France has 4 nuclear Submarines, atleast one in each ocean.Theres a British nuclear sub up Argentinas ass right now. :D
Only the president knows where they're.
44. Ethiopa
We can neither confirm if there is a UK nuke sub near argentina or not.Man the UK wouldn't sell it's nukes especially to someone who's a potential threat to national security, and to add the UK would have quite a few more if it did sell one, why would you sell your nukes knowing you might need them some time? And there is a British nuclear sub near Argentina, it has been there since they destroyed the HMS Ark Royal and probibly will be until one of the UK's new Aircraft carriers are finished and put into service in 2016. :razz:
British government tries to be clever by doing this.
But actually we sold all our nukes to Iran so we can afford to bail out some banking bankers.
how lebanon Defeated israel in 33day?????That's ironic... cause last time I checked, Israel won...
israel-->10
lebanon-->52 :cool:
That's ironic... cause last time I checked, Israel won.......Says the guy who mistook jews for muslims...
<...>
Ignorant people these days...
....Says the guy who mistook jews for muslims...
That's ironic... cause last time I checked, Israel won...You just won't stop being THE ignorant will you?
Israel
121 killed
(including 2 captured soldiers)
628 wounded
Lebanon
≤500 (Lebanese officials' est.) Killed
1,500 (Lebanese officials' est.) Wounded
Captured: 4 fighters
Amal militia: 17 dead
LCP militia: 12 dead
PFLP-GC militia: 2 dead
Ignorant people these days...
I'm just reporting in your ironic persona.
y u mad bro? Don't go back to locked topics, brotha.
I'm just reporting in your ironic persona.
whats the actuall point of this topic?
25. Canada
I HAVE THE BIGGEST GUNS IN THE WORLD, YOU ALL OTHER COUNTRIES SUCK, 'MERICA FTWWW!
In a nutshell.
Wheres Cuba???
Weirdo has no clue lol
THAT right there, PROVES this list is BULLSHITIf it's right, should'a stayed as part of the United Kingdom. :lol:
Doubt it.
46. Portugal
I don't even think it's possible to accurately list the most powerful countries in order, can only list the countries that show it by pushing the most wars. As in, only what's shown gets attention, and not shown wont seem to exist. I'm having a hard time explaining it, hope you all somewhat understand lol
Only **** with her Nuclear missile silo in the wilderness of the sea and sky. :war: :war: :war:there is no point using nuclear weapons because they wont be able to live where it landed for about a century, however EMP(Electro Magnetic Pulse) only kills if he is in that area right in that moment when it explodes(not in cod)
there is no point using nuclear weapons because they wont be able to live where it landed for about a century, however EMP(Electro Magnetic Pulse) only kills if he is in that area right in that moment when it explodes(not in cod)
it does not kill humans, truth be told, it would only be a matter of restarting most eletronic devices, it would only affect people with Heart Pacemakers, and obviously, the kills from plane crashes and such.i think i told you its NOT Call of Duty.
EMPs do not kill humans, not yet atleast.(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d3/EMP_mechanism.GIF/333px-EMP_mechanism.GIF)
i think i told you its NOT Call of Duty.
Let me explain why it kills humans:
So you know that humans have some charge of electricity aswell, so if a human is being overcharged he is being killed just like he is being killed from the lightning. And no not even the electronic stuff can be turned on again because it is overcharged aswell, again the best example is the lightning if your computer is on durring thunderstorm and the ligning goes through it, you wont be able to use it again. And no the planes will not crash because they are not electronic planes are they? and since the engine already started it does not need electricity however don't try to restart your engine after the EMP detonated^^
that's true, Agreed.
Airbus fly by wire utilizes 6 computers to calculate the pilots imput from his joystick, not only does the electricity run the flight systems, pressurization systems, cooling systems and such, they also run the communications and flight control systems in most cases, yes, the engines after started generate their own energy, but EMP's would surely affect the distribution system of such electricity, and perharps even the engine itself, therefore causing it to shut down, planes do need electricity.
EMP's are usually detonated at 20-40km above Earth's surface, the reason for that is that when the bomb detonates, the electrons at that distance can be captured by the Earth's magnetic field, therefore spreading it in a much wider area than if it was detonated on the ground, A large device detonated at 400–500 km (250 to 312 miles) over Kansas would affect all of the continental U.S.
So yeah, you're own picture contradicts your thought.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080923073649AAc1UG5 (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080923073649AAc1UG5)This.
with a profile image of a cartoonSays Mr.Phelps.
This.still more intelligent, and now end of conversation this is getting off topic.
Says Mr.Phelps.
profile image of a cartoon
What on earth does a forum avatar have to do with anything?its a preview of the user's IQ
its a preview of the user's IQ
Oh I just thought I would point it out for you, there's no apostrophe in the plural "users".
Not to mention you didn't start your sentence with a capital letter, nor did you put an apostrophe in the word "It's".
You forgot to end your sentence with a full stop.
i think i told you its NOT Call of Duty.
Let me explain why it kills humans:
So you know that humans have some charge of electricity aswell, so if a human is being overcharged he is being killed just like he is being killed from the lightning. And no not even the electronic stuff can be turned on again because it is overcharged aswell, again the best example is the lightning if your computer is on durring thunderstorm and the ligning goes through it, you wont be able to use it again. And no the planes will not crash because they are not electronic planes are they? and since the engine already started it does not need electricity however don't try to restart your engine after the EMP detonated^^
its a preview of the user's IQYou: detective relying on evidence. Me: an inventor relying on his own imagination and intelligence. Who's got the higher IQ?
In that context it doesn't necessary have to be in plural, therefore your statement is null.
Oh I just thought I would point it out for you, there's no apostrophe in the plural "users".
In that context it doesn't necessary have to be in plural
therefore your statement is null.
null[
=.=Everything was correct in that sentence.
Wheres Cuba???
Up
Military Strength is theoretically determined by
Number of ordinances (bombs, missiles)The weaker force could have anti-missile technology.
Military Assets Available - From Humvee to Aircraft Carriers, total active count of assets ready/actively deployedAircraft carriers arnt that good of an asset, sure you can take your jets and invade another country with them and always have the landing strip 100 miles from the target destination, but a country only really needs 1 of them and alot of good pilots.
Deployment Coverage - How much of the world is covered by said nations reach. (I.E Monitor Ocean, Overseas Bases Etc.)If that were true, why is China, Russia and America super powers when they only have one big continent?
Active Nuclear Arsenal - How many active war heads does said nation have, and how many are deployed strategically.Nuclear missiles are only a deterrence to stop other nations with nukes from nuking the defending country, for example America wouldn't nuke the UK because the UK could nuke them back, same with Russia, China and other countrys with nuclear technology.
Standing Personnel - How many active duty soldiers does the said nation have enlisted.
Reserve Personnel - How many reserve duty soldiers does said nation have on standby.Personnel mean nothing if not all of them are trained to be elite, or the nation your personnel are attacking has extremely good defences round it's coasts.
Training - How effective is the training provided to said nations soldiers.THIS is what power should be done by, TRAINING! A force of 10 soldiers could wipe out a force of 1000 soldiers if said 10 soldiers have more experience and training, same with battle ships, jets or missiles, it all comes down to how good the nation is at using it's resources, not how many they have, this is how the super power list should be, but it's not about that.
The weaker force could have anti-missile technology.
Aircraft carriers arnt that good of an asset, sure you can take your jets and invade another country with them and always have the landing strip 100 miles from the target destination, but a country only really needs 1 of them and alot of good pilots.
If that were true, why is China, Russia and America super powers when they only have one big continent?
Nuclear missiles are only a deterrence to stop other nations with nukes from nuking the defending country, for example America wouldn't nuke the UK because the UK could nuke them back, same with Russia, China and other countrys with nuclear technology.
Personnel mean nothing if not all of them are trained to be elite, or the nation your personnel are attacking has extremely good defences round it's coasts.
THIS is what power should be done by, TRAINING! A force of 10 soldiers could wipe out a force of 1000 soldiers if said 10 soldiers have more experience and training, same with battle ships, jets or missiles, it all comes down to how good the nation is at using it's resources, not how many they have, this is how the super power list should be, but it's not about that.
By the way how is India in 4th?
They are still buying 60-80yr old battle ships off Britain that Britain doesn't want anymore due to being so out dated, in-efficient and just plain old.. :trust:
Mikal, contrary to popular belief the Indian armed forces are actually well trained. As has been proven in the military battles that India took part in, India prevailed by a huge gap.
Plus, Indian soliders are famous for actually being determined, you might of heard about how 180 Indian soldiers singlehandedly defeated a invasion army of 2000 troops in 1971.(With WWII rifles while the Pakistanis marched with tanks and machine guns..).
The Indian army is highly under-funded(As is the case for anything related to the Indian Govt.) but the training isnt so bad, wherever you got that information is wrong
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Aircraft Carriers are escorted by a nuclear sub, 3 other battleships(United States 'strike' group formation). They have the ability to move a full air raid to any location in the world. They can also transport thousands of people into war very quickly. It is also the most valuable asset to the United States Navy (other than Seals) and also to the Royal Navy. Aircraft Carriers are floating cities, with enough fire power to remove a small country off the map. US Carriers have their own zip codes, they normally contain more than 5,000 Sailors and Marines on board. The Royal Navy also has similar setup to them.The UK currntly has no aircraft carriers, the last one (HMS ArkRoyal) which led it's last operation with the US (Was a huge training exercise involving both British and American destroyers/carriers and some other small military vessels), the UK's currently building 2 carriers which will be the worlds most advanced (according to an American show I watched on the Military channel about modern weaponry), however the UK currently is not concerned about not having any carriers, theres the nuclear submarines, 2 of them I know of anyway, 1 is in the Falklands, 1 is in Scotland and another is also being built, if a country like the UK doesn't seem concerned about not having carriers till 2015 then I'de assume they arnt that important, to the UK anyway. You say that they are capable of transporting thousands of troops, but thats what the UK uses it's military planes for, wether they are jumping out with parachutes or landing on a runway they are still capable of transporting as many people as a carrier is, as they are currently using them in Iran and Afghanistan.
The United States has assets all over the world. United States the largest presence made in the world. China and Russia not so much, firepower isn't military strength so I don't know.ASSETS, not colonys.
The UK couldn't nuke the US, because we have the ability to shoot a nuke down before it leaves your continent. The United Kingdom, China, Russia and few other countries have this ability as well, also countries who have nuclear ability, so your statement is again false.The ability to shoot a missile before it leaves the country? Talk less crap please, the missile has to be within a certain radius before it is detected, military satallites or not. I'm not saying the UK would try to nuke the US, I was using it as an example as I'm British, your American and this discussion is between us, call it Russia if you'd like, but the ability to shoot down nukes like you suggest would make them useless, thats why countrys have more than 1 to fire, you might stop 1, or maybe even 10, but one would eventually hit it's target, same with any country with nuclear power.
Not everyone needs to be special forces. United States Army break their men down, build them up, train them in boot camp. They are not trained to be special forces, they are trained in their area, and in combat. A basic combat training is all that is needed, and it is up to the officers to guide the foot soldiers to be use strategically in order to gain the advantage over the enemy and eliminate the enemy.I saw the 'basic training' US soldiers have with that other video in the news section, y'know where he's on the hill running round like a clown in obvious enemy fire.. :roll:
In which United States and Russia would still be at the top, in addition most nations soldiers are trained by United States forces, so most are well suited. Your statement here isn't to far off. The only group single able to disarm a nation is a Navy Seal, but 1000 soldiers, bit unrealistic mate. Even a team of Seals would be challenged unless it was 1000 100% untrained average joes with a gun. While Navy Seals are at the top of world wide special forces; United Kingdom Special Forces (British Commandos), Russian Spetsnaz, are shortly behind them.Most nations are trained by the US? Not the UK.. I'de like you to know a high ranking British soldier was murdered in the US whilst on his way to a boot camp to carry out training for some US soldiers, can't remember where it was, saw it on FBI Files.
While it does also play into the fact China has the largest standing army, but they (the men) are old and aged. So while its true the pure number isn't really always effective but still and some other of your points may not be as far off as some.
I'm not gonna even argue with you. You get facts from American shows and not raw stats, yes I might have been wrong about the Royal Navy and the carriers. If they were useless, they wouldn't make one then.I haven't been 12 in 6 years, what does that have to do with this?
You are entirely missing the point I stated and trying to play my trucks bigger, which I don't play that game, sorry haven't been 12 in 8 years.
The fact is you insist America is better than the rest of the world at everything involving the military.
Like if we still have to be proud about how many nukes & such s**t we got. I would be proud if I had less of those things.Maybe man, I wouldn't want the UK to lose it's nukes though, they are one main thing that stops us from being invaded, I just see a small army being better, why? Theres more time to train each soldier until he can't be trained no more, for example the SAS isnt huge, but every soldier inside it is said to be the worlds most elite. :roll:
Maybe man, I wouldn't want the UK to lose it's nukes though, they are one main thing that stops us from being invaded, I just see a small army being better, why? Theres more time to train each soldier until he can't be trained no more, for example the SAS isnt huge, but every soldier inside it is said to be the worlds most elite. :roll:
I meant we shouldn't be claiming our big armies and such (not saying you, Mikal, are). They should be used and thought just for defence purposes. I don't think having 394857934 nukes + 3248023489809423089 tanks ships and such is meant for defence..Look at it this way, countries only have big militarys if they plan on invading other countries, countries that don't do invading, have smaller militarys and high-tech technology to make it impossible for others/big militarys invading them, the UK is building 2 aircraft carriers, why? By 2050 it's said the UK will have to start invading smaller surrounding countrys such as Ireland and Iceland in order to make room for the ever expanding population, (mainly thanks to immigrents and relaxed immigration laws in Britain), if I were the UK's PM, the UK would be losing around 10million people, that would be immigrents going back to where they came from. :lol:
Look at it this way, countries only have big militarys if they plan on invading other countries, countries that don't do invading, have smaller militarys and high-tech technology to make it impossible for others/big militarys invading them, the UK is building 2 aircraft carriers, why? By 2050 it's said the UK will have to start invading smaller surrounding countrys such as Ireland and Iceland in order to make room for the ever expanding population, (mainly thanks to immigrents and relaxed immigration laws in Britain), if I were the UK's PM, the UK would be losing around 10million people, that would be immigrents going back to where they came from. :lol:
It's so hard to get a job right now. :cry:
You're right in the first part. Can't say you're completely wrong in the second one concretely talking.. Theorically that's completely wrong but I know what it means..Wrong about what? :razz:
About the invasion thing: lol, neva.
Wrong about what? :razz:
Wrong about immigrants. Theorically.There are 6,000,000 Muslims in the UK, more than half of which are just having 6 kids per couple and sitting on child benefits and the dole for aslong as they possibly can, basicly screwing our country over through the benefits system which is only meant for those who really can't support their families, now if theres 6 million Muslims, how many other immigrents from other backgrounds are there? I used Muslims because it's seems they are the biggest type of person that comes to the UK, the UK has 62,641,000 people in total, and my guess is up to 20,000,000 of them are immigrents.. :poke:
do u want cat^ ^
For?