"Progressive" Suckers

[water_ripple]

Heh, no. China's army is woefully underequipped. Sure they do ok against civilians, but put them up against a real force and they'd get slaughtered. Training counts, and training wise the list looks like this.
1) Israel
2) USA
3) Russia/UK/Switzerland (others too, but these pop to mind)
everyone else.

Poor training cannot be made up for with numbers.

You make a good point, but Russia is in economic crisis at the moment. They cannot afford to pay the military staff to at least stay on guard. I am sure that the only way the Swiss would engage in militaristic activity is if somebody stormed into their country. Massive army they have. Almost everyone will be called up if they do have to defend themselves.

Isreal, the USA, and the UK though are well trained. But, there are plenty of countries who are not showing very much love for the democratic way of life. Also gurellia warfare is not something that ends swiftly. (Vietnam, our effort in Iraq to rebuild their country) We may be well trained and seasoned, but warfare gets more complicated when one is not sure who is military and who is civillian. Strength in numbers...WW2..Hitler's army was extremely well trained, but when he went in USSR not only did he have the climate working against him but he also faced fresh troops after winning battles.

 

[water_ripple]

I think you missed my point. Why should I worry about other countries having a large military more than I worry about our own large military? Are not all countries equally capable of domestic tyranny?

Yeah I think all countries are capable of domestic tyranny. I think the concern should be would one rather live in a democracy or in a dictatorship. Freedom or oppresion..that should be the concern. Not conquest and power.

 

[tulc]

Now Lillith, don't confuse the disscussion by stating what should be obvious to anyone who reads or watches the news. With or without a bong.
tulc