Most Powerful Nation in Present-Day Europe

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Benderino


That may be. I was just going off assumptions. Didn't Germany contribute much of the NATO forces that went into Serbia? I was under the impression that it did. However, France has sent troops to North Africa from time to time. You have no reason to apologise to me .

Ok

I'm no expert. If you think that (i.e. that Germany's military is better than France's), then you probably have a good reason. I'll just let others deal with this, even if France's unpopularity might mean that not everyone's going to be fair to her.

I doubt that we could learn much from the no. of troops sent to Serbia though.

 

[Zarn]

No, even taking out the nukes, France still has the edge over Germany, IMHO.

 

[Ohwell]

Germany's miltary is indeed more powerful than France's military. Germany doesn't have a law like Japan's law, it currently has one of the most potent ground forces in the world, with some limited ability to act abroad. I have a link to worldwide military statistics but it appears to be down right now...

France's military is more of a smaller elite infantry-based force that acts quickly and fast. Its main infantry is mostly conscripted, its armor force is decent. It doesn't pay too much attention it, choosing to instead focus on its special forces. Germany has a large force of proffesional/conscript infantry, a decent amount of armor and a decent airforce. It got my vote because of its economy, population, and influence on world politics, rather than its military, though.

On second thought, the military capabilities of the two are rather equal based on their population. I have no doubt in either of them to be able to defend themselves.

I also think saying the UK is best because it is allied with the US is rubbish. The UK does not own the US, therefore the power is not collective.

 

[Benderino]

Originally posted by calgacus


Ok

I'm no expert. If you think that (i.e. that Germany's military is better than France's), then you probably have a good reason. I'll just let others deal with this, even if France's unpopularity might mean that not everyone's going to be fair to her.

I doubt that we could learn much from the no. of troops sent to Serbia though.

I have nothing against France, but I don't remember where I got the thought that Germany was more powerful. Why do you doubt that? The more number of troops sent means the greater number of troops available, right?

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Benderino


I have nothing against France, but I don't remember where I got the thought that Germany was more powerful. Why do you doubt that? The more number of troops sent means the greater number of troops available, right?

No not really, just the nation's commitment to that cause.

 

[Benderino]

Perhaps, that makes just as much sense.

I'm getting too sweepy for this *yawn*

 

[Pangur Bán]

Well, once again Benderino...

 

[Benderino]

Now it's my turn to say:

Originally posted by calgacus
I don't get you Benderino*

*Benderino meaning Calgacus

 

[Pangur Bán]

Oh yeah

 

[Benderino]

Ooooookkkkkkk......?

*slowly backs away...goes upstairs to bed*




(g'night, I think )

 

[naervod]

Here is a link, with credible rating of armed forces of the world, in the pre-Gulf War II (still 2003) world. The link is to Europe's armed forces, and I find this source to be very reliable, the site is updated almost daily. You can click on each column heading to see exactly how the ratings/statistics work.

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/e.asps

 

[The Art of War]

Originally posted by PolishAssassin
w/o a strong leader the russians are screwed! Stalin came along and just tore the Germans a new one.......

Stalin didn't do that much, especially since he wasn't expecting the Barbarossa operation. Vyacheslav Molotov would've been a better General Secretary. All Stalin did was kill off potential officer corp and starve the people. Any competent ruler could've rallied his people.

 

[The Art of War]

Originally posted by PolishAssassin
w/o a strong leader the russians are screwed! Stalin came along and just tore the Germans a new one.......

Stalin didn't do that much, especially since he wasn't expecting the Barbarossa operation. Vyacheslav Molotov would've been a better General Secretary. All Stalin did was kill off potential officer corp and starve the people. Any competent ruler could've rallied his people.

 

[Stapel]

Originally posted by calgacus
@everyone else, if you insist on correcting me, then please be accurate: stop saying Britain or Great Britain: England's offical name is the United Kingdom

I stated England is not a nation! The UK indeed is, I don't need to tell you that.
But saying England's official name is the UK.. I don't understand that. That's like saying the official name of Texas is the US? Would you care to explain Calgacus!

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Stapel


I stated England is not a nation! The UK indeed is, I don't need to tell you that.
But saying England's official name is the UK.. I don't understand that. That's like saying the official name of Texas is the US? Would you care to explain Calgacus!

No. I've done so loads of times. You should know by now!

 

[jack merchant]

In 5 pages, only HuckFinn got it right. In modern-day Europe, the military capabilities don't matter, it's the economy, stupid !
Which makes my vote for Germany obvious.

However, we here in the Netherlands have Weapons of Mass Distraction .

 

[Stapel]

Originally posted by calgacus


No. I've done so loads of times. You should know by now!

Pffff, A typical answer from some one who is wrong!

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Stapel


Pffff, A typical answer from some one who is wrong!

No amount of goading, Bas, will drag me OT into yet another debate on this topic!

 

[phoenix_night]

Originally posted by Stapel
I stated England is not a nation! The UK indeed is, I don't need to tell you that.

England is a nation.

A state is what it is not (officially).

 

[Stapel]

Originally posted by calgacus


No amount of goading, Bas, will drag me OT into yet another debate on this topic!

OK, I see! I thougth I was missing something, but now I see it is a 'debatable' thing.

Still, whether Engerland is a nation or not, I don't understand what you mean. How come you think England's official name is the UK? Can you provide a link to a previous thread or pm the whole shebag?

The reason why I am confused is that you yourself used the word England in the poll.

And sorry for the goading! Btw: I have just learnt a new English word: goading!