Topic: What is the current military strength of the Top 10 nations? 7

SHERMAN · September 24th, 2004

If you choose to continue the off-toppics, heads will roll.

Chocobo_Blitzer · September 24th, 2004

I think it largely depends on the nation, whether or not to expand the armies. Take China, it needs a large army so it's current regime can stay alive and repel a occupation. Guerilla warfare, in large numbers, will wear a enemy down eventually. Or take the US, it needs many troopers to expand it's "democratic empire" and/or respond to multiple threats plaguing the world. Or take something like Norway.... it just needs to fulfill it's duties as a member of the UN... so stay small.

panzer · September 26th, 2004

Right it just depends on the countries needs for self defense. But I am in smaller more flexible forces. But this also depends on the enemy you are fighting as well. Plus the size of your other services.

the_13th_redneck · September 27th, 2004

It depends on what kind of war your military is designed for. If you are like South Korea who wants an army to fight off invasion, yes you need to get as many people as you can with weapons. In fact by calling up reserves, South Korea fields over a million men. And if things get even more desperate, they can call up even more people.

Now if you want an offensive, globally mobile strike force, you need smaller units with high firepower.

View Poll Results :Should countries have more or less troops?
More, every country should have a million soldiers.	12	63.16%
Less, large armies are no longer needed.	7	36.84%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

September 24th, 2004	Post 61
SHERMAN Milforum Moderator Gear	If you choose to continue the off-toppics, heads will roll. __________________

September 24th, 2004	Post 62
Chocobo_Blitzer Primus Pilus	I think it largely depends on the nation, whether or not to expand the armies. Take China, it needs a large army so it's current regime can stay alive and repel a occupation. Guerilla warfare, in large numbers, will wear a enemy down eventually. Or take the US, it needs many troopers to expand it's "democratic empire" and/or respond to multiple threats plaguing the world. Or take something like Norway.... it just needs to fulfill it's duties as a member of the UN... so stay small. __________________ \"The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come. When in a state of security he does not forget the possibility of ruin. When all is orderly, he does not forget that disorder may come. Thus his person is not endangered, and his States and all their clans are preserved.\"

September 26th, 2004	Post 63
panzer Optio Gear	Right it just depends on the countries needs for self defense. But I am in smaller more flexible forces. But this also depends on the enemy you are fighting as well. Plus the size of your other services. __________________ "If the tanks succeed, then victory follows." - Heinz Guderian

September 27th, 2004	Post 64
the_13th_redneck No Chance Outside Gear	It depends on what kind of war your military is designed for. If you are like South Korea who wants an army to fight off invasion, yes you need to get as many people as you can with weapons. In fact by calling up reserves, South Korea fields over a million men. And if things get even more desperate, they can call up even more people. Now if you want an offensive, globally mobile strike force, you need smaller units with high firepower. __________________ I don't exist. TRESPASSERS WILL BE PROSTITUTED Next time you travel http://www.epictrip.com