Posted on Feb 6, 2015
If our world powers went head-to-head, who would win?
21.1K
65
60
12
12
0
If militaries around the world went head-to-head, these power houses would come out on top. Are you surprised to see any of the countries included?
Infographic
Command Post
Foreign Forces
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 37
6
6
0
I think the number for Sea power is a bit skewed. North Korea calls every boat from a dingy to a garbage scow a Naval Ship. Not to mention the quality of the builds. Also they fail to take into account America's secret Ground force... Hunters!
(6)
(0)
PO3 Steven Sherrill
SSG John Bacon Admiral Yamamoto considered it:
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."
http://www.skylighters.org/quotations/quots6.html
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."
http://www.skylighters.org/quotations/quots6.html
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
Numbers don't mean anything without quality. Quality of personnel. Quality of training. Quality of equipment. That's what really matters, and we've got that covered.
(6)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Didn't Napoleon say, "Quantity has a quality of its own"?
Sorry, it was to good to pass up.
Sorry, it was to good to pass up.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
Besides being in the top 3 in ground, air, and sea. We have a few unequal advantages that no other nation has. We have an all volunteer force; meaning that we are all willing to die for the betterment of this great nation...at least I know I am. Second, don't quote me but If I had to make an educated guess, I would have to bet that we have more firearms per citizen than any other country. And If our air, ground, and sea forces were to falter, we would still have the capabilities to defend our nation.
(6)
(0)
Sgt Packy Flickinger
Gotta love the second amendment!! I'd argue other countries have servicemen willing to die for their countries, muslim countries certainly do.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
First, nobody wins in terms of an all out conflict. Between the massive advancements in nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons as well as the proliferation of unconventional/guerrilla warfare...I don't foresee world powers ever engaging in invasion-style operations like seen in WW2. Most likely, it will be an attempt to bankrupt the other nations by forcing massive expenditures in terms of men/materials/equipment via "third party nations", similar to the conflicts of Russia and the United States in the Korean and Vietnam War to damage the economy and cause an internal collapse.
Also, the statistics on North Korea are somewhat misleading. Having 1000 vessels sounds significantly impressive considering the rest, but many are aging destroyers and frigates without significant benefit. Even the simple point of considering North Korea as a "major world power" is somewhat of a comical thought. North Korea is a danger only as much as China allows it to pose a danger. It is that "junkyard dog", able to run to the end of the leash to bark and snarl menacingly.
China steps in and drops economic sanctions and it can cripple the already fragile North Korean economy. In that sense, China is an often understated work player. Their role in the global economy and their abilities to tie in with Russia and North Korea both make them a capable opponent. This is part of why they are starting to strut a bit more powerfully and build up military posts in contested regions a bit more. My guess is that the preparations are in play for some serious muscle flexing within the region in the next 5-10 years.
It will be interesting to see how the global politics game plays out.
v/r,
CPT Butler
Also, the statistics on North Korea are somewhat misleading. Having 1000 vessels sounds significantly impressive considering the rest, but many are aging destroyers and frigates without significant benefit. Even the simple point of considering North Korea as a "major world power" is somewhat of a comical thought. North Korea is a danger only as much as China allows it to pose a danger. It is that "junkyard dog", able to run to the end of the leash to bark and snarl menacingly.
China steps in and drops economic sanctions and it can cripple the already fragile North Korean economy. In that sense, China is an often understated work player. Their role in the global economy and their abilities to tie in with Russia and North Korea both make them a capable opponent. This is part of why they are starting to strut a bit more powerfully and build up military posts in contested regions a bit more. My guess is that the preparations are in play for some serious muscle flexing within the region in the next 5-10 years.
It will be interesting to see how the global politics game plays out.
v/r,
CPT Butler
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
PO2 Steven Erickson
As "WOPR" said...
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."
"How about a nice game of chess?"
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."
"How about a nice game of chess?"
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I love infographics!
However... and I pause for effect... this is an incomplete picture.
Yes, China has the biggest ground forces. However the USA does have an "inactive" draft of any Male aged 18-26. In matters of National Defense, our ability to "double" our numbers is just staggering. Their ability to do the same doesn't come close.
When it comes to Aircraft, we have complete and total Air Superiority. Which brings us to the Seas.
Sure N. Korea has more Ships.... for about 15 minutes. That's where Air Superiority comes into play.
The Navy (used to) define Naval Superiority as Controlling not only the oceans, but the Air ABOVE the oceans, and the water BELOW the ocean. How long is the N. Korean fleet going to last against the US Air Force (Largest AF in the world), and US Navy (Second Largest AF in the World)?
That brings us to the real brass tacks. MONEY!!!
We spend A LOT of money. When it really boils down to it, you can't make comparisons between the amount of money two countries spend on "defense" spending. For one, China is able to do it cheaper. They just get more bang for the buck (pun intended) than we do. Two, a solid portion of our money is actually going to protect countries like Saudi Arabia & the UK. That entire Global Stability mission. We spend the money so they don't have to, which in turn reduced our cost over all. It's a semi-symbiotic relationship.
However... and I pause for effect... this is an incomplete picture.
Yes, China has the biggest ground forces. However the USA does have an "inactive" draft of any Male aged 18-26. In matters of National Defense, our ability to "double" our numbers is just staggering. Their ability to do the same doesn't come close.
When it comes to Aircraft, we have complete and total Air Superiority. Which brings us to the Seas.
Sure N. Korea has more Ships.... for about 15 minutes. That's where Air Superiority comes into play.
The Navy (used to) define Naval Superiority as Controlling not only the oceans, but the Air ABOVE the oceans, and the water BELOW the ocean. How long is the N. Korean fleet going to last against the US Air Force (Largest AF in the world), and US Navy (Second Largest AF in the World)?
That brings us to the real brass tacks. MONEY!!!
We spend A LOT of money. When it really boils down to it, you can't make comparisons between the amount of money two countries spend on "defense" spending. For one, China is able to do it cheaper. They just get more bang for the buck (pun intended) than we do. Two, a solid portion of our money is actually going to protect countries like Saudi Arabia & the UK. That entire Global Stability mission. We spend the money so they don't have to, which in turn reduced our cost over all. It's a semi-symbiotic relationship.
(4)
(0)
SSG Christopher Parrish
We can always draw on our Vets and retirees. I'm sure if it came down to it, there are some WWII vets who would try to take up arms and go at it again.
(0)
(0)
SGT William Howell
There is also no account of professionalism. A Chinese Infantryman and a American Infantryman are not the same. A North Korean sailor is not anywhere close to the caliber of a US sailor. The Chinese and Russian pilots have learned first hand they are not superior in the skies to the American tactics and training even with aircraft that were close to even. Training and professionalism makes for a force multiplier well beyond shear numbers.
(0)
(0)
SGT James Elphick
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS with the retirement of USS Enterprise and a few other navies getting some AC's launched that is no longer the case, the rest of the world as us by about 2 or 3 now. However, those 10 carriers we have are all nuclear-powered supercarriers while most of the rest of the world has what we could consider escort carriers or about the equivalent of our Amphibious Assault Ships that the USMC cruises aboard.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGT James Elphick exactly. It's really hard to do an Apples to Apples comparison between us and the rest of the world with the world. But us showing up with "some of ours" vs "all of theirs" is still going to be hugely unfair in our favor.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
"We got the bomb, and we're not afraid to use it." Thank you Dennis Leary.
-nuff said
-nuff said
(3)
(0)
PO3 Steven Sherrill
Of all the nations that possess the weapons, we were the only one to deploy them. I sincerely hope that it never happens again, but it is nice to know that in the event of catastrophe, we can just reboot the world.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Really, North Korea's Navy against ours. That wouldn't last as long as the last Ronda Rousey fight. Forget that our Navy has advanced weaponry, not a fishing boat with an AK 47. This thing is ridiculous. Our sub force alone would cripple them before the first carrier group arrived.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Here is a the average NK Soldier looks like, not too worried. Throw a few Big Macs, we'll be good.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
PO2 Mark Saffell
Some countries may have more ships, But its Quality here. Any one of our ships is better than 10 of theirs. Go Navy.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google