
4. Germany and India
5. Brazil, France, Italy, Turkey, South Corea
6. Israel and Spain
7. Indonesia, Mexico, Canada, Pakistan
8. Egypt, Australia, Argentina, Sweden
9. Saudi-Arabia
10. Iran, Thailand, Ukraine
11. Greece


----------



## akiboy

*


canavar said:



			That is not true.
Russians have very good military projects ongoing like T-95 and Black Eagle in MBT areas
http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/

S-47 and MIG 1.44 test-projects with Plasma Stealth experiments to counter F-22 and F-35 will be implemented on 5th Generation fighter Suchoj T-50 which is in development.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/plasma/index.htm

Besides Russians are modernizing especially their tactical Missiles and Navy Fleet (25 modern ships being constructed).
http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1720&catid=243&pending=true

Also the Russians have GLONASS, the Russian GPS, for military use.


Also Russian defense budget grew from 2004 to 2005 by 27%.
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/08/20/defensebudget.shtml

And from 2005 to 2006 by 22%.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...cial-fy-2006-russian-defense-budget/index.php

From 2006 to 2007 budget will raise again by 29%.
http://warfare.ru/?lang=&linkid=2279&catid=239

Never underestimate the Russians, in areas like defensive and offensive Missile Technology they are leading and in all other areas they do not need to hide from any other state.
Russia has Know-How and what is more important, with constant high prices of oil and natural gas the neccassarily Dollars to make use of that Know-How.
Russian Know-How can cope with armed conflicts of the 21st century.
I think Russia will be for next or 2 decades still Number 2 military power behind
USA.

Only China can kick Russia from that position, India never.
Both India and China still are biggest importers of Russian military hardware and Technology Know-How Import.
		
Click to expand...

*
Gosh.. I didnt know this. Thanks for the links. I came to my conclusions based on recent news reports of Russia's failed Bulava class SLBM tests and Russian defence budget cuts. There was also info on the Russian Navy's Cold War era ships decaying in Russian ports.

As you yourself said India can never kick Russia from that position...You are absolutely right.But neither can CHina. That is why India is ahead of CHina in the list (which was not written or thought by me before you start coming to any conclusions). If you have a look at the Indian military's upcoming projects you will agree. I agree that India has depended a lot on Russia for its defence needs but now India has indigenioulsy started developing its own defence stuff. The Surya 1 and Surya 2 ICBM is testimony to that. So is the Sagarika cruise missile (which is second best only to the Tomahawks). India's navy has started building 5 new aircraft carriers which will be ready by 2009-2010. The Indian Air Force is much much better than CHina's I agree India dosent have nuclear capable aircraft yet...But , India has the latest Migs and Sukhois purchased from Russia which beat any Chinese fighter. (The chinese have the Su-27 while the Indians have the Su-30 and Mig 27).Plus , india's army gets one of  the best training in the world. The "Gurkha" regiment of the Indian Army is one of the best in the world. 
India has already started building French Scorpene submarines locally in its docks as the technical know how has been given from Paris.

So , neither CHina or India can ever beat Russia or USA in terms of defence and military might. But India can be the third most powerful nation in the world in terms of military might.


----------



## weirdguy30

Oh sure, fighting Argentina with hidden US help is really difficult.Operating used US naval systems is even more difficult. Buying/Gaining US technology is also difficult. You must be a superpower to do that.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

I believe in the 90's the Indian Air Force managed to beat a US team in a practice fight.


----------



## Ringel05

RetiredGySgt said:


> I believe in the 90's the Indian Air Force managed to beat a US team in a practice fight.



A couple of my friends were driving Abrams in Germany not that long ago.  They were part of a joint exercise between the Germans and American forces.  To make a long story short the Germans kicked our butts.  Superior tactics managed to destroy our armor and air support with their armor, air and ground support.


----------



## Annie

Ringel05 said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe in the 90's the Indian Air Force managed to beat a US team in a practice fight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of my friends were driving Abrams in Germany not that long ago.  They were part of a joint exercise between the Germans and American forces.  To make a long story short the Germans kicked our butts.  Superior tactics managed to destroy our armor and air support with their armor, air and ground support.
Click to expand...


I think the US will be in the top 10, but not necessarily the top 5. Russia? Depends on whether or not Putin is able to grab territory. China/India definitely.


----------



## Ringel05

Annie said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe in the 90's the Indian Air Force managed to beat a US team in a practice fight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of my friends were driving Abrams in Germany not that long ago.  They were part of a joint exercise between the Germans and American forces.  To make a long story short the Germans kicked our butts.  Superior tactics managed to destroy our armor and air support with their armor, air and ground support.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the US will be in the top 10, but not necessarily the top 5. Russia? Depends on whether or not Putin is able to grab territory. China/India definitely.
Click to expand...


Like Ekram stated, never under estimate Russia.  Putin and the Russians are scary, he has a long term goal to make Russia the Superpower it once was, plus some and will do just about anything to achieve that goal.  The Russians, even more than the Chinese, are not to be trifled with.


----------



## shawn_gg

Why didn't anyone put the North Koreans into the list as well?


1. US
1. China
3. Russia
4. India
5. France
6. Japan
7. South Korea
8. Israel
9. Germany
10. Ukraine, Brazil, Iran, and the UK all tied here.


----------



## eagleseven

I don't believe the North Koreans should be on the list...they have bodies and little else. Poor as hell, and so they have outdated junk. Modern technology differentials more than compensate for manpower, as one bullet is still cheaper than one man. If I had to rank them:

1. USA
2. China
3. India
4. Russia
5. South Korea/Japan/UK/Germany (small, but advanced)
6. Brazil


*USA:* While the US will be reducing its massive defense budgets in the short term, we have a trump card. Within the next two decades, we will see the full-scale deployment of laser weaponry on US naval vessels, aircraft, and armored vehicles. Needless to say, this will render virtually all other heavy weapon systems obsolete, and cause a paradigm shift in military doctrine.

UK Telegraph: US Military Develops Anti-Aircraft Laser
Wired.com: Military Laser Hits Battlefield Strength
New Scientist: US military sets laser PHASRs to stun

*China:* Self-explanatory. Money + Massive Manpower + Modern Designs = Superpower. China edges out India, primarily because the Chinese military has the practical experience required to develop effective doctrines for their manpower.

*India:* Nearly tied with China for similar reasons, although I rank them below China primarily because their modern military remains largely untested. The last major action India saw was WWII, and the world has changed dramatically since then. Yes, I do realize that India fought four wars against Pakistan, but India demonstrated a critical lack of an unified military doctrine (ie didn't learn from their mistakes). Perhaps India will develop a cohesive doctrine eventually, but in the near future, China has the advantage.

*Russia:* Still maintains a massive, if aging arsenal, but is hurt by lack of funding and manpower. They are holding onto their position primarily due to their oil wealth...but may lose it to its EU neighbors if Russia becomes too aggressive. With just oil wealth, however, they will be unable to keep up with the top three.

*Smaller States:* They are all linked to the US, and so will benefit from US tech developments, and still have significant manpower reserves.  What puts them over the top, however, is their extraordinary wealth, wealth that is increasingly being poured into weapons development.

*Brazil:* Brazil, though no doubt a rising economic power, still lags behind the smaller states in terms of military power in the long term. Why? Due to a lack of immediate threats. Japan, India, and South Korea all have the threat of China to encourage military spending. Germany and the UK must provide a counterbalance to the new Russian Empire. Brazil, in contrast, has no effective threats from its neighbors. The only remotely militaristic South American regime, Hugo Chavez, has a population, military, and economy a tiny fraction of the size of Brazil's.



Well, there's my two cents...


----------



## JW Frogen

The list makes sense, I will not argue with it, but mark my words there will be some rouge wild card that threatens far more havoc than these powers.

I mean who would have thought a Saudi psychopath dependent on Yak powered dialysis machines would strike a major blow against the US?

It is the crazy fuck wad powers you really have to worry about, those who could give a fuck about balance of power, like Iran.


----------



## Douger

akiboy said:


> Russia can no longer be considered in the top 3. Maybe in the top 5 but definitely not in the top 3. Russia's military is facing a severe budget cut and cannot expand/upgrade their huge arsenal. The Russian Navy which was so formidable during the Cold War is silently degrading after the breakup of the Soviet. One can find many Cold War era ships rotting away in the ports of Russia. Plus , Russia hasen't come up with any new subs or missiles. They don't even have enough money to upgrade their old nuclear facilities. I recently read in the news that Russia is planning to re equip its mobile lauchers with old Topol M warheads..I don't know how much of that is true but one thing is for certain Russia can never become the military powerhouse it once was. Yes , I know they still have enough warheads , bio/chem weapons facilities to blow the world thrice but their Air Force and Navy are in bad shape. There is practically no organization in their huge land based army. But , yes they still can destroy any nation's economy and civilian population.



Rush ? Hannutsy ? Ann ? Is that you posting ?


----------



## Charles Stucker

eagleseven said:


> *USA:* While the US will be reducing its massive defense budgets in the short term, we have a trump card. Within the next two decades, we will see the full-scale deployment of laser weaponry on US naval vessels, aircraft, and armored vehicles. Needless to say, this will render virtually all other heavy weapon systems obsolete, and cause a paradigm shift in military doctrine.


When did lasers become able to ignore fog, dust, smoke, etc? Something which obscures sight effectively blocks lasers used as weapons. Too much power is lost over any distance. As a sighting/rangefinding tool, fine - works great. As a battlefield weapon - I would have to see it in practice before I would give it much credence.


----------



## BigBear

20 years from now the US will be so broke that it'll cause the states to separate.


----------



## mightypeon

As Ekrem said, even parts of the Russian Cold War arsenal are ahead of some junk the oh so mighty US Army uses today. As a former artillery jock, I am hard pressed to come up with an Self propelled barrel artillery system currently in use by a non third world country that is Worse than the US M109.
Also, the Russians (who were locally outnumbered, who was fighting in Georgia was the 56 Army, not the entire Russian military) totally trounced the US/Israeli trained Georgian army, although the Russians were tactically suprised. 

Presently, I can see China overtaking Russia, but not India. This is because:
1: China has more dangerous neighbours, they have a crazy shithead with Nukes (North korea), 2 US proxies (Japan, South Korea), the Russian bear, a bunch of Moslem Seperatists (Do you know who actually borders Afghanistan?  ) and India. Lets not forget the Vietnamese, with whom they also have ongoing border conflicts in the Spratly islands. In comparison, India only has to worry about Pakistan, and can assume that the Chinese have around 10 more pressing problems then border conflicts in the Himalaya.  Also, China not quite democratic system will have much less problems in maintaining an (expensive) armament programm than India would.

Therefore, China will invest more of its resources into the military, and thus stay ahead of India.
Given the difference in manpower, I can see them overtaking the Russian federation, I cannot see how India would invest the significant ressources to do so.

Germany has the industrial potential to "outproduce" France or the UK with relative ease, however, it does not have the slightest reason to do so.  As we Krauts finally learned after a bunch of World Wars (including the 7 years and the Napoleonic Wars), Russia is a far better trading partner/ally than a military opponent, the same reasoning also applies to the Russians.

Historically, if Germany and Russia fought against each other, things tended to go downhill for at least one, more often both sides, alliances (Polish Partitions, against Napoleon, against the Ottomans) were much more fruitfull.

Brazil is a country I cant really comment on.

South Korea, Spain and Sweden have a too low population base to really matter on a global scale I am afraid.
I am inclined to believe that both Indonesia and Vietnam may overtake them.


----------



## The_Halfmoon

Turkey is currently a top 10 power, and it will expand.  The USA will decline dramatically in military spending, there is no way it can possibly continue wasting money on military equipment which does not work in an era of politically educated civilians who will resist. This was evidenced in Iraq/Lebanon, where a bunch of thugs with carbombs and small rockets totally undermined Israeli and the US deterrence capabilities due to their ability to communicate out of uniform and hide amongst civilians.  

We're witnessing a new era of assymetrical military tactics that clearly favor armies which have what is called "normative" power.  The current militaries have spent a lot of money on precision air power, which is now essentially useless.  Ideological warfare may be a major factor, thus you have to also favor highly nationalistic nations.  This is a rough guess as to where countries would fare:

1. Russia
2. China
3. USA
4. Turkey
5. Iran
6. Iraq
7. Israel
8. Germany
9. India
10. Brazil

No single european nation I expect in the top 10, but definitely top 5 if the EU had a combined military force.  

Some of you may laugh at the list (certainly a bit Iranocentric), but be aware that I take into account geopolitical realities which include OIL and future oil reserves and US debt. Which is why Russia ought to take the top spot and the US will have to reduce defense spending.  Iran and Iraq have tremendous normative power. These are nations that for centuries have been war-like and expert fighters.  They have had top 5 militaries in the 70s and 80s, and the main reason for their current situation has been wars against each other and in Iraq's case, the most powerful military in the history of mankind.  So I'm giving them a break.


----------



## eagleseven

mightypeon said:


> As Ekrem said, even parts of the Russian Cold War arsenal are ahead of some junk the oh so mighty US Army uses today. As a former artillery jock, I am hard pressed to come up with an Self propelled barrel artillery system currently in use by a non third world country that is Worse than the US M109.


The Russian Cold War arsenal was raped by the US Military in the First Gulf War, and that was almost 20 years ago!



mightypeon said:


> Also, the Russians (who were locally outnumbered, who was fighting in Georgia was the 56 Army, not the entire Russian military) totally trounced the US/Israeli trained Georgian army, although the Russians were tactically suprised.


The Russians invaded with T-90s, and the Georgians defended with T-72s. Georgia had almost no US-made heavy equipment, only obsolete Soviet leftovers.

And since when does the defender have the tactical initiative? Russia was the one invading Georgia, remember?

Military equipment of the Georgian Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## rightwinger

The_Halfmoon said:


> Turkey is currently a top 10 power, and it will expand.  The USA will decline dramatically in military spending, there is no way it can possibly continue wasting money on military equipment which does not work in an era of politically educated civilians who will resist. This was evidenced in Iraq/Lebanon, where a bunch of thugs with carbombs and small rockets totally undermined Israeli and the US deterrence capabilities due to their ability to communicate out of uniform and hide amongst civilians.
> 
> We're witnessing a new era of assymetrical military tactics that clearly favor armies which have what is called "normative" power.  The current militaries have spent a lot of money on precision air power, which is now essentially useless.  Ideological warfare may be a major factor, thus you have to also favor highly nationalistic nations.  This is a rough guess as to where countries would fare:
> 
> 1. Russia
> 2. China
> 3. USA
> 4. Turkey
> 5. Iran
> 6. Iraq
> 7. Israel
> 8. Germany
> 9. India
> 10. Brazil
> 
> No single european nation I expect in the top 10, but definitely top 5 if the EU had a combined military force.
> 
> Some of you may laugh at the list (certainly a bit Iranocentric), but be aware that I take into account geopolitical realities which include OIL and future oil reserves and US debt. Which is why Russia ought to take the top spot and the US will have to reduce defense spending.  Iran and Iraq have tremendous normative power. These are nations that for centuries have been war-like and expert fighters.  They have had top 5 militaries in the 70s and 80s, and the main reason for their current situation has been wars against each other and in Iraq's case, the most powerful military in the history of mankind.  So I'm giving them a break.



Sorry...when it comes to Military Power there is the US and everyone else.

You also have to consider the collective power of NATO


----------



## mightypeon

eagleseven said:


> mightypeon said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Ekrem said, even parts of the Russian Cold War arsenal are ahead of some junk the oh so mighty US Army uses today. As a former artillery jock, I am hard pressed to come up with an Self propelled barrel artillery system currently in use by a non third world country that is Worse than the US M109.
> 
> 
> 
> The Russian Cold War arsenal was raped by the US Military in the First Gulf War, and that was almost 20 years ago!
> 
> 
> 
> mightypeon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, the Russians (who were locally outnumbered, who was fighting in Georgia was the 56 Army, not the entire Russian military) totally trounced the US/Israeli trained Georgian army, although the Russians were tactically suprised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Russians invaded with T-90s, and the Georgians defended with T-72s. Georgia had almost no US-made heavy equipment, only obsolete Soviet leftovers.
> 
> And since when does the defender have the tactical initiative? Russia was the one invading Georgia, remember?
> 
> Military equipment of the Georgian Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


The first Gulf war had modern US equipment against some scraps that Russia saw fit to sell.

Concerning Georgia, from the outset it was clear that Georgia attacked. This was also stated by the EU report. 
On the first day, georgia proclaimed a "ceasefire" reshuffled their troops, and then launched a large scale bombardment of Tsinkhvali as well as on Russian peace keeping troops. They then captured Tsinkhvali were the South Ossetian militia barely suceeded in evacuating most of their assests, they, together with the remants of the Russian peace keeping force, succeeded in keeping the Georgias away from the Roki Tunnel.
After 2 days, significant Regular Russian Tank and artillery assets got through the Roki tunnel and kicked Georgias ass.

Again:
1. Georgia captured Tsinvali on day one of hostilities. This alone proves that they were the attackers. In no "suprise" war did the defender ever made advances on day one.
2. Russia had a (several in fact) clear cut Casus Belli to intervene.  Casus Belli A: Georgia signed a UN backed treaty which included joint peace keeping operations by Georgians, Russian and South Ossetians in the area. These Russian troops were effectivly backstabbed, and suffered severe losses due to beeing suprise attacked. Casus Belli B: Leveling a city inhabited by Russians (that is, people sporting Russian passports) during a nightime suprise attack is also a Casus Belli. Casus Belli C: Russia was a guaranteeing power of the "peace" in South Ossetia, which means that it can use violent means to restore this peace.
3: Russia showed remarkable restraint concerning its war objctives. Given the way the war went. everybody in the area was totally amazed at Sakshvili actually staying in power. Maybe Russia prefers to have someone incompetent in charge their, he now faces a lot of domestic opposition too.


In General, while the US is very good in Propaganda wars, it seems to make the mistake of believing its own propaganda right now.


----------



## germanguy

mightypeon said:


> eagleseven said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mightypeon said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Ekrem said, even parts of the Russian Cold War arsenal are ahead of some junk the oh so mighty US Army uses today. As a former artillery jock, I am hard pressed to come up with an Self propelled barrel artillery system currently in use by a non third world country that is Worse than the US M109.
> 
> 
> 
> The Russian Cold War arsenal was raped by the US Military in the First Gulf War, and that was almost 20 years ago!
> 
> 
> 
> mightypeon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, the Russians (who were locally outnumbered, who was fighting in Georgia was the 56 Army, not the entire Russian military) totally trounced the US/Israeli trained Georgian army, although the Russians were tactically suprised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Russians invaded with T-90s, and the Georgians defended with T-72s. Georgia had almost no US-made heavy equipment, only obsolete Soviet leftovers.
> 
> And since when does the defender have the tactical initiative? Russia was the one invading Georgia, remember?
> 
> Military equipment of the Georgian Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first Gulf war had modern US equipment against some scraps that Russia saw fit to sell.
> 
> Concerning Georgia, from the outset it was clear that Georgia attacked. This was also stated by the EU report.
> On the first day, georgia proclaimed a "ceasefire" reshuffled their troops, and then launched a large scale bombardment of Tsinkhvali as well as on Russian peace keeping troops. They then captured Tsinkhvali were the South Ossetian militia barely suceeded in evacuating most of their assests, they, together with the remants of the Russian peace keeping force, succeeded in keeping the Georgias away from the Roki Tunnel.
> After 2 days, significant Regular Russian Tank and artillery assets got through the Roki tunnel and kicked Georgias ass.
> 
> Again:
> 1. Georgia captured Tsinvali on day one of hostilities. This alone proves that they were the attackers. In no "suprise" war did the defender ever made advances on day one.
> 2. Russia had a (several in fact) clear cut Casus Belli to intervene.  Casus Belli A: Georgia signed a UN backed treaty which included joint peace keeping operations by Georgians, Russian and South Ossetians in the area. These Russian troops were effectivly backstabbed, and suffered severe losses due to beeing suprise attacked. Casus Belli B: Leveling a city inhabited by Russians (that is, people sporting Russian passports) during a nightime suprise attack is also a Casus Belli. Casus Belli C: Russia was a guaranteeing power of the "peace" in South Ossetia, which means that it can use violent means to restore this peace.
> 3: Russia showed remarkable restraint concerning its war objctives. Given the way the war went. everybody in the area was totally amazed at Sakshvili actually staying in power. Maybe Russia prefers to have someone incompetent in charge their, he now faces a lot of domestic opposition too.
> 
> 
> In General, while the US is very good in Propaganda wars, it seems to make the mistake of believing its own propaganda right now.
Click to expand...



Just to add my feeble thoughts:

Any of the military powers on the list will be or are frightening adversaries.
On the other hand, the more sophisticated the military becomes, the more difficult it seems to "properly" win a war. 
Any country - except the US - on the list would have at minimum problems to fight a war against one of the other and winning it. 

Imagine a war, let´s say Germany and China. 

I suppose, that our Bundeswehr would not have even have more than a handful of U-Boats and frigates to throw against China. Vice versa China might be able to nuke us or send bombers around the globe. But we would not be able to deliver war to each other.
Same with Turkey and Brazil or India and the UK.

More likely are wars between neighbouring countries, but this already shows, that most countries with large armies and the industrial capacity are still only regional military powers. 

Leaves the US. 

China might, if investing enough money, be able to start an arms race. But on the long, they have more strategic problems than the US.

Now the US:
Even they are not able to conquer a third-world-state and occupy it without signs of overstretching the troops. So they might be able to project power nearly everywhere upon this planet, but it seems, that this starts to fade away.
As regional powers like Brazil are becoming more powerful, this diminishes the weight of the US power.

But we all have left out one player who has a lot of things running well for him:
Iran

Although in the uncomfortable and direct neighbourhood of two large US contingents (Iraq and Afghanistan) a lot of things are pointing in the direction of this country to become one of the next big regional powers.

1. The population is rising constantly and already about 70 million, mostly very young and well educated.
2. The next regional power is Iraq, which is out of the game for the next time
3. The other regional states are too weak to count, exept Turkey, but I see no problems there.
4. Iran already has the money (oil & gas) and the fundament of a large scale industry.
Therefore, 10 - 20 years from now, they will have their own arms production and nearly be self-reliable.

I daresay, that the Iranians will not go nuclear, but gain the capacity to do so. Just to prove they can do it. 
They will modernize and enlarge their military and will be the force in the gulf against which nothing will be accomplished. 

regards
ze germanguy


----------



## eots

they will all bow down united federation of planets....


----------



## germanguy

eots said:


> they will all bow down united federation of planets....




Yes !
Fuck the Dominion !

Live long and prosper !

(Crap..how to unfold my middle fingers)

regards
ze germanguy


----------



## eagleseven

mightypeon said:


> Concerning Georgia, from the outset it was clear that Georgia attacked. This was also stated by the EU report.


Why did Russia keep fighting until they reached the BTC pipeline? Russia advanced _well past_ South Ossetia, despite the fact that the Georgians had no desire to fight the Russian bear.

That is like saying Luxembourg invaded Germany...ludicrous!


----------



## JeremyNight

eots said:


> they will all bow down united federation of planets....



Hahaha! True!


----------



## Toro

*1.  Canada *- After decades of ruinous monetary and fiscal policies, the US dollar collapses and Canada buys America for $20 million.  Canada replaces its armed forces with America's, but all Americans are forced to accept universal healthcare, take French in school, and accept hockey as the new national sport.


----------



## eagleseven

Toro said:


> *1.  Canada *- After decades of ruinous monetary and fiscal policies, the US dollar collapses and Canada buys America for $20 million.  Canada replaces its armed forces with America's, but all Americans are forced to accept universal healthcare, take French in school, and accept hockey as the new national sport.


NEVAAAAAAAAAAAR!


----------



## mightypeon

eagleseven said:


> mightypeon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Concerning Georgia, from the outset it was clear that Georgia attacked. This was also stated by the EU report.
> 
> 
> 
> Why did Russia keep fighting until they reached the BTC pipeline? Russia advanced _well past_ South Ossetia, despite the fact that the Georgians had no desire to fight the Russian bear.
> 
> That is like saying Luxembourg invaded Germany...ludicrous!
Click to expand...


Actually, its a bit more like Venezuela (Georgia) attacking Columbia (South Ossetia)and killing US troops (which were there under an agreement Venezuela signed) in the process, leading to a US intervention in force.
Or like China attacking Taiwan, triggering a US intervention by killing US troops (again, Georgia is more at fault since they formally invited the Russians they backstabbed). From a international rights viewpoint (number of states that actually acknowledge Taiwan) Taiwan is not much more of a state than South Ossetia, iirc the most powerfull state that recognices them is Ghana, followed by the Vatican.

Or, to get back to your Luxemburg exampe: Belgium tries to annex Luxemburg, kills Germans while doing so, Germany kicks Belgiums arse.


----------



## mudwhistle

I heard Singapore can open a can of whoopass when it wants to.


----------



## GHook93

1. US - American will be #1 in 20 years and beyond.
2. Russia - With all their nukes its hard to see them not at #2. 
3. India - I like the author assessment; While China has dominated at building small manufacturing goods; India has dominated by stealing the world's Research and Development teams; India also produces more new scientist than any other country; not to mention they will have a larger population tha
4. China - The soon to be 2nd largest economy in the world; they have the brutal fighting spirit and the numbers.
5. UK - The Brits know how to fight, always have and always will; The author is right they have pound for pound the toughest navy!
6. Germany - Still a good fighting force dispite the Libtards taking over the country
7. Brazil - The author is right; These guys are emerging on every front; they are building to an economic superpower, their military is large, they have an abundance in resources and 200 million people
8. Japan - 137 million people, best fighting spirit in the world; strong navy and airforce
9. France - Sorry, but the Frogs have been pussies for too long to make them higher!
10. South Korea - See what the author said


----------



## GHook93

I will break them down.
5. Brazil, France, Italy, Turkey, South Corea - I had a feeling you would bring Turkey into the equation. They have a large military worth mentioning. But the Italians should be left out
6. Israel and Spain - Spain is not a player and while pound for pound Israel has the toughest military in the world; she is way to small to be a real player.
7. Indonesia, Mexico, Canada, Pakistan - All 3rd rate militaries at best; although Canada has a modern military, they still rely on their big brother to the south for protection
8. Egypt, Australia, Argentina, Sweden - Egypt with help from America is becoming a player and might worthy of top 10 considerations; Australia has a well trained military, but too small a population; Argentina and Sweden , who are you crappin?
9. Saudi-Arabia - Um No
10. Iran, Thailand, Ukraine - Iran is a paper dragon, their biggest weapon is hurting world oil supplies; Ukraine somewhat; Thailand, lol NO
11. Greece  - LOL, NO



ekrem said:


> This is very speculative, as many factors have to be considered, such as Know-How, economy, ressources, changeing security threats (like Japan) etc.
> 
> But, for next 20 years without considering nuclear capability i would say:
> 
> 1. USA
> 2. Russia and China
> 3. UK and Japan
> 4. Germany and India
> 5. Brazil, France, Italy, Turkey, South Corea
> 6. Israel and Spain
> 7. Indonesia, Mexico, Canada, Pakistan
> 8. Egypt, Australia, Argentina, Sweden
> 9. Saudi-Arabia
> 10. Iran, Thailand, Ukraine
> 11. Greece


----------



## mightypeon

Some other musings:

In South East Asia, Vietnamh has a sizeable population and roughly 2 millenia experience of fighting against whoever was the or one of the worlds most dominant powers of that time. Given that, compared to  a world dominating power, their population isnt that sizeable at all, they performed quite well no matter if their opponents were Expanionist Chinese Dynasties, the Mongol Empire, the Imperial French, the Japanese or the USA.
If Vietnam and Thailand come to blows my bet would be on Vietnam.

Do you know the difference between Indian technology stealing and Chinese technology stealing? The Chinese do it better.
And much more...
Much Much More...
Id wager that "Dalai Lama Support" by European countries uninterested in the strategic region (Germany, Skandinavia, the Benelux countries etc.) has a lot to do with the wish to show displeasure for  chinese attempts at furnishing "innovative transfer of knowledge".


----------

