Which Country Has The Most Efficient Military Force?
- Thread starter Liberalman
- Start date
Israel - Has to be quick and effective - They could have stayed longer fighting Hezbollah - but the are causality sensitive - small population and does not matter what they do they always get crapped on
US - Force projection and the ability to use overkill - Read up on the 1st war with Iraq - The most critical man of the hour, after Stormin Norman - Tactical genius -was the General in charge of Logistics - Moved millions of tons of ammo, equipment, food - had depots in Iraq - that was a surprise - and no one knew a thing about the mass transfer taking place.
The question was country. The USMC is not a country but we know that good ol' NAVY detachment you are talking about anyway... :thumbup:
Most efficient is hard to pin down, there's a lot of factors to consider.
-Financial (cost to the taxpayer) can be measured by GDP or dollars per citizen?
-Technology (doing more with less manpower) The US is way ahead of most
-Firepower (Killing the enemy more than they kill you) depending on the size of the conflict and how well equipped your adversary is. In strictly a ground war the Chinese and Russia would inflict a big hurt on anyone but still behind the US.
-Mobility (getting there in the least amount of time no matter where it is) No contest the US. UK and France a distant second
-Intelligence (knowing your enemy, its culture, and geography) The UK and Russia spend more time and seem better at this.
The above is if you expect your military to be involved with more than defending your own border. War, peacekeeping, humanitarian and disaster assistance will put a lot more demands on a military.
Israel may be good in its region but they have no expeditionary capability.
If it's solely on defending your own borders than any small mountainous country would have the advantage. How would you invade Switzerland with only a few avenues in? They could defend those forever and make the aggressors pay.
Canada has a long way to go if it wants to simply defend its own borders. The Navy is in deep trouble and will need 30 or more new vessels in the coming decade or face complete rust out. Our arctic claims are being challenged and building a few patrol boats will not deter Russia, the US, or even China in the least...
Just my 2 cents for what its worth, fire away
-Financial (cost to the taxpayer) can be measured by GDP or dollars per citizen?
-Technology (doing more with less manpower) The US is way ahead of most
-Firepower (Killing the enemy more than they kill you) depending on the size of the conflict and how well equipped your adversary is. In strictly a ground war the Chinese and Russia would inflict a big hurt on anyone but still behind the US.
-Mobility (getting there in the least amount of time no matter where it is) No contest the US. UK and France a distant second
-Intelligence (knowing your enemy, its culture, and geography) The UK and Russia spend more time and seem better at this.
The above is if you expect your military to be involved with more than defending your own border. War, peacekeeping, humanitarian and disaster assistance will put a lot more demands on a military.
Israel may be good in its region but they have no expeditionary capability.
If it's solely on defending your own borders than any small mountainous country would have the advantage. How would you invade Switzerland with only a few avenues in? They could defend those forever and make the aggressors pay.
Canada has a long way to go if it wants to simply defend its own borders. The Navy is in deep trouble and will need 30 or more new vessels in the coming decade or face complete rust out. Our arctic claims are being challenged and building a few patrol boats will not deter Russia, the US, or even China in the least...
Just my 2 cents for what its worth, fire away
If Canada really wanted a military that could do whatever is asked of it then the USMC would be what we should model ourselves on. They've got it all!
Depends on a large number of factors, but in terms of equipment, firepower, and global reach the USA has to be number one. Currently US weapons research equals the total military budgets of every nation except China.
War is an exercise is controled inefficiency. If we consider destruction as negative. Since we have not defined limits and fits I will assume that war itself can have no positive value, as commonly stated. In that case their can be no efficiency in war at all as once planning for hostilities have begun the effort and material is already effectively removed from any productive manipulation. No two sided military contest can have any positive outcome, positivity resides solely in the third side. Ask a banker.
The most efficient at blowing up civilians would be any one of many Islamic extremist groups. No need to invest billions for satellites and lazers to try and avoid civilians just strap a bomb onto one person and walk into a crowd, very efficient. Moscow residents recently experienced this "efficiency".
I mentioned the USMC because of the overall self supporting organization it is. Marines can undertake almost any task without the assistance of any other military branch. Their own ships, air force, etc..
As long as there are borders there will be a force to defend it and an agressor trying to move it.
We have a fleet of biplanes? After jets had been introduced and were common to use, P38 Lightnings were still used. C130 Hercs are still in use, etc.
I have no doubt that biplanes can still be used for something. But as most anyone interested in classic autos can attest, there are plenty of vehicles in barns and garages that need relatively little work to get back into running order. If one is worn out it is worn out. 2 different concepts.
There is interest in slow maneuverable propeller driven aircraft to do something between what a helicopter and A-10 warthog does. Brazil and even the US have looked at some models.
Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Piper PA-48 Enforcer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and then there's the blueprint only stuff
SM-27S/T MACHETE TURBOPROP OVERVIEW
Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Piper PA-48 Enforcer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and then there's the blueprint only stuff
SM-27S/T MACHETE TURBOPROP OVERVIEW
How about we try to define efficient as applied to a military? Liberalman can you expand on what you meant as efficient? What is it you would like our military to do?
Besides, the Marines are reputedly a good force, but there are others better.
The British Royal Marines.
And even General Douglas MacArthur was disgusted at the fact that ANZACs out-performed his Marines in the Pacific. (according to William Manchester.......in Douglas MacArthur, An American Caesar.....Manchester was a Marine at Guadalcanal too)
BTW, my late great-uncle Al joined the Marines in 1937, which he called "the epitome of bad timing"....he was with the First Marine Division at Guadalcanal.......as in the current HBO series The Pacific....
Now I'm in for it!!!
