Best Arm Force in ASIAN.
-
Who has the strongest arm force in asian?
-
In terms of what? Numbers? Training? Equipment? Theres no certain answer to that question, its just like asking "Whats the best fighter plane/tank/warship/rifle/missile in the world". The answer is as usual, "It depends". Asking a general question like this would result in no certain answers and to me, is totally pointless.
Even if you ask the question in more specific terms, the answer is still, "It depends". Too many factors to consider for a definitive answer.
There are a lot of comprative tables in terms of numbers about world armed forces, including Asias, either on the web of in libraries. I would suggest you refer to those. -
It should be "Who has the strongest arm force in [b]asia[/b]?"Originally posted by Anza Andy:Who has the strongest arm force in asian?
not "Who has the strongest arm force in asian?"
-
Originally posted by [G]oggles:
It doesnt quite matter right
It should be "Who has the strongest arm force in [b][b]asia[/b]?"
not "Who has the strongest arm force in asian?" [/b]
.Undoubtful its the japanese currently this status could be remove anytime.With the arm race climate in east asia.South korea shall take the lead onces its f-15k fighters and KDxx destroyers(aegis) are completed.
I say the most fearsome military power in east asia is People Republic of China with its SSN22 sunburn/moskit which has the capacity to carry nuclear warhead and skimming at mach 3 which is 3 x the speed of a exocet.Its large army which could walk the land like countless armoured ants.Land linked nations like korean peninsula might be serious outnumbered -
I venture to say that the most powerful armed force in Asia is........ America. I guess you might be thinking this.(!!!???)
But I'm referring specifically to the 7th fleet. -
How about in south east asia?
-
I personally think that there are 2 general viewpoints to look at the question, the first is to take the "power" in absolute context, eg. the greater the quantity, the more powerful, second, is to look at the quantity against the population or land mass ratio.
In terms of the first viewpoint (gross/absolute power), Russia will have to be the most powerful in terms of their nuclear capabilities and conventional force. Ok, it is hard to say Russia being entirely an Aisan country (as part of Russia is in Europe), then China would be the most powerful given their nuclear capabilities. I doubt China will win a conventional war against Japan or India but when they have that many nuclear bombs at your disposal, I guess we have to admit that is just absolute power.
In terms of power per capital, Israel would definitely be the best. Israel has many times proven that they could defeat enemies with a strength 10 times their own force in all aspect, from land warfare to air warfare. Only their naval forces has not seen too many actions except a couple of exchanges between themselves and the then mighty Eygptian navy. Israel lost a destroyer while the Eygptian lost a few smaller boats.
In terms of the "best armed" armed forces in conventional weapons, Japan would be the best. They currently posses the best air force (most advanced American jets), the most advanced naval ships with Ageis and standard missiles, and one of the most advanced tank, the Type-90 based on German Leopard 2 tank design. Israel will be the equal first. South Korean would be second, and Thailand probably third.
In terms of numerical superiority, China, Vietnam and India could possibly fight for the #1 spot.
So, there is no real answer to this question.
If the answer is, who would probably win a all out conventional war, if everyone is fighting everyone in a marlee, then, I think Australia will win...
-
how about SEA????
-
but the americans are still the most powerful forces.Saw CNN yesterday US got a latest bomb named big blu,its a 30,000kg bunker blaster and if u see the SCV powerzone they still got lots of under research toys.But I see China still the strongest in Asia as Japan's weapons looks just strong only.
-
There won't be any clear winner if you are looking for the 'best ' armed forces. While I agree with Joe Black on his choice of Russia and China, they will still be bound by international treatise not to use them due to repercussions that will be abound after the war. Japan probably has the most powerful conventional force, however, Japan as a whole is particularly vulnerable to electronic attacks.
China's weakness is its large borders. Every country has an Archilles heel waiting to be exploited in any war, so it is difficult to judge. -
wow...... has it been really so long.... that we have seen such a big giantic KUKU moron??Originally posted by airconlin:If someone often involves fighting, then the skills and experience
maybe better than others, so do countries.
In south east asia, Vietnam should be the No.1,it has more than
40 years war's experience.
Cambodia also has long terms war, but as it's just guerrilla warfare.
in east asia, China is NO 1, as china also had involved many wars in the past half century, 1951-1953, with American and UN troops in Korea, 1962 with India, 1969 with Soviet(small conflict),
1979-1980 with Vietnam.
As I can remember, China may have fight with most of countries
after WW2 in asia, maybe more than Israel, just korea war, china fight with 15 UN countries.
Any other countries in SEA have really involve large scale wars after WW2? I don't know, It seems this region is a peaceful land,
that's a good thing, isn't it?
And why SEA become a peaceful land compare with other regions?
is it because race and religious structure is simple? no,
is it because SEA countries has the world's most powerful weapons? NO
Is it because all the countries are very powerful? No,
even a smallest country like Brunei, with just 200,000 population, can survive well.
The reasons maybe:
1: This region has a ASEAN organization
2: The international law are take effect, it's not so simple
that large fish can eat small fish, and small fish can eat shrimp,
if this is really a rule, then the world will just left 20-30 countries
now, not 200 countries.
So, to keep peace, the most important thing, is not to maintain
a most powerful arm force, it's not a effective way for
a small countries like singpaore to maintain such an arm force,
and it also can not guarantee the peace.
even if Singapore has a most powerful army in the SEA, like Vietnam, 1 million army, can fight with Super power like American, China, then what happen to them, what benifit to the people?
And even a nation is as powerful as Mongolia, Soviet Union in the
history, what's the benifit to themself, why they collapsed in
just a few decades.
Take a very near sample, why Indonesia let east timor independent? and if the gap between Singapore and Malaysia
is as big as Indonesia and East Timor, do you think Malaysia
will occupy Singapore, and bring themself tremendous troubles?
In this world, in 21 century, the most important thing is co-operation, like in western European, most country are tiny countries, some countries like Monaco, andorra, the population
is just 5% of Singapore, but they have EU, they have Nato,
that's enough.
The arms race just bring more potential conflict, not security.
Let American and UN to play the role of world's police, that's enough. -
Firstly, I agree with you on the point that co-operation is the most important thing when dealing with other countries today. however, where on earth do you get the extra oomph or the weight behind whatever you wanna say? Do you think everyone in this forum is a moron??? Why do you think when people from Malaysia and SIngapore bomb each other in this forum, the thing that gets thrown in first is the size and power of each countries armed forces??? Every country wants to co-operate of course, but then they also have their own interests to secure and protect.
For eg. look at the UN security council, you think Britain, France, US, Russia and China are in there for what??? They are the big players with the biggest guns, thats why they are the ones with permanent seats in the SC. Why does UN send out 'peacekeeping' forces? This is to stop others from attacking countries too small to defend themselves or to ensure that military violence does not escalate.
Although today, countries have reached an unprecedented level of co-operation as compared to in the past, history has shown that war can never be eliminated.
Gulf War:
Kuwait did not have a strong armed forces, and Iraq attacked it, which caused a US-led coalition to come to its rescue. If kuwait had a proper armed force in the first place able to at least fight back a bit, I doubt Iraq would have chosen to attack Kuwait in the first place.