India has world’s fourth strongest military: Military Direct’s study

[OMB]

China has the strongest military in the world, scoring 82 out of 100 points in the index, it noted.

China has the strongest military force in the world while India stands at number four, according to a study released on Sunday by defence website Military Direct.

“The USA, despite their enormous military budgets, comes in 2nd place with 74 points, followed by Russia with 69, India at 61 and then France with 58. The UK just about makes the Top 10, coming in 9th place with a score of 43,” said the study.

The study said “ultimate military strength index” was calculated after taking into consideration various factors including budgets, number of inactive and active military personnel, total air, sea, land and nuclear resources, average salaries, and weight of equipment.

China has the strongest military in the world, scoring 82 out of 100 points in the index, it noted.

“Based on these scores, which account for budgets, men, and things like air and navy capacity, it does suggest that China would come out as top dog in a hypothetical super conflict,” it mentioned.

The world’s biggest military spender with a budget of USD 732 billion per year is the USA, it noted, adding that China comes second with USD 261 billion, followed by India at USD 71 billion.

“China would win by sea, USA by air and Russia by land” in this hypothetical conflict, it said.

“USA wins in an aerial war with 14,141 total airships vs Russia with 4,682 and China with 3,587. The Russian Federation wins in a land war with 54,866 vehicles vs USA with 50,326 and China with 41,641,” it mentioned.

China wins in a sea war with 406 ships vs Russia with 278 and the USA or India with 202, it said.

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-has-worlds-fourth-strongest-military-military-directs-study-7238175/

 

[Bi_Jamalo]

China has the strongest military in the world, scoring 82 out of 100 points in the index, it noted.

China has the strongest military force in the world while India stands at number four, according to a study released on Sunday by defence website Military Direct.

“The USA, despite their enormous military budgets, comes in 2nd place with 74 points, followed by Russia with 69, India at 61 and then France with 58. The UK just about makes the Top 10, coming in 9th place with a score of 43,” said the study.

The study said “ultimate military strength index” was calculated after taking into consideration various factors including budgets, number of inactive and active military personnel, total air, sea, land and nuclear resources, average salaries, and weight of equipment.

China has the strongest military in the world, scoring 82 out of 100 points in the index, it noted.

“Based on these scores, which account for budgets, men, and things like air and navy capacity, it does suggest that China would come out as top dog in a hypothetical super conflict,” it mentioned.

The world’s biggest military spender with a budget of USD 732 billion per year is the USA, it noted, adding that China comes second with USD 261 billion, followed by India at USD 71 billion.

“China would win by sea, USA by air and Russia by land” in this hypothetical conflict, it said.

“USA wins in an aerial war with 14,141 total airships vs Russia with 4,682 and China with 3,587. The Russian Federation wins in a land war with 54,866 vehicles vs USA with 50,326 and China with 41,641,” it mentioned.

China wins in a sea war with 406 ships vs Russia with 278 and the USA or India with 202, it said.

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-has-worlds-fourth-strongest-military-military-directs-study-7238175/

What’s the use if its composed of Abhinandans and the Bihar regiment?

 

[Zeshan547]

What’s the use if its composed of Abhinandans and the Bihar regiment?

Such out dated method to calculate military strength, future warfare is all ability tech and AI, and yanks are way ahead from rest of the world let alone China in terms of high tech military.

 

[Bi_Jamalo]

Such out dated method to calculate military strength, future warfare is all ability tech and AI, and yanks are way ahead from rest of the world let alone China in terms of high tech military.

Also the existence and possession of nukes have made the role of conventional military much more irrelevant.

As for comparing Indian army with China, we dont even need to consider technology. PLA ne keelo wallay nokeelay dunday se pitai ki ha Bihar regiment ki.

 

[OMB]

Also the existence and possession of nukes have made the role of conventional military much more irrelevant.

As for comparing Indian army with China, we dont even need to consider technology. PLA ne keelo wallay nokeelay dunday se pitai ki ha Bihar regiment ki.

Nukes were accounted for in the scoring done by Military Direct.

 

[Tubs]

This does seem strange, not that India is higher than Pakistan, but because of the US not being first and the UK and France being fairly low down.

 

[Mesozoic]

What’s the use if its composed of Abhinandans and the Bihar regiment?

Use?

Just go on and Google 'Largest surrender since world war 1' and see who were responsible for that. Go on. Educate yourself.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Use?

Just go on and Google 'Largest surrender since world war 1' and see who were responsible for that. Go on. Educate yourself.

Are these metrics about statistics about modern capability or 40 years old capability.

So called 4th strongest military bombed trees 2 years ago and then faced retaliation then got cooked alive by Chinese last year.

 

[Bi_Jamalo]

Use?

Just go on and Google 'Largest surrender since world war 1' and see who were responsible for that. Go on. Educate yourself.

Haan yeh tou ha. I can see your pain when Abhinandan is ‘dragged’ on forums like this.
But while you are allowing yourself the freedom to travel back in time, let me take it back a notch and check out other military surrenders like panipat and somnath.

Point is that nukes have changed the equation a bit.

 

[Local.Dada]

Haan yeh tou ha. I can see your pain when Abhinandan is ‘dragged’ on forums like this.
But while you are allowing yourself the freedom to travel back in time, let me take it back a notch and check out other military surrenders like panipat and somnath.

Point is that nukes have changed the equation a bit.

We should have a talk about Abhinandan and CT final only day on PP. it’s so easy to skip the timelines, status, power-shift, credibility etc pre or post those 2 events. Whatever makes you happy

That’s fine don’t think you have too much to offer outside of those anyways.

Somnath and Panipat really )?

Also why do you see conquest of Somnath or panipat as a victory for Pakistan and defeat for India?

 

[Kroll]

I think anyone with a semblance of common sense would say the US is by far the strongest military power in the world.

 

[Mesozoic]

Haan yeh tou ha. I can see your pain when Abhinandan is ‘dragged’ on forums like this.
But while you are allowing yourself the freedom to travel back in time, let me take it back a notch and check out other military surrenders like panipat and somnath.

Point is that nukes have changed the equation a bit.

93000 buddy....


No matter how much you "drag" anyone around, that pain ain't going away for generations to come. Kinda sad really... Can't imagine how hard it is for such inflated egos.

Panipat and Somnath lmao...

 

[Mesozoic]

Are these metrics about statistics about modern capability or 40 years old capability.

So called 4th strongest military bombed trees 2 years ago and then faced retaliation then got cooked alive by Chinese last year.

You can believe whatever you want. You can also believe that the Chinese have cooked Modi alive , occupied Leh and will deliver Kashmir to Pakistan as a symbol of "friendship".

 

[Bi_Jamalo]

We should have a talk about Abhinandan and CT final only day on PP. it’s so easy to skip the timelines, status, power-shift, credibility etc pre or post those 2 events. Whatever makes you happy

That’s fine don’t think you have too much to offer outside of those anyways.

Somnath and Panipat really )?

Also why do you see conquest of Somnath or panipat as a victory for Pakistan and defeat for India?

I didn’t say Pak vs India. I was talking about military surrenders. Plenty of them to find in Indian history and in every corner of India.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Meaningless stats to be perfectly honest. Until we actually see how armies perform in battle conditions, the numbers mean very little. According to this report, India is 4th strongest and UK is 9th. Does anybody seriously believe that India would win a war with Britain?

 

[guna]

The US would wipe China and tear a new one in any war. China is all about posturing and blowing hot air.

 

[ElRaja]

whats the point of this kinda study, might as well just sort by active military personnel on wikipedia or something.

the us has superior aerial numbers, superior tech, and a much larger network intelligence. china has numbers on its side.

in a hypothetical super contest neither the usa or china can be defeated on their home turf, however on neutral turf the US has a signficant advantage.

 

[GenericBrand]

Are they just raw sizes to determine who would win lol.

Russia winning by land warfare is laughable.

 

[Varun]

War is seen as a sport these days on web forums.

Everybody fantasizes about a massive event where planes will be swooshing across borders and tanks will conquer city after city.

The reality is much more different and subtle in a diplomatic sense.

Heck even in the useless T20 rankings a Netherlands can defeat an England. So these studies mean nothing.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

What’s the use if its composed of Abhinandans and the Bihar regiment?

Before you even get there, we got look at their crying soldiers for being fed with daal roti, and that too is scarce.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Fourth strongest only because of technology, man for man indians are the most courageous and braveheart soldiers. No wonder enemies try to malign their character.

 

[Lego20]

In to enjoy the burn, denial & delusion opcorn:

 

[IMMY69]

Fourth strongest only because of technology, man for man indians are the most courageous and braveheart soldiers. No wonder enemies try to malign their character.

Your comic timing has finally improved..
After a million attempts I suppose you were bound to get it right sometime.

 

[El Generico]

Haan yeh tou ha. I can see your pain when Abhinandan is ‘dragged’ on forums like this.
But while you are allowing yourself the freedom to travel back in time, let me take it back a notch and check out other military surrenders like panipat and somnath.

Point is that nukes have changed the equation a bit.

Let the poor guy be, they don’t have any big military accomplishment despite claiming to be a “bazillion year old civilization. Their history is mostly filled with defeats to various Muslim kings then the British.

They finally got a victory in 1971 when the opposing army was cut off from their home base and heavily outnumbered as well as stuck in hostile conditions due to political failures. Even despite all that they weren’t able to take even once inch of territory for themselves and just created another Muslim nation in “akhand bharat” lol but I guess it was still a win.

I know it’s being like 6 decades but like I said it was a rare victory for them so let them enjoy it. Cause with Pakistan having nukes,1971 would likely not be repeated so let the poor dude take solace in 5 decade old memories.

 

[El Generico]

In to enjoy the burn, denial & delusion opcorn:

This report says China is the strongest army in the world, even stronger than the US? Do you agree with that?

 

[Lego20]

This report says China is the strongest army in the world, even stronger than the US? Do you agree with that?

I dont care. Just here to see the desperation from a neighbor country - report is totally worth just for that.

 

[El Generico]

I dont care. Just here to see the desperation from a neighbor country - report is totally worth just for that.

Lol sure but majority of the desperation seems to be coming from the India posters who are bringing up 50 year old battles.

Anyways I have never met a Pakistanis that has denied that India has a clear edge on Pakistan when it comes to conventional warfare, I mean just their sheers numbers and stronger economy give them a advantage. So this report wouldn’t really bother most Pakistanis.

However with nukes around, mutual destruction is ensured if Pakistan/India get into a full out war so stronger military doesn’t really mean much. So this report may be good for bragging rights but won’t mean much unless Pakistan somehow lose their nukes lol.

 

[Lego20]

Lol sure but majority of the desperation seems to be coming from the India posters who are bringing up 50 year old battles.

Anyways I have never met a Pakistanis that has denied that India has a clear edge on Pakistan when it comes to conventional warfare, I mean just their sheers numbers and stronger economy give them a advantage. So this report wouldn’t really bother most Pakistanis.

However with nukes around, mutual destruction is ensured if Pakistan/India get into a full out war so stronger military doesn’t really mean much. So this report may be good for bragging rights but won’t mean much unless Pakistan somehow lose their nukes lol.

Report says we are no #4 !! Pakistan no where Thank god for the stolen nukes.

 

[Bi_Jamalo]

Report says we are no #4 !! Pakistan no where Thank god for the stolen nukes.

Tou phir aao na kabhi Khushbu lagga k

 

[El Generico]

Report says we are no #4 !! Pakistan no where Thank god for the stolen nukes.

Congratulations at being #4 man, good stuff.
Why doesn’t your #4 army take back it’s “atoot aang “ from the unranked Pakistan? Or do you not consider “pok “ part of India?

I mean yeah Pakistan has nukes but you guys are #4!! you should be able to walk in and take Kashmir.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Report says we are no #4 !! Pakistan no where Thank god for the stolen nukes.

I think that you are #4 but still only feel strong enough to puff little chests on unranked Pakistani forum is revealing. Britain is #9, would you fancy taking us on?

 

[Napa]

If a war does happen (which it most likely won't), then the one with superior technology will win. The 1990 Iraq War made that very clear. The US is far ahead of China in terms of technology.

The scoring used by Military Direct for its ranking is at the following URL. A lot of stuff they give weight to, like number of soldiers etc. are in reality minor considerations.

https://www.military.direct/blogs/news

 

[Manunited18]

Meaningless stats to be perfectly honest. Until we actually see how armies perform in battle conditions, the numbers mean very little. According to this report, India is 4th strongest and UK is 9th. Does anybody seriously believe that India would win a war with Britain?

Lol the last sentence would be epic on April fools day!

 

[Bi_Jamalo]

Fourth strongest only because of technology, man for man indians are the most courageous and braveheart soldiers. No wonder enemies try to malign their character.

https://youtu.be/ffVd0kM1x6g

Pehle yeh problems tou solve kar lo. Jab hi yeh har jaggah se maar kha k wapas aa jatay hain

 

[El Generico]

https://youtu.be/ffVd0kM1x6g

Pehle yeh problems tou solve kar lo. Jab hi yeh har jaggah se maar kha k wapas aa jatay hain

This should be a matter of concern for every Indian. How come the 4th strongest army can’t even arrange food for its soldiers?

 

[wajid]

China has the strongest military in the world, scoring 82 out of 100 points in the index, it noted.

China has the strongest military force in the world while India stands at number four, according to a study released on Sunday by defence website Military Direct.

“The USA, despite their enormous military budgets, comes in 2nd place with 74 points, followed by Russia with 69, India at 61 and then France with 58. The UK just about makes the Top 10, coming in 9th place with a score of 43,” said the study.

The study said “ultimate military strength index” was calculated after taking into consideration various factors including budgets, number of inactive and active military personnel, total air, sea, land and nuclear resources, average salaries, and weight of equipment.

China has the strongest military in the world, scoring 82 out of 100 points in the index, it noted.

“Based on these scores, which account for budgets, men, and things like air and navy capacity, it does suggest that China would come out as top dog in a hypothetical super conflict,” it mentioned.

The world’s biggest military spender with a budget of USD 732 billion per year is the USA, it noted, adding that China comes second with USD 261 billion, followed by India at USD 71 billion.

“China would win by sea, USA by air and Russia by land” in this hypothetical conflict, it said.

“USA wins in an aerial war with 14,141 total airships vs Russia with 4,682 and China with 3,587. The Russian Federation wins in a land war with 54,866 vehicles vs USA with 50,326 and China with 41,641,” it mentioned.

China wins in a sea war with 406 ships vs Russia with 278 and the USA or India with 202, it said.

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-has-worlds-fourth-strongest-military-military-directs-study-7238175/

Completely stupid. US has no rival at the moment...

 

[Bi_Jamalo]

This should be a matter of concern for every Indian. How come the 4th strongest army can’t even arrange food for its soldiers?

Our indian friends here must be living in some parallel universe because:

- On one hand: Inn ki Bihar regiment ko Galwan valley meh chinese ne nokeelay dunday se maar maar k mountains se jump karnay pe majboor kiya ha. 20 soldiers lost their lives.
- On the other hand: yahan Hinduvita supporters Indian army ki technological advancement aur morale pe bhashan de rahay hain.

Wake up!

 

[amax]

First there is USA than day light , man for man , USA will rout anyone in an open battle

2 and 3 are china and russia

than there is day light , I would say India is there , we like it or not though mostly because driven by sheer numbers , India is a military power now in a tier below the top 3.

After that we will have european powers of yesteryear with advanced military industrial complex where defence output is product of reaserch in sciene and technology rather than sheer numbers :
UK and France

Beyond this tier we have Pakistan , israeal , where its combinition of battle hardeness with limited resources.

Also middle eastern countries that have ammassed fancy toys because of oil money like saudia arabia.

Turkey and South Korea has both traning and tech thanks to close ties with west historically


this pretty much sums up the top 20.


I am not much emotionally attached to such rankings , I will like pakistan to enter in such lists like europeean countries or south korea where defence capability is product of advances in science and technolgy rather than amassing weapons ala saudia arabia and india.Even its after 100 years.

 

[Napa]

First there is USA than day light , man for man , USA will rout anyone in an open battle

2 and 3 are china and russia

than there is day light , I would say India is there , we like it or not though mostly because driven by sheer numbers , India is a military power now in a tier below the top 3.

After that we will have european powers of yesteryear with advanced military industrial complex where defence output is product of reaserch in sciene and technology rather than sheer numbers :
UK and France

Beyond this tier we have Pakistan , israeal , where its combinition of battle hardeness with limited resources.

Also middle eastern countries that have ammassed fancy toys because of oil money like saudia arabia.

Turkey and South Korea has both traning and tech thanks to close ties with west historically


this pretty much sums up the top 20.


I am not much emotionally attached to such rankings , I will like pakistan to enter in such lists like europeean countries or south korea where defence capability is product of advances in science and technolgy rather than amassing weapons ala saudia arabia and india.Even its after 100 years.

Your ranking of the top 4 is probably correct except I would put Russia above China. Never underestimate the Russians. Many powerful nations have crashed to defeat underestimating the Russians, just ask Napoleon and Hitler. The fact is that Russians have 3 things that makes them still superior to China 1) likely better technology, China's tech is unproven 2) soldiers who are ready to endure unimaginable hardships in fighting for their country 3) super Army leaders, read up about General Zhukov and how he consistently out-thought the Germans.

 

[moghul]

4th strongest military in the world, whatever it takes to hold Kashmir freedom movement suppressed.

 

[King-Misbah]

why isn't the Indian army ranked number 1? Can Joshila explain this?

 

[Civil]

Focus should be on happiness, poverty, development, education.

Nukes guarantee pakistan survival. End of story. We need to switch the goalpost and be happy we can hold our own. India a neighbour much bigger and still will never even think of attacking us as a matter of doctrine. That is a significant and unique feat in the geopolitics.

Internationally no other country considers south Asians as a race to be muscular nor tough guys in battle. unless it's Punjabis or Pathans and even then lower tier compared to Russians, Israelis, Americans, china etc.

It is what is, I hope atleast on the Pakistan side we move away from such small thinking and meaningless defense stats one day.

 

[amax]

Focus should be on happiness, poverty, development, education.

Nukes guarantee pakistan survival. End of story. We need to switch the goalpost and be happy we can hold our own. India a neighbour much bigger and still will never even think of attacking us as a matter of doctrine. That is a significant and unique feat in the geopolitics.

Internationally no other country considers south Asians as a race to be muscular nor tough guys in battle. unless it's Punjabis or Pathans and even then lower tier compared to Russians, Israelis, Americans, china etc.

It is what is, I hope atleast on the Pakistan side we move away from such small thinking and meaningless defense stats one day.

yeah, the way pakistan ensure geostrategic parity in south asia despite bordering 8 times larger hostile neighbour and afghanistan and being such a thin and vulnerable country is quite an achievement on its own and I would say its one of major achievement of its kind in post world war 2 warfare.

 

[Napa]

yeah, the way pakistan ensure geostrategic parity in south asia despite bordering 8 times larger hostile neighbour and afghanistan and being such a thin and vulnerable country is quite an achievement on its own and I would say its one of major achievement of its kind in post world war 2 warfare.

Not sure what "geostrategic parity" you are referring to. In the modern world, invading and occupying another country is just unending trouble. What some Hindutva hotheads may say notwithstanding, no Indian leader has any intention of occupying Pakistan.

Also, if Pakistan had any sort of parity, they would have kept Bangladesh.

 

[KingKhanWC]

First there is USA than day light , man for man , USA will rout anyone in an open battle

2 and 3 are china and russia

than there is day light , I would say India is there , we like it or not though mostly because driven by sheer numbers , India is a military power now in a tier below the top 3.

After that we will have european powers of yesteryear with advanced military industrial complex where defence output is product of reaserch in sciene and technology rather than sheer numbers :
UK and France

Beyond this tier we have Pakistan , israeal , where its combinition of battle hardeness with limited resources.

Also middle eastern countries that have ammassed fancy toys because of oil money like saudia arabia.

Turkey and South Korea has both traning and tech thanks to close ties with west historically


this pretty much sums up the top 20.


I am not much emotionally attached to such rankings , I will like pakistan to enter in such lists like europeean countries or south korea where defence capability is product of advances in science and technolgy rather than amassing weapons ala saudia arabia and india.Even its after 100 years.

USA has the most sophisticated arms, crafts and technology in history. This is obvious.

But you say will route anyone in an open battle? What is an open battle?

 

[amax]

Not sure what "geostrategic parity" you are referring to. In the modern world, invading and occupying another country is just unending trouble. What some Hindutva hotheads may say notwithstanding, no Indian leader has any intention of occupying Pakistan.

Also, if Pakistan had any sort of parity, they would have kept Bangladesh.

according to even many indian defence experts , pakistan is only south asian country that is in way of complete hegemony of india in south asia. Also Bangladesh war is another thing , you cant change laws of physics , pakistan was bound to be defeated since there are multiple notes of indian officers in east front testifying the valour of pakistan forces in eastern front despite being outnumbered 1 to 15. India never was able to dicicive blow to pakistan in western front.

Add to this pakistan has its won share of success in Afghanistan chessboard as well , which pretty much involves all super powers of the world

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VghZ8xskI7s

 

[amax]

USA has the most sophisticated arms, crafts and technology in history. This is obvious.

But you say will route anyone in an open battle? What is an open battle?

Open batttle means USA not invading next contenders china or russia but meeting them in a neutral venue . invasion of china and russia will be very costly and we all know why. In a nuetral venue USA will decisively defeat any country in the world

 

[Napa]

according to even many indian defence experts , pakistan is only south asian country that is in way of complete hegemony of india in south asia. Also Bangladesh war is another thing , you cant change laws of physics , pakistan was bound to be defeated since there are multiple notes of indian officers in east front testifying the valour of pakistan forces in eastern front despite being outnumbered 1 to 15. India never was able to dicicive blow to pakistan in western front.

Add to this pakistan has its won share of success in Afghanistan chessboard as well , which pretty much involves all super powers of the world

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VghZ8xskI7s

What is this "hegemony" that "defense experts" talk about? Suppose Pakistan was militarily weaker and India stronger, what difference would that have made to India's behavior? Pakistan has many problems, India has many problems. For India to take over Pakistan means India's problems would increase tenfold.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Open batttle means USA not invading next contenders china or russia but meeting them in a neutral venue . invasion of china and russia will be very costly and we all know why. In a nuetral venue USA will decisively defeat any country in the world

Do you mean conventional war or a proxy war? If there is an all out war between Nato & Russia/China, there will be no neutral venue, as it will nuclear war.

 

[Civil]

What is this "hegemony" that "defense experts" talk about? Suppose Pakistan was militarily weaker and India stronger, what difference would that have made to India's behavior? Pakistan has many problems, India has many problems. For India to take over Pakistan means India's problems would increase tenfold.

Hegemony they are talking about is using military might to exert inflence. India cannot do this.. not because they don't want to ...current Indian ruling party would certainly love to..it is because they can't. Not even talking about all of Pakistan just take disputed Kashmir territory.

Takeover of whole country is not necessary for a decisive military blow and to shift balance. Simply attacking and taking back POK would prove that. But in current setup even this would not be feasible for Indian Army.

Bangladesh was 50 years ago with no nukes maybe at that time proper attack and takeover of strategic portions of west Pakistan was possible But not now.

 

[amax]

What is this "hegemony" that "defense experts" talk about? Suppose Pakistan was militarily weaker and India stronger, what difference would that have made to India's behavior? Pakistan has many problems, India has many problems. For India to take over Pakistan means India's problems would increase tenfold.

"parity" in south asian context is keeping power differential to a limit so that , India cant achieve any of its objectives economically , militarily, diplomatically forcefully against pakistan. And these objectives exists in indian minds , Takeover of whole pakistan is obviously far fetched . But denying existance of certain indian objectives viz a viz will be being too naive.


listen to this indian guy , he perfectly summarizes it

listen from 3:30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR62zuTtdaM

 

[CricketCartoons]

This should be a matter of concern for every Indian. How come the 4th strongest army can’t even arrange food for its soldiers?

Soliders need to be prepared to go without food. It is just part of the insane army drill. Obviously not all can pass.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Hard to believe China is superior to USA.

USA has triple the budget...and God knows what they are hiding.

 

[Slog]

Hard to believe China is superior to USA.

USA has triple the budget...and God knows what they are hiding.

I guess size of the military force has a huge role to play in this ranking calculation. US will always trail in that regard

 

[Bigboii]

Hard to believe China is superior to USA.

USA has triple the budget...and God knows what they are hiding.

I know what they are hiding
Funding from inner cities, drug infested neighborhood and anything that makes a difference in people's lives

Also a bunch of this funding ends up in corruption or burecrati c spending so isn't exactly all kum ah yah

Would take US at 15 on this list any day where no would attack and we can focus on our own issues instead of spending crazy amount on military

US establishment is kinda stupid too
US basically funds European lifestyle of welfare economics through these bloated military budget and other such measures while people suffer here ...

 

[Napa]

"parity" in south asian context is keeping power differential to a limit so that , India cant achieve any of its objectives economically , militarily, diplomatically forcefully against pakistan. And these objectives exists in indian minds , Takeover of whole pakistan is obviously far fetched . But denying existance of certain indian objectives viz a viz will be being too naive.


listen to this indian guy , he perfectly summarizes it

listen from 3:30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR62zuTtdaM

I had actually viewed this entire video. Some of it is well-reasoned, but Gupta misses some important issues:

1) He doesn't discuss the motivations of the Pakistani Army, especially its need for an external enemy. If Pakistan made peace with India, where would that leave the Pakistani Army? At least some discussion on this point was merited.

2) He says India should take Pakistan's offer seriously, but what exactly should India do? Give some similar statements in return? Or return Kashmir to pre-Aug 5, that is again make 370 part of the law? Obviously that is not going to happen. What could happen is that Pakistan stop trying to get India out of Kashmir using violence, but has Bajwa suggested that? Again, Gupta was not clear about exactly what Bajwa has offered.

You can say Pakistan has parity in the sense that India will not go to war with it, beyond maybe more air strikes the sort that followed Pulwama. Now that it has the Rafaels and maybe the SS400 in the near future it will feel more capable of retaliating to the next Pulwama with airstrikes, but it will not launch a bigger war. A bigger war is going to also adversely impact foreign investor sentiment, which is critical for India's economic growth.

So this parity is ill-defined. Pakistan doesn't have enough strength to stop Indian airstrikes, especially as India is investing billions of dollars in newer equipment. India doesn't have the strength for an all out war which will dampen investor sentiment and may lead to a nuclear exchange.

Best would be if both countries got over the stupid enmity, accepted reality and worked for economic development. The reality is the LoC is not going to change in the next hundred years or so. It will change when one country collapses because it got too weak, and that could well happen in the longer term as history teaches us it happens quite frequently in the longer term

 

[Mamoon]

The ranking is decent except the top two. The U.S. is by far the strongest military power in the world. They would dominate any country in a direct limited war (no nuclear engagement) including China and Russia.

It is understandable that Pakistan is nowhere to be found. The Pakistani military is all hot air and propaganda.

They have been humiliated by India in every full-scale war and can only claim superiority on the back of the achievements of PAF.

There is no doubt that PAF is an elite force and superior to IAF, but the military and navy wings of the armed forces are mediocre and that is why India has always dominated us in wars.

 

[Robert]

China is the coming power. By the second half of this century, all but the US will bow to them.

 

[CricketCartoons]

China is the coming power. By the second half of this century, all but the US will bow to them.

I saw dunkirk movie, they showed the the soldiers were scared and didn't have the stomach or the british bull dog spirit to fight.

 

[Babeikh]

This Military Strength Index has USA, Russia and China as 1,2, and 3.

India is 4th, UK is 8th, Pak is 10th.

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php

To be honest I am not sure of the value of these things and what they actually measure.

Military conflict is not a cricket match that you can work out what happen by the relative strength and statistics of the two sides etc. I suppose Ireland beating Pakistan would be the equivalent of Malawi beating China in a war.

You can see historically the phainty the Viet Cong gave to the USA, the Afghans gave to the Russians etc.

 

[Robert]

This Military Strength Index has USA, Russia and China as 1,2, and 3.

India is 4th, UK is 8th, Pak is 10th.

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php

To be honest I am not sure of the value of these things and what they actually measure.

Military conflict is not a cricket match that you can work out what happen by the relative strength and statistics of the two sides etc. I suppose Ireland beating Pakistan would be the equivalent of Malawi beating China in a war.

You can see historically the phainty the Viet Cong gave to the USA, the Afghans gave to the Russians etc.

The USA won every major battle in Vietnam. But their tactics were wrong - it was all about kill counts rather than taking territory and holding it. And they could do nothing to prevent the vast volume of Soviet munitions coming into Haiphong without kicking off WW3. In the end, America just grew weary of the constant drip-drip of their sons coming home in body bags to no obvious gain. Ho Chi Minh (once a CIA asset) knew that if he kept killing them they would eventually leave, as had the French.

USSR lost in Afghanistan due to general collapse of the Soviet state due to Chernobyl among other factors.

 

[cricketjoshila]

This should be a matter of concern for every Indian. How come the 4th strongest army can’t even arrange food for its soldiers?

One paramilitary guy posted one video and that's all pakistanis will post.

Tell me how did 90k pakistanis surrendered in Dhaka? Or Pakistan army ran away living behind their dead in kargil?

Is that not a matter of concern?

 

[Bigboii]

China is the coming power. By the second half of this century, all but the US will bow to them.

Historical big 3 will never bow to anyone...
There's a power that comes with being that big a country resulting in no bowing
You won't see US or India bowing to anyone almost ever
If they are at their normal potential that is

Economy wise

China
US
India

After 50 years

Any of these countries if they are decently ran will have independent foreign policies, power, influence

 

[Robert]

Historical big 3 will never bow to anyone...
There's a power that comes with being that big a country resulting in no bowing
You won't see US or India bowing to anyone almost ever
If they are at their normal potential that is

Economy wise

China
US
India

After 50 years

Any of these countries if they are decently ran will have independent foreign policies, power, influence

I don’t think India will ever be in that league. China will be #1 by 2050, with the US and EU struggling to compete
with their economic might and influence. Right now China is expanding into Africa and South America. Russia and India will be small fry. UK will be reduced to irrelevance unless it joins the EU or USA.

 

[Bigboii]

I had actually viewed this entire video. Some of it is well-reasoned, but Gupta misses some important issues:

1) He doesn't discuss the motivations of the Pakistani Army, especially its need for an external enemy. If Pakistan made peace with India, where would that leave the Pakistani Army? At least some discussion on this point was merited.

2) He says India should take Pakistan's offer seriously, but what exactly should India do? Give some similar statements in return? Or return Kashmir to pre-Aug 5, that is again make 370 part of the law? Obviously that is not going to happen. What could happen is that Pakistan stop trying to get India out of Kashmir using violence, but has Bajwa suggested that? Again, Gupta was not clear about exactly what Bajwa has offered.

You can say Pakistan has parity in the sense that India will not go to war with it, beyond maybe more air strikes the sort that followed Pulwama. Now that it has the Rafaels and maybe the SS400 in the near future it will feel more capable of retaliating to the next Pulwama with airstrikes, but it will not launch a bigger war. A bigger war is going to also adversely impact foreign investor sentiment, which is critical for India's economic growth.

So this parity is ill-defined. Pakistan doesn't have enough strength to stop Indian airstrikes, especially as India is investing billions of dollars in newer equipment. India doesn't have the strength for an all out war which will dampen investor sentiment and may lead to a nuclear exchange.

Best would be if both countries got over the stupid enmity, accepted reality and worked for economic development. The reality is the LoC is not going to change in the next hundred years or so. It will change when one country collapses because it got too weak, and that could well happen in the longer term as history teaches us it happens quite frequently in the longer term

1 Pak army is doing cost benefit analysis the situation Pak find itself in as he explained is putting the whole country at risk
That situation demands unprecedented actions I mean they are not going to risk Pakistan itself to feed their hunger not is that ott machivilian but also stupid
They can find another way for domestic dominance they are very smart but risking the whole organism and it's well being isn't worth that
2 you have to sit down to know their offer you can't make assumptions
But what's the worst that can happen current status quo?

Would they play hardball maybe at first yes but a India is in a dominant position
Where Pak is looking for a clean slate to decide their relationship with China in the future and Pakistan is weak atm
So the power dynamics would help India but 10,20 years later economy will be decent, military stronger due to China and you'll actually be adding China to the conversation due to our complete reliance on China if India kept pushing Pak towards em

I think down the line it'll only get trickier cause RN Pak is at a crossroad but if you wait they'll choose a road and commit to it...

If India continues escalating than you are just pushing pak towards China
They have no other choice you're making two powers more powerful in the process cause China will keep sending modern weapons to Pakistan like their versions S 400 , modern planes like they are doing RN
China would absolutely love that, they have absolutely no problems with that
They were selling navy warships for low intrest rates, subscdized to Pakistan they'll love to keep India engaged on two fronts making India practically an island of sort

I don't think even GOP or army wants that as Chinese are too overbearing but you are pushing than towards than in the process creating two powerful military threats

So you can't blame Pakistan for going towards China cause if a tight treaty isn't being signed on Kashmir than you are leaving tham with no other choice

 

[OMB]

I don’t think India will ever be in that league. China will be #1 by 2050, with the US and EU struggling to compete
with their economic might and influence. Right now China is expanding into Africa and South America. Russia and India will be small fry. UK will be reduced to irrelevance unless it joins the EU or USA.

Yes this is where it is heading.
China is actually standing alone in military-politico circles and still going strong. The various measures are not doing anything to hold them back. I travel a lot in Africa, SL and MENA region and have seen how they have established bases (trading posts initially) using the might of their embassies, banks and industrial production.

USA is stronger due to the years of research and hard work spent developing capability in technology.
Not saying that report of Military direct provides justification to any country to attack other.
Also, having a strong defense setup is not created in order to attack neighbours (or UK). Also all the finger pointing and converting this to India Pak or China war situations is far fetched scenario.

 

[Napa]

The USA won every major battle in Vietnam. But their tactics were wrong - it was all about kill counts rather than taking territory and holding it. And they could do nothing to prevent the vast volume of Soviet munitions coming into Haiphong without kicking off WW3. In the end, America just grew weary of the constant drip-drip of their sons coming home in body bags to no obvious gain. Ho Chi Minh (once a CIA asset) knew that if he kept killing them they would eventually leave, as had the French.

USSR lost in Afghanistan due to general collapse of the Soviet state due to Chernobyl among other factors.

Hard to say that the US won the Iraq War or will win the Afghanistan War.

Result of Iraq War is that a Sunni dictator violently opposed to the biggest US enemy in the region Iran has been overthrown. Instead there is now a Shia government in power, which has close ties with Iran.

 

[Napa]

I don’t think India will ever be in that league. China will be #1 by 2050, with the US and EU struggling to compete
with their economic might and influence. Right now China is expanding into Africa and South America. Russia and India will be small fry. UK will be reduced to irrelevance unless it joins the EU or USA.

Not sure why you are down about India's prospects. India has very good entrepreneurs, for example Lakshmi Mittal who went out of India with a little wealth and ended up buying up the largest European and other steel manufacturers. It has very good managers, for example the CEOs of various tech and other firms. It has a huge population. These essential ingredients make it possible that economically India could in the top 2 or 3 nations in the world.

 

[El Generico]

One paramilitary guy posted one video and that's all pakistanis will post.

Tell me how did 90k pakistanis surrendered in Dhaka? Or Pakistan army ran away living behind their dead in kargil?

Is that not a matter of concern?

That was nearly 60 years ago, it may have been a matter of concern at that time however things have changed since then with the biggest addition being nukes. Another 1971 can’t happen without mutual destruction so why be concerned about that?

Anyways instead of getting all worked up ,you should focus on why such a strong army has an issue with giving its soldiers proper food? Because it’s not just one video, there have been other concerns also raised about the quality of food provided to Indian troops.

Shortage of ammunition for Indian Army; unfit food on trains: 10 things CAG has red-flagged
https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...red-flagged/story-q0nh1ohoblym61wq6tanap.html

 

[CricketCartoons]

Shortage of ammunition for Indian Army; unfit food on trains: 10 things CAG has red-flagged
https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...red-flagged/story-q0nh1ohoblym61wq6tanap.html

It says the food on trains is poor. Nothing related to food given to soldiers.

Shortage of ammunition is a good sign. There is more demand than supply.

 

[Napa]

1 Pak army is doing cost benefit analysis the situation Pak find itself in as he explained is putting the whole country at risk
That situation demands unprecedented actions I mean they are not going to risk Pakistan itself to feed their hunger not is that ott machivilian but also stupid
They can find another way for domestic dominance they are very smart but risking the whole organism and it's well being isn't worth that

You have done more analysis of the Pak Army's motivations than Gupta did.

2 you have to sit down to know their offer you can't make assumptions
But what's the worst that can happen current status quo?

Would they play hardball maybe at first yes but a India is in a dominant position
Where Pak is looking for a clean slate to decide their relationship with China in the future and Pakistan is weak atm
So the power dynamics would help India but 10,20 years later economy will be decent, military stronger due to China and you'll actually be adding China to the conversation due to our complete reliance on China if India kept pushing Pak towards em

I think down the line it'll only get trickier cause RN Pak is at a crossroad but if you wait they'll choose a road and commit to it...

At this point what is needed is actions rather than words. If tomorrow Pakistan put JEM in jail (not eyewash but acutally) and Dawood Ibrahim and Tiger Memon were to suddenly turn up in Indian custody, it would indicate that Pakistan is indeed starting with a "clean slate".

Yes, India also finances some terror activities in Pakistan, but those are in the nature of retaliations. The Indian Army doesn't control state policy and doesn't have political influence to determine foreign policy.

If India continues escalating than you are just pushing pak towards China
They have no other choice you're making two powers more powerful in the process cause China will keep sending modern weapons to Pakistan like their versions S 400 , modern planes like they are doing RN
China would absolutely love that, they have absolutely no problems with that
They were selling navy warships for low intrest rates, subscdized to Pakistan they'll love to keep India engaged on two fronts making India practically an island of sort

I don't think even GOP or army wants that as Chinese are too overbearing but you are pushing than towards than in the process creating two powerful military threats

So you can't blame Pakistan for going towards China cause if a tight treaty isn't being signed on Kashmir than you are leaving tham with no other choice

At this point the thinking among Indians is that Pakistan is going to try to damage India as much as it is capable. You talk about a "tight treaty" on Kashmir, but one was already signed 50 years ago, it is called the Simla Agreement. It was sort of followed for 20 years, then Pakistan resumed its armed support for Kashmiri separatists.

Yes, it would be better for both countries if they made peace and didn't let China exploit them. However, at this point Pakistan is under the pump but India isn't. Kashmir is a security problem for India, but far away from Maharashtra and the Southern states where foreign investment is coming in.

Pakistan can improve its security situation only if it takes unilateral steps to crack down on internal jihadi outfits. Putting them in jail and then releasing them two days later is not going to be enough. Releasing the guy who was part of the group that killed Daniel Pearl is the wrong way to go. The US is not stupid and India is not stupid. Statements from IK and Bajwa don't count for much. Talk is cheap as they say. Real action like ending JEM will count and improve Pakistan's image in India and the West.

Some Pakistanis like to ignore the real issues and keep chanting "nooras, corruption, Nawaz, Bhutto" but even if their political leaders became 100% not-corrupt, it still won't get Pakistan the foreign investment it needs escape poverty if it continues nurturing domestic jihadi outfits.

 

[El Generico]

It says the food on trains is poor. Nothing related to food given to soldiers.

Shortage of ammunition is a good sign. There is more demand than supply.

I might posted the wrong article, here is a more detailed and recent one.


“ In a report tabled in Parliament yesterday, CAG also said that there is inadequate food for soldiers, affecting their calorie intake by as much as 82 percent”

https://m.economictimes.com/news/de...oldiers-make-cag-angry/slideshow/73930553.cms

So my point still stands, instead of harping on about 60 year old battles, shouldn’t you focus more on this?

Also these reports show that the issue isn’t limited to just one video like [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] was making it out to be.

 

[amax]

I don’t think India will ever be in that league. China will be #1 by 2050, with the US and EU struggling to compete
with their economic might and influence. Right now China is expanding into Africa and South America. Russia and India will be small fry. UK will be reduced to irrelevance unless it joins the EU or USA.

Uk will remian in top 10 though , british strength has always been producing indivisuals of brillance and it will keep on producing it in both arts and sciences ,enough to keep it in top 10 but as they say "size matters", UK simply dont have sheer numbers to be in tier 1 as you can call it.

 

[CricketCartoons]

I might posted the wrong article, here is a more detailed and recent one.


“ In a report tabled in Parliament yesterday, CAG also said that there is inadequate food for soldiers, affecting their calorie intake by as much as 82 percent”

https://m.economictimes.com/news/de...oldiers-make-cag-angry/slideshow/73930553.cms

So my point still stands, instead of harping on about 60 year old battles, shouldn’t you focus more on this?

Also these reports show that the issue isn’t limited to just one video like [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] was making it out to be.

Not a matter of concern, but a matter of pride. That with inadequate food, we are 4th ranked. Imagine if we operated at full capacity.

 

[silentkiller187]

AS CT17 stats dont matter, its all about what happens on the day and the flukes, i mean nukes

Real test comes in battle, i wonder if the endorsement of Pakistan's tea from the 4th best army on the globe has done anything in the TEA rankings.

 

[Technics 1210]

War is not about the numbers game anymore. Boots on the ground and all that are practically irrelevant in a nuclear age, but pore importantly, cyber age.

Also, USA might be the world's powerful military, but USA has never won a war on its own; has always picked on smaller countries, with allies, and would never consider all out war with Russia/China. Remember, Russia annexed Crimea and not a peep from USA.

As for India. Pure jokes. Unless they intend to go war with China, Bangladesh, or Pakistan - at the same time; military expansion is a waste.

Once those nukes go off world wide, your troops, tanks, fighter jets, warships and you name it - are effectively useless.

Today's wars are fought in the economic and cyber spheres - not some Mahabharat TV show.

 

[Robert]

Uk will remian in top 10 though , british strength has always been producing indivisuals of brillance and it will keep on producing it in both arts and sciences ,enough to keep it in top 10 but as they say "size matters", UK simply dont have sheer numbers to be in tier 1 as you can call it.

I didn’t mention any Tiers, though we are still a second-rank power like France. Nukes, UNSC membership, and unsurpassed intelligence network will keep us a player a while yet, but leaving the EU will bring long-term economic decline and eventual brain drain as the brightest leave.

 

[Robert]

War is not about the numbers game anymore. Boots on the ground and all that are practically irrelevant in a nuclear age, but pore importantly, cyber age.

Also, USA might be the world's powerful military, but USA has never won a war on its own; has always picked on smaller countries, with allies, and would never consider all out war with Russia/China. Remember, Russia annexed Crimea and not a peep from USA. [/b]

As for India. Pure jokes. Unless they intend to go war with China, Bangladesh, or Pakistan - at the same time; military expansion is a waste.

Once those nukes go off world wide, your troops, tanks, fighter jets, warships and you name it - are effectively useless.

Today's wars are fought in the economic and cyber spheres - not some Mahabharat TV show.

Which is why boots on the ground are still necessary, along with hybrid warfare such as cyberattacks and social media destabilising tactics.

 

[Technics 1210]

Which is why boots on the ground are still necessary, along with hybrid warfare such as cyberattacks and social media destabilising tactics.

Defence review: British army to be cut to 72,500 troops by 2025

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56477900

 

[thelandofthebravepeople]

The EU including UK should probably be counted as 1. If ever they go into world war the EU/UK will fight united. On top of that you will have USA+EU+UK fighting as one.