PDA

View Full Version : Rank the Top 10 Most Powerful Countries



zhaoyun
05-12-2015, 06:29 AM
How would you rank the current top 10 most powerful countries in the world? Taking into account all measure of power from military to economic to industrial to scientific to the ability to mobilize resources? Here is my ranking.

1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Japan
5. India
6. Germany
7. Brazil
8. UK
9. France
10. South Korea

StonyArabia
05-12-2015, 06:33 AM
How would you rank the current top 10 most powerful countries in the world? Taking into account all measure of power from military to economic to industrial to scientific to the ability to mobilize resources? Here is my ranking.

1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Japan
5. India
6. Germany
7. Brazil
8. UK
9. France
10. South Korea


From all those countries I like Brazil and India. The other nations I don't really like. I think Brazil would be third the way it seems to be going, and India third. I do respect China, not so much Japan and South Korea they are basically castrated nations, no offense to anyone.

Prisoner Of Ice
05-12-2015, 06:33 AM
1. USA
2. Russia
3. China
4. Germany
5. Japan
6. UK
7. France
8. Denmark
9. Spain
10. South Korea

Maximilian
05-12-2015, 06:57 AM
1. Libya
2. Nigeria
3. Somalia
4. Mali
5. Ghana
6. Mexico
7. Guatemala
8. El Salvador
9. Random Caribbean islands
10. Random West African shitholes

Their impact on the 1st world disparate to their achievement is impressive.
Meanwhile the west displays a distinct lack of power against these invaders.

Ctwentysevenj
05-12-2015, 08:41 AM
http://www.richestlifestyle.com/most-industrialized-countries-in-the-world/2/

Ctwentysevenj
05-12-2015, 08:49 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qo0pHwWD6cE/VH4b8jjGy-I/AAAAAAAA4vw/QhePjt2VTl0/s1600/GDP2015forecasts.png

Ctwentysevenj
05-12-2015, 08:54 AM
http://static.businessinsider.com/image/53bf14c96bb3f7e131e33651/image.jpg

poiuytrewq0987
05-12-2015, 09:34 AM
1. USA

http://www.guerrillaexplorer.com/wp-content/uploads/U.S.-Empire.jpg

The USA is the undisputed political, economic and military power. It will continue to be the case for the next fifty years even with China's supposed rise.

2. UK and core Commonwealth nations (Australia, Canada and NZ)

http://iai.tv/assets/Uploads/_resampled/CroppedImage608342-on-imperialism.jpg

Britain and allied Commonwealth nations make up the world's second largest economy if we exclude China, their military is of unparalleled quality and in many ways our equals, and they wield huge political influence but have been unwilling to use it lately.

3. France

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/De_Gaulle_shot0064.png

France possesses one of the world's most powerful navies, have an economy that is in lockstep with Britain, and wields significant political clout in North Africa and the Middle East.

4. China

http://imperialsm-by-brady.wikispaces.com/file/view/china_cartoon.gif/59234358/china_cartoon.gif

China is a dragon still rising but not quite there yet with the economy yet to reach first world standards, the military still of poor quality compared to Western nations, but wields very significant political clout.

5. Japan

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xKjGLSw9xgU/VLfX8k9fGBI/AAAAAAAA57s/xE1Onh9aPlY/s1600/carriercompare.jpg

Japan is the world's third largest economy, have a technologically advanced and capable military including one of the world's best navies but its military and political influence are restrained by anti-war principles.

6. Russia

http://www.arcticphoto.co.uk/Pix/RU/02/RUS2003-20_P.JPG

Russia is a technological powerhouse although a declining one at that, it possesses the world's largest stockpile of nuclear bombs, but the demographic is aging and the country rapidly reaching pariah status, all guarantee diminished Russian influence in the world that no bomb can change. The economy is still mired in Soviet inefficiency and the 90s privatization leading to the creation of state capitalism, essentially, a dressed up Stalinist economy.

7. Germany

http://media.economist.com/images/images-magazine/2011/03/12/ld/20110312_ldp001.jpg

Germany is the undisputed economic and political leader in Europe but because of losing WW2, much of the influence they should possess naturally is restrained and often only directed toward helping other Europeans rather than themselves.

8. South Korea

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AL440A_ebers_G_20100429180037.jpg

South Korea is East Asia's second technological powerhouse behind Japan but its potential is limited by the nearly 25 million Koreans trapped under the cliquish rule of the Kim Jongs in North Korea.

9. Turkey

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Images/Books/CagaptayTurkeyBookCoverLoRes.jpg

Turkey is a rising power in Europe and the Middle East, with a steady demographic growth compared to the rest of Europe, a rapidly improving military-industrial complex, and an economy growing at lightspeed, all guarantee the restoration of Turkey to great power status.

10. India?



They're a disordered, and weaker version of China whose potential is still very far out of reach.

or for the tenth position - Brazil?

Brazil's economy still have huge problems, problems that severely limit it from realizing its potential in ways that are worse than India because India's economy is actually growing at a much quicker pace. That said, they do have a higher quality demographic compared to India's and the military is possibly better than theirs. The only difference that tips the balance in India's favor is nuclear weapons.

Mortimer
05-12-2015, 10:02 AM
How would you rank the current top 10 most powerful countries in the world? Taking into account all measure of power from military to economic to industrial to scientific to the ability to mobilize resources? Here is my ranking.

1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Japan
5. India
6. Germany
7. Brazil
8. UK
9. France
10. South Korea

good thread agree with your ranking. usa and china are two mightiest nations on earth, also china surpassed the usa as biggest world economy but the usa has lots of nukes and stronger military so i would put them ahead of china slightly. china is second. prisoner of ice and some others didnt mentioned india but it should be definitely in the top 10 10th Country by GDP sometimes in G8+5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G8 and strong military, alot of nukes and in scientific field they send a mars mission (or was it just a space mission).

Tekken
05-12-2015, 12:13 PM
Lets stick to top 5. Easier.
A. Superpowers
1. USA
2. China.

B. Great Powers
3. Germany/Japan/Russia = (Equal in their respective spheres of influence).
4. France/UK/South Korea = Equal
5. Brazil, India = Could easily get to spot #4 if they fixed their social problems.

zhaoyun
05-12-2015, 04:50 PM
Lets stick to top 5. Easier.
A. Superpowers
1. USA
2. China.

B. Great Powers
3. Germany/Japan/Russia = (Equal in their respective spheres of influence).
4. France/UK/South Korea = Equal
5. Brazil, India = Could easily get to spot #4 if they fixed their social problems.

Generally a good categorization of the powers. What makes it so hard to compare is the vastly different geographical sizes, resources and socio-economic situations of the different powers. Russia for example, is much poorer per capita wise than Germany and Japan (though the population difference isn't as big), but it commands a VAST continent sized territory that stretches from Europe to the Far East, that alone allows it to wield much more power than Germany and Japan. In addition, Russia still fields the world's second most powerful military (though China may surpass them in 10 years), so I think Russia should be a step ahead of Germany and Japan (two countries that punch above their weight, but are limited due to their small landmass).

India too is hard to quantify. It certainly has advancement in a field of industries, and it is a huge and massive country with a population over a billion and a large territory. However, it is vastly underdeveloped in so many ways, and still far from it's potential. It's hard to say that a country like South Korea is more "powerful" than India though it's Per capita strengths are so much ahead, but it is so tiny in comparison. So again, this is a challenging list to generate.

Dylan
05-12-2015, 06:25 PM
How would you rank the current top 10 most powerful countries in the world? Taking into account all measure of power from military to economic to industrial to scientific to the ability to mobilize resources? Here is my ranking.

1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Japan
5. India
6. Germany
7. Brazil
8. UK
9. France
10. South Korea

I'm not sure if I'd put Japan so high, simply because they lack a real military. But they're ranked so highly in everything else that its difficult to pick out where it fits

Dylan
05-12-2015, 06:26 PM
1. Libya
2. Nigeria
3. Somalia
4. Mali
5. Ghana
6. Mexico
7. Guatemala
8. El Salvador
9. Random Caribbean islands
10. Random West African shitholes

Their impact on the 1st world disparate to their achievement is impressive.
Meanwhile the west displays a distinct lack of power against these invaders.

you know damn well this is bs

Geni
05-12-2015, 06:45 PM
1. Albania
2. Albania
3. Albani
4. Albania
5. Albania
6. Great republic of Pushtec
7. Epirotes (albanians of south Albania that declared grecs for 300 Euro per month )
8. Megaloidiotis Greece
9. Bosnia Hercegovina (Serbian side)
10. Serbians with true illyrian origine

DarknessInside
05-12-2015, 09:07 PM
1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Germany
5. Japan
6. UK
7. France
8. Brazil
9. South Korea
10. India

curupira
05-13-2015, 12:04 AM
I'd place Israel somewhere among the top 5.



How would you rank the current top 10 most powerful countries in the world? Taking into account all measure of power from military to economic to industrial to scientific to the ability to mobilize resources? Here is my ranking.

1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Japan
5. India
6. Germany
7. Brazil
8. UK
9. France
10. South Korea

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 12:08 AM
I'm not sure if I'd put Japan so high, simply because they lack a real military. But they're ranked so highly in everything else that its difficult to pick out where it fits

Japan does have a military, it's just called a self defense force, but it is more competent than the vast majority of "militaries" in the world. Japan is also the world's 3rd largest economy and has a population of 130 Million, and is amongst the most technologically advanced states. So it's capabilities definitely allow it to rank higher than any other state on the list except for the big 3 (USA, China, Russia). Japan is definitely stronger than Germany, the UK, France, India, Brazil, etc.

curupira
05-13-2015, 12:09 AM
I agree with the Israeli military expert Martin van Creveld when he said the following:


"Our armed forces are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that this will happen before Israel goes under."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/21/israelandthepalestinians.bookextracts

In this world, technology is what counts mostly. Israel is said to have from 200 to 400 nuclear warheads, nuclear suitcases, neutron bombs. Which isn't hard to believe. Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer, Leo Szilard, Edward Teller (the father of the hydrogen bomb), Samuel Cohen (the father of the neutron bomb), were all Jews and comitted to world Jewry. Edward Teller especially. The Israeli Air Force is one of the most sophisticated in the world. I wouldn't doubt their capability to hit any target anywhere in the world, or act covertly under the flag of another country, as Jews can be quite powerful and influential in key countries (nearly half of the US top 50 billionaires are Jews and roughly 40% of their Nobel Prize winners; in the UK Jews comprise the largest group among the richest Britons; etc). They have know how at very high levels, flexibility, and a strong sense of identity which is thousands of years old. International Jewry influence extends all over the world, a very powerful network of connections, being infiltrated in key positions everywhere, which makes them not only less vulnerable to attacks, but also capable of having access to any significant new technological development.

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 12:10 AM
I'd place Israel somewhere among the top 5.

No. Israel has a population of 9 Million people, 20% of which are Israeli Arabs, a minority at odds with the Jewish population. Israel punches far above it's weight, but it cannot be compared to real great powers, it doesn't have the resources or strength.

RMuller
05-13-2015, 12:17 AM
TOP 5

1. USA
2.China
3.Russia
4.Japan
5.Germany

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 12:24 AM
I agree with the Israeli military expert Martin van Creveld when he said the following:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/21/israelandthepalestinians.bookextracts

In this world, technology is what counts mostly. Israel is said to have from 200 to 400 nuclear warheads, nuclear suitcases, neutron bombs. Which isn't hard to believe. Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer, Leo Szilard, Edward Teller (the father of the hydrogen bomb), Samuel Cohen (the father of the neutron bomb), were all Jews and comitted to world Jewry. Edward Teller especially. The Israeli Air Force is one of the most sophisticated in the world. I wouldn't doubt their capability to hit any target anywhere in the world, or act covertly under the flag of another country, as Jews can be quite powerful and influential in key countries (nearly half of the US top 50 billionaires are Jews and roughly 40% of their Nobel Prize winners; in the UK Jews comprise the largest group among the richest Britons; etc). They have know how at very high levels, flexibility, and a strong sense of identity which is thousands of years old. International Jewry influence extends all over the world, a very powerful network of connections, being infiltrated in key positions everywhere, which makes them not only less vulnerable to attacks, but also capable of having access to any significant new technological development.

Israel's power is FAR EXAGGERATED. Also, he speaks as if Israel is operating in a bubble. It is a small country, VERY small, in size and population. Yes, because of many reasons, it punches FAR ABOVE it's weight, but it cannot escape the fact that it is a VERY SMALL COUNTRY.

Israel doesn't belong in the top 10.

curupira
05-13-2015, 12:31 AM
Israel's power is FAR EXAGGERATED

I don't think so. I guess it is underestimated and poorly understood. I am speaking of the international Jewry/Israel complex here. Israel is but one the faces of it.

By the way, van Creveld is a teacher at American Military academies, not a student.


Van Creveld is the author of seventeen books on military history and strategy, of which Command in War (1985), Supplying War: Logistics from Wallenstein to Patton (1977, 2nd edition 2004), The Transformation of War (1991), The Sword and the Olive (1998) and The Rise and Decline of the State (1999) are among the best known. Van Creveld has lectured or taught at many strategic institutes in the Western world, including the U.S. Naval War College.

Of particular significance is his 1991 book The Transformation of War (UK: On Future War), which was translated into French, German (New German edition in 2004), Russian, and Spanish.

The book's significance is attested to by the fact that until the middle of 2008, it was included on the list of required reading for United States Army officers, and (with Sun Tzu and Clausewitz) the third non-American entry on the list.[4] Van Creveld's Supplying War: Logistics from Wallenstein to Patton is now included on the list as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld

Armand_Duval
05-13-2015, 12:35 AM
My selection.

1.-USA.
2.-China.
3.-Germany.
4.-Japan.
5.-France.
6.-England.
7.-Canada.
8.-Spain.
9.-Brazil.
10.-Italy.

While many mention India among top ten IMHO I wouldn't change living In Mexico for Living in India.

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 12:40 AM
I don't think so. I guess it is underestimated and poorly understood. I am speaking of the international Jewry/Israel complex here. Israel is but one the faces of it.

By the way, van Creveld is a teacher at American Military academies, not a student.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld

I thought you may have been referring to the strength of the Zionist lobby, but again, that's hard to really quantify and measure as a status of Israel's power, it's more still a measure of America's power being used for Israel's benefit. But I understand what you mean.

I still don't consider Israel amongst the top 10 most powerful, probably top 20. But that's another list.

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 12:41 AM
My selection.

1.-USA.
2.-China.
3.-Germany.
4.-Japan.
5.-France.
6.-England.
7.-Canada.
8.-Spain.
9.-Brazil.
10.-Italy.

While many mention India among top ten IMHO I wouldn't change living In Mexico for Living in India.

Well, yeah, we are just talking about comprehensive national strength here not per capita living standards. By that measure, I'd rather live in Switzerland than the United States, but Switzerland cannot be compared to the US as a great power.

But I think Mexico belongs in the top 20 list of powers, if we are talking about that measure.

Balmung
05-13-2015, 01:08 AM
Scientifically, top 5 with the most papers.

1. USA
2. China
3. UK
4. Germany
5. Japan

Military might

1. USA
2. Russia
3. China
4. India
5. UK

As for political influence personally I wouldn't put Brazil anywhere in the top 5. Currently that would look something like.

1. USA
2. EU
3. China
4. India
5. Japan

Top 10 according to the Atlantic Council based on GDP, defense spending, technology etc.

1. USA
2. China
3. India
4. Japan
5. Germany
6. UK
7. France
8. Russia
9. Brazil
10. Italy

BeerBaron
05-13-2015, 01:52 AM
Lets stick to top 5. Easier.
A. Superpowers
1. USA
2. China.

B. Great Powers
3. Germany/Japan/Russia = (Equal in their respective spheres of influence).
4. France/UK/South Korea = Equal
5. Brazil, India = Could easily get to spot #4 if they fixed their social problems.

China isnt a superpower, it cant project power anywhere in the world militarily, economically, AND culturally.

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 01:57 AM
China isnt a superpower, it cant project power anywhere in the world militarily, economically, AND culturally.

Economically, yes. But in the other two, it lacks significantly behind the US.

Gooding
05-13-2015, 02:10 AM
Top 05 Countries in the World today
#1: The United States of America
#2: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland/ The British Commonwealth of Nations
#3: The People's Republic of China
#4: The Russian Federation
#5: Democratic People's Republic of Korea ( North Korea)

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 02:15 AM
Top 05 Countries in the World today
#1: The United States of America
#2: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland/ The British Commonwealth of Nations
#3: The People's Republic of China
#4: The Russian Federation
#5: Democratic People's Republic of Korea ( North Korea)

With all due respect, there is no way that the UK is more powerful than China currently, and North Korea is nowhere near the top 5 IMO.

Dylan
05-13-2015, 02:20 AM
Japan does have a military, it's just called a self defense force, but it is more competent than the vast majority of "militaries" in the world. Japan is also the world's 3rd largest economy and has a population of 130 Million, and is amongst the most technologically advanced states. So it's capabilities definitely allow it to rank higher than any other state on the list except for the big 3 (USA, China, Russia). Japan is definitely stronger than Germany, the UK, France, India, Brazil, etc.

well argued. personally in my list i would have placed india above it, especially since its up and coming whereas Japan sorta peaked in the 80's, but your reasoning was logical.

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 02:22 AM
well argued. personally in my list i would have placed india above it, especially since its up and coming whereas Japan sorta peaked in the 80's, but your reasoning was logical.

India will likely get there 10 years from now. But I still give Japan the edge. Again, this is hard to quantify because the contenders are so dissimilar and there are many factors to take into account.

Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin
05-13-2015, 02:23 AM
top10 most power full nations.
1. United States
2 United States
3 United States
4 China
5China
6United States
7China
8China
9China
10Canada

Gooding
05-13-2015, 02:33 AM
With all due respect, there is no way that the UK is more powerful than China currently, and North Korea is nowhere near the top 5 IMO.

All right, bearing in mind that the Queen is titular head of the British Commonwealth countries such as Canada and Australia and also considering the cultural influence exerted by Great Britain, both directly and through these countries, I will in my turn respectfully disagree. It was not that long ago that our president lauded the "special relationship" that was enjoyed by the US and the UK after the 9- 11 terrorist attacks and how the U.K. was among the first to rally to us in support. I do think that underestimating the U.K. is fallacious.

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 02:35 AM
All right, bearing in mind that the Queen is titular head of the British Commonwealth countries such as Canada and Australia and also considering the cultural influence exerted by Great Britain, both directly and through these countries, I will in my turn respectfully disagree. It was not that long ago that our president lauded the "special relationship" that was enjoyed by the US and the UK after the 9- 11 terrorist attacks and how the U.K. was among the first to rally to us in support. I do think that underestimating the U.K. is fallacious.

Hence why the UK is still in my top 10. But when one considers all the measures of power, it's been surpassed by a good number of other powers.

Weedman
05-13-2015, 02:51 AM
How would you rank the current top 10 most powerful countries in the world? Taking into account all measure of power from military to economic to industrial to scientific to the ability to mobilize resources? Here is my ranking.

1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Japan
5. India
6. Germany
7. Brazil
8. UK
9. France
10. South Korea you forgot the ISIL Caliphate

I don't mean this in any fucking good fucking way at all, but the truth is

1.no one wants to fuck with them at all

and even the U.S. , (or maybe just fucking Obama?:rolleyes:), is too scared to go to war , for the first time in it's fucking history

2. definitely have mobility of resources and people/crazy fucks

3. have stolen, and ,now, control, a certain amount of the oil in the region, and are selling it on the black market

and not to mention they even have Saudi Arabia scared of them and Saudi princes/ noble upper class families also giving them financial resources among other things

zhaoyun
05-13-2015, 03:16 AM
you forgot the ISIL Caliphate

I don't mean this in any fucking good fucking way at all, but the truth is

1.no one wants to fuck with them at all

and even the U.S. , (or maybe just fucking Obama?:rolleyes:), is too scared to go to war , for the first time in it's fucking history

2. definitely have mobility of resources and people/crazy fucks

3. have stolen, and ,now, control, a certain amount of the oil in the region, and are selling it on the black market

and not to mention they even have Saudi Arabia scared of them and Saudi princes/ noble upper class families also giving them financial resources among other things

Nah, ISIS is just a bunch of nutty savages, and I still stand by wanting to kill every LAST ONE of their followers.

BeerBaron
05-13-2015, 03:37 AM
Top 05 Countries in the World today
#1: The United States of America
#2: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland/ The British Commonwealth of Nations
#3: The People's Republic of China
#4: The Russian Federation
#5: Democratic People's Republic of Korea ( North Korea)

North Korea lol North Korea isnt even a regional power.

mikhail
05-13-2015, 03:45 AM
1.) Israel

Everyone else is irrelevant

Gooding
05-13-2015, 03:57 AM
North Korea lol North Korea isnt even a regional power.

North Korea was enough to make Obama shit himself. Full stop.

Gooding
05-13-2015, 04:10 AM
North Korea lol North Korea isnt even a regional power.

So, what's North Korea been up to? http://www.nknews.org/

BeerBaron
05-13-2015, 04:25 AM
Lest we forget, of course, that not only does North Korea have nukes that they seem eager to deploy, Iran is also working on a nuclear program despite sanctions and before somebody comes in with a remark about how " weak" Russia is, let's just say that Vladimir Putin is having his way three ways to Sunday in his own little sphere of influence. I stand by my opinions. Great Britain has powerful allies and she's no slouch, herself. North Korea may " not even be a regional power," but apparently she has China guarding her back.

Building a nuke doesnt make a nation powerful, loads of nations that dont have nukes have demonstrated the ability to quickly build and deploy accurate nuclear warheads.....Japan for example.

So lets look at N. Koreas attributes.
-shit house economy
-moderate population
-crumbling infrastructure
-massive corruption
-controlled communication
-obsolete military, large in man power doesnt make something strong, especially if people want to eat in north korea they join the military

its certainly not an african "country" but in the top 10 most powerful, please :bored:

as for nations "watching their backs" because of north korea, sure, nutters un nerve people. the malnourished starving homeless person un nerves people as well, and hes got a knife. is he dangerous, could be, on a small scale. is he powerful, absolutely not.

but north korea, just like the homeless guy, tends to stfu when someone puts a dollar in their soup can.

Gooding
05-13-2015, 04:41 AM
Building a nuke doesnt make a nation powerful, loads of nations that dont have nukes have demonstrated the ability to quickly build and deploy accurate nuclear warheads.....Japan for example.

So lets look at N. Koreas attributes.
-shit house economy
-moderate population
-crumbling infrastructure
-massive corruption
-controlled communication
-obsolete military, large in man power doesnt make something strong, especially if people want to eat in north korea they join the military

its certainly not an african "country" but in the top 10 most powerful, please :bored:

as for nations "watching their backs" because of north korea, sure, nutters un nerve people. the malnourished starving homeless person un nerves people as well, and hes got a knife. is he dangerous, could be, on a small scale. is he powerful, absolutely not.

but north korea, just like the homeless guy, tends to stfu when someone puts a dollar in their soup can.

Granted that North Korea is a poor state with a terrible infrastructure, massive corruption and an outdated military. I'll grant that the leadership is insane, as well. Do I still say that North Korea qualifies as the Top Five? Take away Russia as a potential source of support ( China, too, although I'm not sure how cozy China and Korea are these days), take away all of that and I'll agree that North Korea is just an insignificant backwater with a loudmouth yapping like an impotent Chihuahua. I'll also mock Obama for his efforts to appease the North Koreans. As uncertain as things are these days and with an understanding of history ( Hitler looked pretty impotent too, in his early days, just like Germany looked like a beaten joke), I would say it's not a good idea to underestimate any threat to the West, because there are millions of people out there drooling to see the West fall in a mushroom cloud.

Buchan
05-13-2015, 05:23 PM
How would you rank the current top 10 most powerful countries in the world? Taking into account all measure of power from military to economic to industrial to scientific to the ability to mobilize resources? Here is my ranking.

1. USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. Japan
5. India
6. Germany
7. Brazil
8. UK
9. France
10. South Korea

The most important facet of power other than military capability is influence, something that many of the rising economic powers do not possess currently.

Is measuring and comparing the ability to wage war even meaningful in the modern world? Equidistant nuclear warfare negates advantages in manpower and deployment capability. It also makes the prospect of unrestrained war between developed powers unthinkable.

Odin
02-06-2018, 10:06 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xrXy6WoigM

Acquisit0r
02-06-2018, 10:13 PM
1) USA
...
...
...
...
2) a few wannabe's like China, Russia, UK..

Marinus
02-06-2018, 11:05 PM
#1 USA is top on all accounts, soft power(media, pop ""culture"", diplomacy), military power, economic power. It is declining.

#2 China/Russia, outside of their spheres of influence they don't have that much influence but as a block they're very powerful, this is mostly China by itself TBH but Russia has the largest stock pile of nukes in the world. Not that they'll nuke anyone but Mutually Assured Destruction is something to think about.

#3 Germany, as long as the EU does not implode/Japan it's military is the size of France's AND Britain's militaries COMBINED very well equipped also, lacks nukes though.

#4 India, it's a counter balance to China, if push comes to shove the US and NATO will aid it against China. Also has a respectable nuclear arsenal, alright military.

#4 Britain, has the most soft power in the world after America, world class military which has been cut rather thin at the moment BUT is highly mobile and the only one in the EU capable of deploying a significant fighting force overseas (by itself), rich, highly advanced but smallish nuclear arsenal, most bases around the world after the US, if it still had executive power over the Empir.... I mean Commonwealth then it would be #2, well a boy can only dream.

#4 France, it'sthe Reic... ahem.. the EU's sole nuclear power (Brexit means Brexit!)

#5 Pakistan, it's India's natural counter balance, China might help it against India, it also has some pull in the eastern-middle east, the US uses Pakistan for their supply lines in Afghanistan. Also has a respectable nuclear arsenal, has muslim support across the world.

Odin
02-10-2018, 12:34 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtvR5CTO2mk

Slavic Italian
02-10-2018, 01:55 AM
1. USA
2. China
3. UK
4. Germany
5. Russia
6. France
7. India
8. Israel
9. Iran
10. Japan

Look for France and Germany to rise. The USA to fall. UK and Russia will remain about the same. China will rise as well. Saudi Arabia will make the list in another ten years.

Kess
03-20-2020, 10:51 AM
1- USA
2- CHINA
3- RUSSIA
4- UK
5- INDIA
6- FRANCE
7- BRAZIL
8- JAPAN
9 -GERMANY
10- TURKEY

Japan and germany ranked at the bottom because they don't have fully independent armies since end of ww2

sean
03-20-2020, 10:53 AM
1. United States
2. United Kingdom
3. China
4. Russia
5. Canada
6. Germany
7. France
8. Australia
9. Japan
10. Israel

Ülev
03-20-2020, 12:31 PM
USA
United Kingdom
Vatican City
Germany
France
China
Russia
Israel
Brazil
Kekistan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepe_the_Frog)

Kosteece
08-17-2021, 04:05 PM
It is military capacity, technological advancement, agricultural self-sustenance, energy autonomy.
Atomic bombs would be a criterion, but three bombs onto Israel and Jews are exterminated in a sec.

The USA is undoubtedly first.
It has the best military capacity, most technological advancement, the best agricultural self-sustenance and energy autonomy.
Second/third place is between China and Russia. Russia has no agricultural self-sustenance and China no energy autonomy. Even though Chinese outnumber Russians 10 to 1 population-wise, Russians have triple the atomic bombs.
In a war between those, I would bet on the Russians.
Fourth/fifth place is between the UK and France.
Middle powers with greater military capacity than Nazis or Harakiris.
Sixth/seventh place is between Japan and Germany.
8th place is India.
Who's gonna fight against 1.3 billion 5'6" hindustanis?
9th/10th place is between Italy and Brazil.
Noone is really scared of them.
Brazil, though, has great potential for places 4/5.
Southern Euros and mulattos is the hindrance to getting there.

Blondie
08-17-2021, 04:38 PM
1. USA
2. China (these both are global superpower)
3. Germany (very large political and economical power as the leader of EU)
4. Japan (advanced economy and scientific world like robot and nano technology)
5. Russia (very strong military and large nuclear arsenal)
6. France (large political power because of EU, also nuclear power)
7. UK (significalt global economic and political power because of Commonwealth)
8. South Korea (its like Japan but not so powerful)
9. Brazil (stronger than India)
10. India (it's not a great power but a very divided country with poor economy)

JamesBond007
08-17-2021, 04:43 PM
1. USA
2. China (these both are global superpower)
3. Germany (very large political and economical power as the leader of EU)
4. Japan (advanced economy and scientific world like robot and nano technology)
5. Russia (very strong military and large nuclear arsenal)
6. France (large political power because of EU, also nuclear power)
7. UK (significalt global economic and political power because of Commonwealth)
8. South Korea (its like Japan but not so powerful)
9. Brazil (stronger than India)
10. India (it's not a great power but a very divided country with poor economy)




Germany vs the UK/Britain :

So I’ll assume that:

Nothing is prohibited.
Nobody is allowed allies.
There are no other conflicts either countries are involved in: they can both entirely focus on one another.
There are no geopolitical or domestic political repercussions for military actions, and both country’s populations are very bloodthirsty.
Germany and the United Kingdom simultaneously declare war on one another and are mutually pursuing a “debellatio” philosophy.
I am British, but I will try to avoid all bias. I’m not going to analyse both sides military because the question doesn’t ask for that: I will tell you my expectation under the rules I laid out above.
To win, one side must occupy the other side’s capital city.

Firstly, the British would use their nuclear strike capability. I will assume that one Vanguard submarine is active at the time of the war declaration. That submarine can now launch 64 Trident D5 455-kiloton nuclear warheads at Germany.

I will assume that the Patriot missile defences in Germany intercepts half of these incoming nuclear missiles and 32 of them hit their targets. I will assume these are military targets as well as major industrial bases integral to the German war effort. I would make an educated guess that this would result in 3–4,000,000 civilian deaths and 4–5,000,000 civilians would be seriously injured, dying in a few days without medical help. The German government and all emergency services are now completely destroyed. The German professional army, air force and navy are all pulverised. Two or three submarines and one or two surface ships could hope to survive. If these ships don’t surrender to the Royal Navy they can either stay in port or venture out and make an attempt to run the Royal Navy blockade, although I don’t know how successful this would turn out. The air force is probably non-existant. What is left of it and able to get off the ground would have extremely limited arms and no access to reserves. I will assume 10% survived, can be manned, crewed and still have access to some armament. The German Army would probably not exist. What was left of it would be trying to help the survivors of the nuclear attack.

In the meantime, the United Kingdom can close its navy in, particularly its two aircraft carriers to fly F35s in sorties and destroy whatever remained of the German military. This can go on for a couple of days to a week or so, but the British need to exploit the breakdown of the German state. As soon as the nuclear strike had crippled the German military, the Royal Navy armada would begin to assemble in the southwestern Baltic, east of Jutland. This would constitute 2 aircraft carriers, 6 destroyers, 12 frigates, 6 amphibious assault ships, and numerous other ships.

The UK’s merchant fleet can be harnessed to assist the Royal Navy, as they begin landing troops in Northern Germany around Lübeck. Before conscription, around 80,000 troops could be landed in a dozen or so waves. With F35s and Typhoons supplying close air support the British Army could, with a relative lack of resistance, march towards Berlin.

Until the British landing at Lübeck, the British would have experienced casualties of one or two if an F35 had been shot down running a sortie over Germany. The very worst possibility would be the loss of a frigate, although I very much so doubt that would be possible considering the air defences of the Type 45 and the lack of a German military.

Another problem for the British is the 2 Type 212 submarines roaming the North Sea and Baltic Sea. I expect that the German surface combatants that had run the blockade would have been sunk by British submarines or ships in the Baltic or the natural chokepoint around Jutland. But that chokepoint goes both ways: I believe there would be a relatively equal chance that the ASW components of the Royal Navy could locate the remaining submarines and destroy them or that the Type 212s could bring a victim down with them: perhaps a merchant ship, and a frigate. But its much more likely that the two fleets wouldn’t come close enough to sink one another, or that the subs would be located and captured.

The British Army, marching through an unprecedented hellscape, would face limited guerilla actions. Ambushes from militias and whatever remained of the German Armed Forces could likely kill anywhere from a few dozen to a few hundred British soldiers on the way to Berlin, however, the British troops would still make it to Berlin.

It would take around 4 to 5 hours for British tanks to reach Berlin. Assuming the UK exploits the few days where Germany is most in disarray, they can expect to win the engagement with the rules introduced within a day. Likely, the UK would face up to 50 casualties during the entire war. A further dozen or so could die if a warship was sunk by a submarine during the assembling of the armada. In comparison, Germany would face up to 9,000,000 dead.

Tl;dr: the United Kingdom wins.



https://www.quora.com/Who-would-win-a-war-between-U-K-and-Germany

Now if allies were allowed then the USA would probably back the UK over Germany most likely so on and so forth etc..

Arūnas
08-17-2021, 04:58 PM
1. Israel
2. Israel
3. Israel
4. Israel
5. Israel
6. Israel

Blondie
08-17-2021, 04:58 PM
Germany vs the UK/Britain

This comparison makes no sense, because Britain has no enough land force to invade Germany, also Germany has no enough naval force to invade Britain. What do you want with nuclear bombs? 1. Germany also has nuclear technology, they can make thousands of such bombs if they want, 2. this both country is very close to each other, if you destroy Germany with nuclear bombs then the radioactive cloud will reach England (and most Europe) as well.

Kosteece
08-17-2021, 05:04 PM
Germany vs the UK/Britain :

So I’ll assume that:

Nothing is prohibited.
Nobody is allowed allies.
There are no other conflicts either countries are involved in: they can both entirely focus on one another.
There are no geopolitical or domestic political repercussions for military actions, and both country’s populations are very bloodthirsty.
Germany and the United Kingdom simultaneously declare war on one another and are mutually pursuing a “debellatio” philosophy.
I am British, but I will try to avoid all bias. I’m not going to analyse both sides military because the question doesn’t ask for that: I will tell you my expectation under the rules I laid out above.
To win, one side must occupy the other side’s capital city.

Firstly, the British would use their nuclear strike capability. I will assume that one Vanguard submarine is active at the time of the war declaration. That submarine can now launch 64 Trident D5 455-kiloton nuclear warheads at Germany.

I will assume that the Patriot missile defences in Germany intercepts half of these incoming nuclear missiles and 32 of them hit their targets. I will assume these are military targets as well as major industrial bases integral to the German war effort. I would make an educated guess that this would result in 3–4,000,000 civilian deaths and 4–5,000,000 civilians would be seriously injured, dying in a few days without medical help. The German government and all emergency services are now completely destroyed. The German professional army, air force and navy are all pulverised. Two or three submarines and one or two surface ships could hope to survive. If these ships don’t surrender to the Royal Navy they can either stay in port or venture out and make an attempt to run the Royal Navy blockade, although I don’t know how successful this would turn out. The air force is probably non-existant. What is left of it and able to get off the ground would have extremely limited arms and no access to reserves. I will assume 10% survived, can be manned, crewed and still have access to some armament. The German Army would probably not exist. What was left of it would be trying to help the survivors of the nuclear attack.

In the meantime, the United Kingdom can close its navy in, particularly its two aircraft carriers to fly F35s in sorties and destroy whatever remained of the German military. This can go on for a couple of days to a week or so, but the British need to exploit the breakdown of the German state. As soon as the nuclear strike had crippled the German military, the Royal Navy armada would begin to assemble in the southwestern Baltic, east of Jutland. This would constitute 2 aircraft carriers, 6 destroyers, 12 frigates, 6 amphibious assault ships, and numerous other ships.

The UK’s merchant fleet can be harnessed to assist the Royal Navy, as they begin landing troops in Northern Germany around Lübeck. Before conscription, around 80,000 troops could be landed in a dozen or so waves. With F35s and Typhoons supplying close air support the British Army could, with a relative lack of resistance, march towards Berlin.

Until the British landing at Lübeck, the British would have experienced casualties of one or two if an F35 had been shot down running a sortie over Germany. The very worst possibility would be the loss of a frigate, although I very much so doubt that would be possible considering the air defences of the Type 45 and the lack of a German military.

Another problem for the British is the 2 Type 212 submarines roaming the North Sea and Baltic Sea. I expect that the German surface combatants that had run the blockade would have been sunk by British submarines or ships in the Baltic or the natural chokepoint around Jutland. But that chokepoint goes both ways: I believe there would be a relatively equal chance that the ASW components of the Royal Navy could locate the remaining submarines and destroy them or that the Type 212s could bring a victim down with them: perhaps a merchant ship, and a frigate. But its much more likely that the two fleets wouldn’t come close enough to sink one another, or that the subs would be located and captured.

The British Army, marching through an unprecedented hellscape, would face limited guerilla actions. Ambushes from militias and whatever remained of the German Armed Forces could likely kill anywhere from a few dozen to a few hundred British soldiers on the way to Berlin, however, the British troops would still make it to Berlin.

It would take around 4 to 5 hours for British tanks to reach Berlin. Assuming the UK exploits the few days where Germany is most in disarray, they can expect to win the engagement with the rules introduced within a day. Likely, the UK would face up to 50 casualties during the entire war. A further dozen or so could die if a warship was sunk by a submarine during the assembling of the armada. In comparison, Germany would face up to 9,000,000 dead.

Tl;dr: the United Kingdom wins.



https://www.quora.com/Who-would-win-a-war-between-U-K-and-Germany

Now if allies were allowed then the USA would probably back the UK over Germany most likely so on and so forth etc..


She's a non-intelligent woman.
No point in engaging with her, mate.
UK would win, but not so effortlessly as you make it seem.

Kosteece
08-17-2021, 05:06 PM
1. Israel
2. Israel
3. Israel
4. Israel
5. Israel
6. Israel

Netanyahu was overthrown, when Dems stole the election.
Israel is no major power, whatsoever.
Jewish bankers are, but bankers' power is not real power.

Blondie
08-17-2021, 05:08 PM
She's a non-intelligent woman.
No point in engaging with her, mate.
UK would win, but not so effortlessly as you make it seem.

Said by you who has no any argument only insults.

Kosteece
08-17-2021, 05:26 PM
Said by you who has no any argument only insults.

Woman, he told you that the UK HAS bombs, which can kill off millions of Germans within days.
Germany has no atomic bombs, and even if Southern "Germans" could build many, that would require time, which is vital.
If Germany had atomic bombs, the ranking would be different.
It does not.
There is no other argument.

Finnish Swede
08-17-2021, 06:13 PM
I would like to add one matter.

What kind of living conditions they (listed countries) can offer to their own citizens?

As in the end that means the most ... to most of us.

Blondie
08-17-2021, 11:36 PM
Woman, he told you that the UK HAS bombs, which can kill off millions of Germans within days.
Germany has no atomic bombs, and even if Southern "Germans" could build many, that would require time, which is vital.
If Germany had atomic bombs, the ranking would be different.
It does not.
There is no other argument.

And these bombs will kill british too, and make Britain unlivable. Nuclear bombs are not toys you mentally retarded, a nuclear strike (and you need many becaus Germany is a big country) will destroy the whole continent including Britain. And do you think other countries will let Britain to destroy their country with no reason? Or do you think the british people will let the british government to destroy Britain too because of radioactive cloud? Nuclear bombs are just deterrent weapons but nobody will use it in a real war, simple because everyone would die. It was the main reason (+ Hitler's phobia) that Germany didn't use their very large biological weapon arsenal in the end of the WW2.

Kosteece
08-18-2021, 03:55 AM
And these bombs will kill british too, and make Britain unlivable. Nuclear bombs are not toys you mentally retarded, a nuclear strike (and you need many becaus Germany is a big country) will destroy the whole continent including Britain. And do you think other countries will let Britain to destroy their country with no reason? Or do you think the british people will let the british government to destroy Britain too because of radioactive cloud? Nuclear bombs are just deterrent weapons but nobody will use it in a real war, simple because everyone would die. It was the main reason (+ Hitler's phobia) that Germany didn't use their very large biological weapon arsenal in the end of the WW2.
What nuclear cloud?
That is nonsense. Junk science.
The war is hypothetical.
Both Germany and the UK would avoid it, simply because it is not to their benefit.
Israel, in particular, could never use its bombs.
Some Americans or Russians or Chinese would survive the bombs.
No Jew would survive a strike of, let's say, three atomic bombs.

Blondie
08-18-2021, 07:32 AM
What nuclear cloud?
That is nonsense. Junk science.
The war is hypothetical.
Both Germany and the UK would avoid it, simply because it is not to their benefit.
Israel, in particular, could never use its bombs.
Some Americans or Russians or Chinese would survive the bombs.
No Jew would survive a strike of, let's say, three atomic bombs.

Science is not nonsense, and you cannot use mass destruction weapons because the enemy will also use it against you and as i said everyone would die. Every country has biological weapons, viral labs etc including Germany which can exterminate complete countries, not only the nuclear bombs can do that. That's why bringing such weapons to a military comparison makes no sense.

Mortimer
08-18-2021, 07:52 AM
USA
China
Russia /UK /France /Turkey [in no particular order]
India /Germany /Japan /Italy /Brazil [in no particular order]

Mortimer
08-18-2021, 07:53 AM
Science is not nonsense, and you cannot use mass destruction weapons because the enemy will also use it against you and as i said everyone would die. Every country has biological weapons, viral labs etc including Germany which can exterminate complete countries, not only the nuclear bombs can do that. That's why bringing such weapons to a military comparison makes no sense.

Germany has a very good economy but it is still secondary in sovereignty the UK is sovereign and has the commonwealth

Mortimer
08-18-2021, 07:56 AM
I would like to add one matter.

What kind of living conditions they (listed countries) can offer to their own citizens?

As in the end that means the most ... to most of us.

Yes that's a good idea but some countries have a high standard of living but have no power at all think of Southern Korea which is entirely a USA satellite

Blondie
08-18-2021, 08:01 AM
Germany has a very good economy but it is still secondary in sovereignty the UK is sovereign and has the commonwealth

In this comparison we analysed this situation without any allies, only UK and Germany alone.

Mortimer
08-18-2021, 08:03 AM
In this comparison we analysed this situation without any allies, only UK and Germany alone.

I think it is still the UK but germans advanced quite since the unification of two Germanys but the UK can project more power Germany still is a country limited in sovereignty do you understand what I mean?

Blondie
08-18-2021, 08:08 AM
I think it is still the UK but germans advanced quite since the unification of two Germanys but the UK can project more power Germany still is a country limited in sovereignty do you understand what I mean?

Yes and? So you mean Germany can't do anything because of that? By this logic Slovenia is stronger than Germany.

Mortimer
08-18-2021, 08:10 AM
Yes and? So you mean Germany can't do anything because of that? By this logic Slovenia is stronger than Germany.

Slovenia is not but turkey is Erdogan always bullies germans

Blondie
08-18-2021, 08:11 AM
Slovenia is not but turkey is Erdogan always bullies germans

Why not? You climed Germany can't do anything in a war because of it's limited sovereignty, Slovenia is completely free country, so by your logic Slovenia is stronger than Germany.

Mortimer
08-18-2021, 08:16 AM
Why not? You climed Germany can't do anything in a war because of it's limited sovereignty, Slovenia is completely free country, so by your logic Slovenia is stronger than Germany.

Slovenia is not a free country it is owned by the germans and Germany in return is controlled by the USA a satellite and France. I think Germany can do something in a war depending on against who but I didn't even meant a war I just meant Germany does not do anything if not approved by bigger powers like the US or France sometimes Germany assists only in war similar to Slovenia or Albania

Blondie
08-18-2021, 08:28 AM
Slovenia is not a free country it is owned by the germans and Germany in return is controlled by the USA a satellite and France. I think Germany can do something in a war depending on against who but I didn't even meant a war I just meant Germany does not do anything if not approved by bigger powers like the US or France sometimes Germany assists only in war similar to Slovenia or Albania

1. In a military comparison we analyse countries without any actual political thing.

2. Germany as leader of EU don't need any permission from others, german soldiers stationed in Baltic States and Balkans too. When i have been to Kosovo, i saw tons of german tanks and soldiers everywhere. Germany (and the EU) also maked such economic decisions what is negative to Britain and USA. Yes i kow there are american soldiers in Germany, but because the german government want it, Trump wanted to send them back home but Merkel paid americans to stay.

Mortimer
08-18-2021, 08:43 AM
1. In a military comparison we analyse countries without any actual political thing.

2. Germany as leader of EU don't need any permission from others, german soldiers stationed in Baltic States and Balkans too. When i have been to Kosovo, i saw tons of german tanks and soldiers everywhere. Germany (and the EU) also maked such economic decisions what is negative to Britain and USA. Yes i kow there are american soldiers in Germany, but because the german government want it, Trump wanted to send them back home but Merkel paid americans to stay.

Maybe I think Germany definitely gained much new influence in the past decades

Kosteece
08-18-2021, 04:49 PM
Science is not nonsense, and you cannot use mass destruction weapons because the enemy will also use it against you and as i said everyone would die. Every country has biological weapons, viral labs etc including Germany which can exterminate complete countries, not only the nuclear bombs can do that. That's why bringing such weapons to a military comparison makes no sense.
Nuclear clouds are nonsense.
And the fear of radioactivity, to boot.
What bio weapons?
No bio weapon has the destructive capacity of atomic bombs.
Two bombs onto Hamburg and Berlin, where real scumbag Germans live and Germany is over.
Unless you, germanised Kelts, were willing to fight for some Pruss-holes...
I wouldn't be surprised...
You make them money and they get to build wind farms...
Anywho, I digress.
Bio weapons can be destructive but not as lethal and devastating as atomic bombs.
And once barbos from the North would go the bio route, more atomic bombs would strike onto German and Keltic lands.
It'd be a shame for germanised Kelts, but it's been almost your decision to share your prosperity with barbos thus far.

Blondie
08-18-2021, 05:21 PM
Nuclear clouds are nonsense.
And the fear of radioactivity, to boot.
What bio weapons?
No bio weapon has the destructive capacity of atomic bombs.
Two bombs onto Hamburg and Berlin, where real scumbag Germans live and Germany is over.
Unless you, germanised Kelts, were willing to fight for some Pruss-holes...
I wouldn't be surprised...
You make them money and they get to build wind farms...
Anywho, I digress.
Bio weapons can be destructive but not as lethal and devastating as atomic bombs.
And once barbos from the North would go the bio route, more atomic bombs would strike onto German and Keltic lands.
It'd be a shame for germanised Kelts, but it's been almost your decision to share your prosperity with barbos thus far.

Calm down brownie :rotfl: Even swedes tasted the radioactive cloud when chernobyl exploded because of wind. You have no idea about the nuclear warfare. But enough some ballistic rocket to the british nuclear power plants and game over the whole island will be unlivable and there are such viruses which can exterminate the complete humanity and the german researches are on very advanced level in this scientific field:
https://www.insider.com/laboratory-on-a-german-island-is-experimenting-with-deadly-viruses-2019-10

Try to understand with your little brownie brain that using mass destruction weapons makes no sense because everyone would die. And what a lunatic disgusting person you are who want to kill millions of civilians instead of military targets. Shame on you ottoman rape product.

SouthDutch7991
08-18-2021, 05:44 PM
Calm down brownie :rotfl: Even swedes tasted the radioactive cloud when chernobyl exploded because of wind. You have no idea about the nuclear warfare. But enough some ballistic rocket to the british nuclear power plants and game over the whole island will be unlivable and there are such viruses which can exterminate the complete humanity and the german researches are on very advanced level in this scientific field:
https://www.insider.com/laboratory-on-a-german-island-is-experimenting-with-deadly-viruses-2019-10

Try to understand with your little brownie brain that using mass destruction weapons makes no sense because everyone would die. And what a lunatic disgusting person you are who want to kill millions of civilians instead of military targets. Shame on you ottoman rape product.

You shouldn't argue about things you don't know a lot about, no offense. Chernobyl being compared to a nuclear weapon is pretty silly, although of course it has been done so many times by a public with a horrifically bad understanding of how nuclear technology works. Fallout from an actual nuclear weapon will be the least of your worries in most cases that they would be used in real life. The scary stuff everyone talks about only really happens in a specific scenario where relatively weak bombs of an old design are used at or below ground level. Most nuclear weapons would be used in much higher yields and at altitudes where the dirt would not mix enough with an actual radioactive material to produce a significant fallout cloud. At most some people might get sick within a couple miles of ground zero. The big worry for nuclear weapons is the high temperatures and the shock wave.

I don't know why radiation became the big thing about nuclear weapons, but it's one of those things that gets blown out of proportion because the effects are so scary, when the actual amount of people affected by it would be vastly smaller than the amount affected by the conventional mechanics.

michal3141
08-18-2021, 07:16 PM
1. China
2. US
3. India
4. Japan
5. Germany
6. Russia
7. Indonesia
8. Brazil
9. France
10. UK

wvwvw
08-18-2021, 07:38 PM
USA
China
France
Russia
UK
Germany
Israel
India
Brazil
Italy maybe Spain

Freeroostah
08-18-2021, 07:40 PM
Ironically Afghanistan is at least on the top 20 most powerful military countries

Americans left a shit-ton of high tech equipment, vehicles, and aircrafts to the Taliban government lol

Creoda
08-18-2021, 07:50 PM
The big 5 still since the war:

US
-------------
China
Russia
United Kingdom
France
-------------------
Germany
Japan
Israel
India (size and nukes alone)
--------------------------------
then a load of countries that only have regional significance

Voskos
08-18-2021, 08:00 PM
1. USA
2. Russia
3. India
4. Pakistan
5. Israel
6. France
7. North Korea
8. UK
9. Turkey
10. Iran

Hektor12
08-18-2021, 08:03 PM
The big 5 still since the war:

US
-------------
China
Russia
United Kingdom
France
-------------------
Germany
Japan
Israel
India (size and nukes alone)
--------------------------------
Israel should be in 2nd pot. Or you can basically just remove Usa and put Israel in the place.

By the way for nuke discussion above, nukes arent real threats anymore. Did you know what EMP is ? A nuclear EMP, without killing any single mosquito, can basically send the whole europe to stone age. Thats the real threat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse

Teutone
08-18-2021, 09:13 PM
Why not? You climed Germany can't do anything in a war because of it's limited sovereignty, Slovenia is completely free country, so by your logic Slovenia is stronger than Germany.

Germany cant do anything in a war because its no souvereign nation, has a disgusting population and the biggest joke military of all g8 members.

Its not top 10 of the most powerful nations, thank god the almighty for that, everything that comes out of Germany ideologically is pure shit.

Teutone
08-18-2021, 09:17 PM
1. Just for a few more years USA
2. China
3. Russia
4. UK
5. France
6. Brazil
7. Japan
8 . India
9. Iran
10. Israel

Mejgusu
08-18-2021, 09:24 PM
1.USA
2.China
3.Russia
4.UK
5.France
6.Germany
7.Japan
8.India
9.Turkey
10.Brazil

Centurion
08-18-2021, 10:16 PM
Taking both GDP in PPP and military power into account:

1. United States
2. China
3. India
4. Russia
5. Japan
6. France
7. Brazil
8. United Kingdom
9. Germany
10. South Korea

Honorable mentions for: Turkey, Indonesia and Italy. They would be 11th and 12th and 13th if I continued the list further.

Blondie
08-18-2021, 11:40 PM
You shouldn't argue about things you don't know a lot about, no offense. Chernobyl being compared to a nuclear weapon is pretty silly, although of course it has been done so many times by a public with a horrifically bad understanding of how nuclear technology works. Fallout from an actual nuclear weapon will be the least of your worries in most cases that they would be used in real life. The scary stuff everyone talks about only really happens in a specific scenario where relatively weak bombs of an old design are used at or below ground level. Most nuclear weapons would be used in much higher yields and at altitudes where the dirt would not mix enough with an actual radioactive material to produce a significant fallout cloud. At most some people might get sick within a couple miles of ground zero. The big worry for nuclear weapons is the high temperatures and the shock wave.

I don't know why radiation became the big thing about nuclear weapons, but it's one of those things that gets blown out of proportion because the effects are so scary, when the actual amount of people affected by it would be vastly smaller than the amount affected by the conventional mechanics.

Okay so if i explode 10000 tsar bomb in New York and only in New York (10000 nuclear bomb) then americans from outside of New york would be fine? The nuclear winter, radioactive rain etc doesn't exist? :D I hope Putin or the chinese commies don't read this forum because he would know that the nuclear bombs are very good for your health.

Blondie
08-18-2021, 11:57 PM
Germany cant do anything in a war because its no souvereign nation, has a disgusting population and the biggest joke military of all g8 members.

Its not top 10 of the most powerful nations, thank god the almighty for that, everything that comes out of Germany ideologically is pure shit.

Because in peace time Germany dont need large army. Btw i didn't say that Germany would win against Britain, i said it would be draw. I often see the Binkov's Battleground channel which is very realistic and most of his war scenario is draw.

Kosteece
08-19-2021, 04:48 AM
Calm down brownie :rotfl: Even swedes tasted the radioactive cloud when chernobyl exploded because of wind. You have no idea about the nuclear warfare. But enough some ballistic rocket to the british nuclear power plants and game over the whole island will be unlivable and there are such viruses which can exterminate the complete humanity and the german researches are on very advanced level in this scientific field:
https://www.insider.com/laboratory-on-a-german-island-is-experimenting-with-deadly-viruses-2019-10

Try to understand with your little brownie brain that using mass destruction weapons makes no sense because everyone would die. And what a lunatic disgusting person you are who want to kill millions of civilians instead of military targets. Shame on you ottoman rape product.

LMAO
You do realize, germanised Kelt, that deadly viri do not trasmit easily, well, because they kill their host off pretty quickly.
This idiocy that deadly viri will kill us all need stop.
You know nothing about either nuclear weapons or bio weapons.
You are just a woman, after all.
I don't put the blame on you.
You live only so that our species is preserved.
Your brain is inferior to male brain, therefore, you suck.
I gave you the chance to engage in convo with a man, but your inferior brain got emotion-struck once again and you started talking like most women, nonsense.
Angela Merkel has the exact same skin tone Tsipras has.
I am no brownie. My skin color is white with a yellowish undertone. The same that Angela Merkelski, the germanized Pole has.
And I am 99% percent European, according to genetic tests.
If I had any "Turkish" in me, I'd have at least 1% Asian DNA.
I don't.
Now, go do something womanly and let men who invented 99.5% of the world you live in talk.
You are clearly not meant for this.

SouthDutch7991
08-19-2021, 05:10 AM
Okay so if i explode 10000 tsar bomb in New York and only in New York (10000 nuclear bomb) then americans from outside of New york would be fine? The nuclear winter, radioactive rain etc doesn't exist? :D I hope Putin or the chinese commies don't read this forum because he would know that the nuclear bombs are very good for your health.

10000 tsar bombs is an insane, and unrealistic number. I don't think you realise what numbers you're talking about, at that point the radiation would be the least of your worries. That's enough to kill everyone on north America from the heat alone. As far as radiation is concerned, it would be blown into space. But, no, radioactive rain is unlikely to happen in a detonation above 300 or so kilotons which is the vast majority of modern nuclear weapons. And nuclear winter is a joke.

Blondie
08-19-2021, 05:23 AM
10000 tsar bombs is an insane, and unrealistic number. I don't think you realise what numbers you're talking about, at that point the radiation would be the least of your worries. That's enough to kill everyone on north America from the heat alone. As far as radiation is concerned, it would be blown into space. But, no, radioactive rain is unlikely to happen in a detonation above 300 or so kilotons which is the vast majority of modern nuclear weapons. And nuclear winter is a joke.

Then youre smarter than most scientist, grat ;) I love TA.

Blondie
08-19-2021, 05:34 AM
LMAO
You do realize, germanised Kelt, that deadly viri do not trasmit easily, well, because they kill their host off pretty quickly.
This idiocy that deadly viri will kill us all need stop.
You know nothing about either nuclear weapons or bio weapons.
You are just a woman, after all.
I don't put the blame on you.
You live only so that our species is preserved.
Your brain is inferior to male brain, therefore, you suck.
I gave you the chance to engage in convo with a man, but your inferior brain got emotion-struck once again and you started talking like most women, nonsense.
Angela Merkel has the exact same skin tone Tsipras has.
I am no brownie. My skin color is white with a yellowish undertone. The same that Angela Merkelski, the germanized Pole has.
And I am 99% percent European, according to genetic tests.
If I had any "Turkish" in me, I'd have at least 1% Asian DNA.
I don't.
Now, go do something womanly and let men who invented 99.5% of the world you live in talk.
You are clearly not meant for this.

Nice post from a dumb brown ottoman rape product. So you have no any real argument, i refuted your all claims about this war scenario :thumb001: :rotfl: Like it or not Germany has every power to answer a mass destruction weapon attack: biological weapons, bombs and ballistic rockets to the british nuclear power plants etc. And a white woman is always smarter than a brown MENA subhuman like you who want to kill millions of civilians instead of military targets like a coward. Just give up brownie

https://i.gifer.com/6GRr.gif

Dandelion
08-19-2021, 05:37 AM
I wish Zhaoyun still posted here. He'd post pictures of anti-Asian racists he beat up in self-defence, while getting applauded for it in a forum full of ethnic nationalists.

SouthDutch7991
08-19-2021, 07:22 AM
Then youre smarter than most scientist, grat ;) I love TA.
No, I'm not. I am however more truthful to you than a melodramatic media talking head would be, and if you actually asked a scientist they would say the same. The effects of nuclear weapons have been greatly exaggerated by people with no connection to actual scientific communities.

Blondie
08-19-2021, 08:44 AM
No, I'm not. I am however more truthful to you than a melodramatic media talking head would be, and if you actually asked a scientist they would say the same. The effects of nuclear weapons have been greatly exaggerated by people with no connection to actual scientific communities.

But the nuclear winter is scientific fact, here is a source from the Cambridge University:

https://books.google.hu/books?id=hq7_TAFD4osC&q=nuclear+winter&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=nuclear%20winter&f=false

From physicists:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120312010114/http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/ToonRobockTurcoPhysicsToday.pdf

from atmospheric and environmental scientists:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013EF000205
https://www.popsci.com/article/science/computer-models-show-what-exactly-would-happen-earth-after-nuclear-war/

from other scientists:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6774726/

https://web.archive.org/web/20141006085234/http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm06/fm06-sessions/fm06_U14A.html

http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCTKcd2Ko98

https://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/88Hampson.html

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31822020694212&view=1up&seq=5

etc etc i can post hundreds more. So youre smarter than the compelte scientific world, i wonder that you didn't get a nobel prize yet.

Finnish Swede
08-19-2021, 09:46 AM
European defense is interesting matter (if any thinks that USA should leave from Europe). How to handle that then? In real no European country can defense itself (alone) against pressures, blackmailings and aggeressions of Russia or Chine (not even in the future). Many are weak against Turkey as well. So as much as people hate EU (as such) I would see the only possibility to handle defenses someway together. Offering enough men, enough money, enough resources and skills to create that kind of system as time goes. Do we opposite have will, is another matter.

Join together projects have already helped Europeans to develop modern weapons like Eurofighter earlier
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Eurofighter_Typhoon_at_Kaivopuisto_Air_Show%2C_Jun e_2017_%2835151068712%29.jpg/383px-Eurofighter_Typhoon_at_Kaivopuisto_Air_Show%2C_Jun e_2017_%2835151068712%29.jpg
It was project between Brits, Germans, Italians, Spaniards.

Now there are two new projects: FCAS (Future Combat Air System, new fighter) between France, Germany and Spain and Tempest-fighter project between Brits and Italy. Sweden is rumored to join this as well.

Anyway as long as Europeans are not ready for this, I'm pretty happy that Americans are here.

SouthDutch7991
08-19-2021, 03:00 PM
But the nuclear winter is scientific fact, here is a source from the Cambridge University:

https://books.google.hu/books?id=hq7_TAFD4osC&q=nuclear+winter&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=nuclear%20winter&f=false

From physicists:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120312010114/http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/ToonRobockTurcoPhysicsToday.pdf

from atmospheric and environmental scientists:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013EF000205
https://www.popsci.com/article/science/computer-models-show-what-exactly-would-happen-earth-after-nuclear-war/

from other scientists:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6774726/

https://web.archive.org/web/20141006085234/http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm06/fm06-sessions/fm06_U14A.html

http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/acp-7-1973-2007.pdf


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCTKcd2Ko98

https://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/88Hampson.html

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31822020694212&view=1up&seq=5

etc etc i can post hundreds more. So youre smarter than the compelte scientific world, i wonder that you didn't get a nobel prize yet.

This was long since proven to be bad research. I'm surprised you've never heard this before.They required hundreds of cities to develop firestorms, which by the way are unrelated to fallout. This has since been found to require bad modelling of soot as well as modern city structures to be possible. Hiroshima alone was the only city to develop a firestorm, which did not happen in nagasaki, and both were cities with very old wooden architecture that became like matchsticks after the shockwave. It's not even clear if firestorms are possible, let alone likely, in a modern concrete and steel city center. If you actually want to see real numbers on radiation from a real atomic bombing, you should read these. https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/med/med_foreword.html https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/mp01.asp

Blondie
08-19-2021, 03:32 PM
This was long since proven to be bad research. I'm surprised you've never heard this before.They required hundreds of cities to develop firestorms, which by the way are unrelated to fallout. This has since been found to require bad modelling of soot as well as modern city structures to be possible. Hiroshima alone was the only city to develop a firestorm, which did not happen in nagasaki, and both were cities with very old wooden architecture that became like matchsticks after the shockwave. It's not even clear if firestorms are possible, let alone likely, in a modern concrete and steel city center. If you actually want to see real numbers on radiation from a real atomic bombing, you should read these. https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/med/med_foreword.html https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/mp01.asp

Your sources analyzed only the first two little atomic bombs and based on these explosions, my sources analyzed other bombs which has much more kilotons which means more effective influenced on nature or do you think the influece of Czar Bomb would be equal with the Fat Man? :D But doesn't matter because youre smarter than the whole scientific world ;)

SouthDutch7991
08-19-2021, 03:49 PM
Your sources analyzed only the first two little atomic bombs and based on these explosions, my sources analyzed other bombs which has much more kilotons which means more effective influenced on nature or do you think the influece of Czar Bomb would be equal with the Fat Man? :D But doesn't matter because youre smarter than the whole scientific world ;)
All their studies are based on the first two atomic bombs you clown. We have no other sources for the ability of atomic bombs to create fires on a large scale, the amount of kilotons is irrelevant as the effects can be scaled with ridiculous ease. For one thing, the Tsar bomb would not be used in a war. Stop using that as an example. For another, many many test detonations were done with atomic bombs and all found that fallout was militarily unimportant beyond a certain detonation altitude, which was usually twice the maximum diameter of the fireball. No atomic bomb would have been detonated lower than that in an attack on a city because the shockwave would cover much less area at a lower height. I am not "smarter than the whole scientific world" I am simply more honest than melodramatic pop-sci journalists who were funded originally by fucking greenpeace. This is not fringe information, this is readily available and widely acknowledged in the scientific world. The effects of nuclear weapons are very well known, and readily available to the public.

I suggest you read this website in depth before posting again. It's older and somewhat outdated, but it contains a lot of informative stuff on nuclear weapons in general and links to primary sources, ie. reports on actual nuclear test series.
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/

Blondie
08-19-2021, 04:26 PM
the amount of kilotons is irrelevant

Oh boy :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: If its irrelevant then by your logic is czar bomb is same as fat man if we see their influence, im sure the next step is they will be good for your health. :thumb001:

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/hamburger-human-brain-isolated-black-background-69017164.jpg

SouthDutch7991
08-19-2021, 05:08 PM
Oh boy :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: If its irrelevant then by your logic is czar bomb is same as fat man if we see their influence, im sure the next step is they will be good for your health. :thumb001:

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/hamburger-human-brain-isolated-black-background-69017164.jpg

Do you know what the term "scaling" means? And as far as fallout is concerned, fission-fusion weapons in the megaton range have a directly less amount of radioactive impact than smaller, cruder fission weapons. For one thing, the max range of instant radiation to cause death is less than the total width of the fireball itself. The distance at which heat alone for a 10 megaton bomb would kill instantly is five times greater! There would be no people who died of the instant radiation burst. As for the fallout, unless it was detonated at ground level, which they absolutely would not be, most of the fallout for a megaton range bomb will be kicked into the upper atmosphere and cause maybe a few dozen cases of cancer total. Smaller bombs are more dangerous when fallout is concerned, not less, because the fallout can come down quicker. Still, it is telling that THERE WERE NO CASES EVER FOUND OF INJURIES CAUSED BY FALLOUT IN THE BOMBINGS OF JAPAN. Which is just what the science predicts.

You need to let go of your movie view of nuclear weapons. And for gods sake, stop thinking it is anything like chernobyl.

Blondie
08-19-2021, 05:16 PM
...

Okay mr you convinced me, eventually the radioactivity was also positive to Mojo Jojo if you saw the The Powerpuff Girls. Btw i want to visit the USA, and i want to try the original yankee burger because i am sure that these retard european traders imported only the shit to Europe and not the high quality, so whats your favourite menu in the McDonalds? And im big fan of the KFC and the coloniel too, can you help me?

SouthDutch7991
08-19-2021, 05:18 PM
Okay mr you convinced me, eventually the radioactivity was also positive to Mojo Jojo if you saw the The Powerpuff Girls. Btw i want to visit the USA, and i want to try the original yankee burger because i am sure that these retard european traders imported only the shit to Europe and not the high quality, so whats your favourite menu in the McDonalds? And im big fan of the KFC and the coloniel too, can you help me?

McDonalds is shit, all fast food is.

Blondie
08-19-2021, 05:26 PM
McDonalds is shit, all fast food is.

Pls don't insult the USA its a nice counry. So you eat original burger without plutonium?

SouthDutch7991
08-19-2021, 05:32 PM
Pls don't insult the USA its a nice counry. So you eat original burger without plutonium?

Eating plutonium would kill you, most delayed radiation deaths would (hypothetically) be caused by ingestion. Just food for thought, but the amount of fallout that chernobyl produced was 400 times more than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, and most of it actually fell to the ground attached to soot and rain as opposed to being lifted up into the atmosphere and dissipating.

Blondie
08-19-2021, 05:34 PM
Eating plutonium would kill you

Really? But it worked on Mojo Jojo he got super power.

Smaland
08-19-2021, 07:10 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOFDFogc6Gk
A terrorist nuke might have an explosive power equivalent to 20KT (kilotons) of high explosive. This is the approximate yield of the Hiroshima bomb.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE_bw4ME9v8
This is a weapon that might be used by today's nuclear powers (possibly excepting North Korea, for now), and it could have a yield of 500KT.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzoeXkdxKuc
A "city destroyer" could have a yield of 20MT (megatons). During the Cold War, ICBM's weren't as accurate as they are now; to compensate, warheads with increased explosive power were used. To the best of my knowledge, back then the most powerful warhead used by an American ICBM was installed on the Titan II missile, and it had a yield of 9MT.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h11ASFLXPjg
This video estimates the effects of the use of a Tsar Bomba, which had a yield of 50MT.

All of these videos assume that a bomb is detonated next to / above the Sears Tower in downtown Chicago. The video narrator is a survivalist who created the Tin Hat Ranch (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX66eXhdLWxf32vAubGL7uQ) channel on YouTube.

TheMaestro
08-19-2021, 07:30 PM
1. Nigeria - With the amount of fertility rate they will rule us soon.

Kosteece
08-21-2021, 01:07 PM
Nice post from a dumb brown ottoman rape product. So you have no any real argument, i refuted your all claims about this war scenario :thumb001: :rotfl: Like it or not Germany has every power to answer a mass destruction weapon attack: biological weapons, bombs and ballistic rockets to the british nuclear power plants etc. And a white woman is always smarter than a brown MENA subhuman like you who want to kill millions of civilians instead of military targets like a coward. Just give up brownie

https://i.gifer.com/6GRr.gif

LMAO
Germanized Kelt, you are the one whose life is gonna be meaningless once you reach the age of 40.
Brown, yellow or white, women are just womb-carers and cocksuckers.
Men, on the other hand, rule the world.
Auf Wiedersehen!
That is the language of your ancestors...
Bwahahahahaha

Ps. You are just another woman incapable of talking logically. I am glad I am bisexual and do not have to deal with womb-caring monkeys like you.