How accurate do you think Global Fire Power is?

[Ir.Tab.]

I'm not a GFP staff so I can't comment accurately. Based on my understanding the country which uses upgraded vehicle will be ranked higher. As in the way Israel is ranked above Egypt.

Yes, that's true. they should provide more transparency for such a controversial ranking. The formula of GFP is unknown. The numbers are unreferenced. The fundamentals of estimations are unknown. The categories need to be divided to sub-categories with more mature evaluating. The issues like "post 147" should be answered clearly.

 

[TopCat]

My my where is Bangladesh? We dont shoot that does not mean we are out of bullets. I see Afhganistan is there.. I did not know Taliban head counts were measured as parameter in this GFP BS

 

[Ir.Tab.]

For an example:

The Composite Index of National Capability (CINC)

This one could be classified as a scientific Index because it is possible to evaluate it's scope and shortcomings and the required information is officially published by countries.

 

[RayKalm]

For an example:

The Composite Index of National Capability (CINC)

This one could be classified as a scientific Index because it is possible to evaluate it's scope and shortcomings and the required information is officially published by countries.

I agree. That list would be much more accurate than this phony list everyone uses.

 

[alok mishra]

Global fire power is ranking is accurate. they consider all the terms which are necessary to fight a war. you can't fight just because you have nuclear weapon and large army. there is also some things which is important in war situation like your economy, economy show your how long you can fight. your land forces, air power, naval power and so on important to face enemy from every side..So i think GFP ranking is accurate.

 

[RayKalm]

Global fire power is ranking is accurate. they consider all the terms which are necessary to fight a war. you can't fight just because you have nuclear weapon and large army. there is also some things which is important in war situation like your economy, economy show your how long you can fight. your land forces, air power, naval power and so on important to face enemy from every side..So i think GFP ranking is accurate.

What about modernity? The quality of weapons rather than the quantity?

 

[King Solomon]

What about modernity? The quality of weapons rather than the quantity?

How many times should I say that is ALREADY taken into account?

Why do you think Russia ranks higher than China and Israel ranks higher than Egypt/Iran?

 

[Ir.Tab.]

I agree. That list would be much more accurate than this phony list everyone uses.

Dear RayKalm I have no idea about the accuracy but as you see in this case the formula is clearly stated. The inputs validation could be re-assisted. In other words transparency was fulfilled.

For me it is only an index. If some one really wants to leave this childish game and to realistically compare the countries there are interesting globally accepted indexes which could be found here.

 

[RayKalm]

How many times should I say that is ALREADY taken into account?

Why do you think Russia ranks higher than China and Israel ranks higher than Egypt/Iran?

If you read the writings before the list, you will see that GFP does in no way account quality.

Just because Russia is ranked higher than China, doesn't mean that the rules break.

 

[King Solomon]

If you read the writings before the list, you will see that GFP does in no way account quality.

Just because Russia is ranked higher than China, doesn't mean that the rules break.

Therefore GFP comparisons are for consideration in a conventional war based solely on each individual nation's capabilities on land, at sea and through the air while including logistical and financial aspects when waging total war

Russia-China

Israel-Iran-Egypt

South Korea-North Korea

US - China

More?

Finally, pray publishing your "own" rankings if you despise GFP so much? Maybe, just because pakistan is not ranked in top 10?

 

[Fantasy]

My standard is pretty simple; can a nation's military battle 1 million Chinese PLA troops, the standard bad guys of our time, and win? Just three countries can say yes to this question; the US, Russia, and Korea. India may win a limited conflict, but would have trouble stopping the advances of 1 million PLA troops in an all out war.

Korea has an unusually powerful military for a country of its size because of the legacy of the Korean War; the primary combatant for the ROK from 1951 to 1953 was the PLA, and the Korean military was designed to battle a combined North Korean-Chinese force of 1.5 million troops in the event of the resumption of the Korean War.


1. Nuclear weapons are useless in almost all war scenarios unless the nuclear state is facing a total destruction similar to Germany and Japan of 1945, and may wish to take out its enemy with it to hell.
2. Aside India, Pakistan doesn't present a military threat to anyone else.


Philippines have a lot of people to be conscripted, as opposed to Sweden short on population.


Weapons of the last resort upon a state's impending doom and total annihilation. Nukes are tactically useless for all other cases, and the Soviets and Americans would have just nuked Taliban to end their Afghan wars if possible instead of losing tons of troops and equipment.

The war from the South Korean side were primarily fought by UN troops, without the assistance of the UN the North Koreans would have took down the entire Korea with Ease, these are facts, and the Chinese do not have a million men army present at any one time during the war, you shouldn't be revising history like this. It wasn't until the UN troops(no South Koreans) march near the Yalu river that Chinese forces sprang to action and drove the UN all the way back south and even retook Seoul, then retreated back to the 38th parallel. Again no South Korean involved in all the major battles, so stop revising history. If it wasn't for the UN intervention, Korea would have been one country today.

 

[RayKalm]

Russia-China

Israel-Iran-Egypt

South Korea-North Korea

US - China

More?

Finally, pray publishing your "own" rankings if you despise GFP so much? Maybe, just because pakistan is not ranked in top 10?

That in no way says that quality is taken into account. If so, why do you think Pakistan is not above Iran? If you say Russia is up there because of their modernity, then the same thing should be accounted for Pakistan.

Israel-Pakistan-Egypt-Iran*

 

[King Solomon]

That in no way says that quality is taken into account. If so, why do you think Pakistan is not above Iran? If you say Russia is up there because of their modernity, then the same thing should be accounted for Pakistan.

Israel-Pakistan-Egypt-Iran*

Ah... so, that is the problem, pakistan is not ranked higher than what it is.

You've got to be impartial when assessing anything. just because your country is not ranked higher, does not mean you trash the ranking.

As far as pakistan not being ranked higher, it could be due to its oil/energy dependency which is a huge disadvantage in case of war.

 

[Ir.Tab.]

Nope, lack of clearance! (now your turn RayKalm)

 

[poseidon]

Is it not accurate because why???
just because some people do not like their rank lol