#fixing military rank

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

dense warren
#

military watch : The strength of countries is ranked according to the strength of the army only
global fire power : It evaluates the ranking of countries according to the strength of the army, economy, population, terrain, gas, oil, natural resources, and much more.

It is unfair to classify the army's strength according to global fire power

The best example is North Korea

military watch North Korean ranking : 6th

global fire power North Korean ranking : 34

🤐

dense warren
dense warren
dense warren
#

@proven estuary

proven estuary
lament ploverBOT
#

success @idriss__xd warned

Reason: Too many Mentions
Duration: 7 days
proofverifiedProof: 👍

coral plinth
#

Some of those tanks are old. Also, some tanks can fire at targets 7 kilometers away, but there is no line of sight in most battlefields that far. So they need to work with jets to spot targets.

#

That's why there are "groups" that can "wage war" as in, a unit of various vehicles that has enough to occupy an area and deal with any problems encountered. These are Battalion Tactical Groups and Brigade Combat Teams. And the teams have 17 Support vehicles (logistics) for every single vehicle that can kill. But they have anit air, and artillary, in them. Meaning, it's not JUST infantry. It's a whole "army" that can deal with any threat by itself without help. Not too easily, but enough.

#

Also, artillery is not that useful without proper knowledge on where the enemy positions are.

dense warren
coral plinth
dense warren
# coral plinth explain?

Global Firepower ranks a country's strength by population, terrain, military strength, gas, oil, and, and, and,
But Military Watch only assesses the strength of the army by military strength
It is unfair to evaluate a country's military strength according to the Global Firepower rating

eager forge
#

That website is not accurate at all lol, North Korea rank 6 worldwide? Maybe as worlds 6th biggest joke

#

They give poor countries which have 1m or more infantry very high rankings, when in reality they aren not that usefull in war compared to sea and air

#

North Korea claims it has 7m army, except only country it can invade it can invade is South Korea, it has no naval or air force to even reach Japan

#

Of course resources, money, equipment and technology play a big part, not just big number of infantry

coral plinth
# eager forge They give poor countries which have 1m or more infantry very high rankings, when...

Also, "infantry" has varying levels of performance. For example, it's safe to say that 10,000 bullets every 6 years of training, but especially on the first year of training, where units can pass a test where they hit 50 targets at ranges 50 to 400 meters, in 160 seconds. With 10 of those targets moving left at speeds varying from 4 to 10 km/h horizontally. Also, they need to be able to have actual equipment, like knee pads, and armor that can stop a .308, and tourniquets, elastic bandages, and packing bandages, and vitaminized blood transfusion devices on every 20 units. Also, for every infantry unit that has color night vision and thermal vision quad tube goggles, they are statistically worth 300 infantry that do not have such equipment. TRAINING and GEAR is worth MORE than simple blood and protein shakes.

Also, it's not just about artillery, but the amount of artillery shells that can be used.

In war, jets, cruise missiles, and long range artillery have a much more pronounced effect. Infantry can be leverage those aspects to be more effective, but without those elements, they are far less important.

weary iris
weary iris
dense warren
dense warren
dense warren
dense warren
eager forge
#

Budget is generally more accurate ranking then numbers, there is just no chance north Korean army has any good stuff with only 2$ billion to spend, no matter how high their numbers are

dense warren
dense warren
dense warren
dense warren