Good afternoon,

I understand this posting is a military discussion, although it is a discussion not restricted to military aviation, so hence under my judgement it is in the "non-aviation" forum, however if it does not belong here, please move it to the better forum to discuss.

Over the past week British PM Theresa May, has come under fire for apparently suggesting the British military cannot sustain a tier one status in military capabilities. The discussion between the Prime Minister, and Defence Secretary, Gavin Williamson was first printed in the Financial Times, when May asked Williamson to justify future spending trends for the British Armed Forces, weeks before a crucial NATO Summit in Brussels.

For reference:
- https://www.ft.com/content/caf066c6-749 ... 23e4384287

The point of this posting is not to address the politics of whether May should have said this or now, but instead ask what countries in 2018 can be ranked Tier One militaries in your opinions?

The list is in some ways subjective as countries militaries are often based upon various circumstances, like where a state is located geographically, and respective defence expenditures.

In my opinion technology plays a role, plus status in international organisations like UNSC (UK being a permanent member) and NATO.

So UNSC permanent 5 states in my opinion are classed as Tier One militaries:
- United States
- France
- United Kingdom
- Russia
- China

But do Australia, India, South Africa count? If not, why not?

Finally, I do not care for arguments, all I care for is finding out lists as to who is "in" and who is "out". I find this stuff, military rankings etc. fun and sure I am not alone in this!

Thanks and I look forward to your answers!

Chris.

What is a tier 1 armed forces? One with nuclear devices? Then you can add: Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea to this list.

If you want to leave nuclear devices out of the equation, than for its size Israel is a very good fighting force and in high regard. Turkey has a good force, although with recent events the quality of the man is declining. Japan and Canada has a good force and Australia.

Dutchy wrote:

What is a tier 1 armed forces? One with nuclear devices? Then you can add: Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea to this list.
.

A tier 1 armed force is one with nuclear weapons, an army, navy and air force and the ability to project power with those.

That is probably just the short list from the top, maybe India at some point.

Best regards
Thomas

Well if a tier 1 armed force is one with nuclear weapons, along with an army of 2m; perhaps North Korea meets the benchmark.

910A wrote:

Well if a tier 1 armed force is one with nuclear weapons, along with an army of 2m; perhaps North Korea meets the benchmark.

They are able to project power, very locally, but nevertheless, they are capable of doing so. It meets Thomas criteria.

What about Israel?

Evening,

Dutchy wrote:

What is a tier 1 armed forces? One with nuclear devices?

I too was unsure as to what requirements were necessary for a military to be classified as a Tier 1 force. Although I am sure there is literature somewhere that covers this, however I think it is down to personal perception, as to what we each think are necessary conditions a military must make.

Dutchy wrote:

If you want to leave nuclear devices out of the equation, than for its size Israel is a very good fighting force and in high regard.

VTKillarney1 wrote:

What about Israel?

I had thought about Israel, as well for instance their application of technologically advanced weapon systems is unmatched by many neighbouring states, but then again they have a weaker Naval component. I would argue- politics aside - that Israel could be a contender. But a lot of their budget =is made up foreign military aid from the US, if that was suddenly removed could they still be a equally strong and sustainable fighting force?

Interesting comments guys! Keep it up!

Regards,
Chris.

I saw a video that ranked them like this:
USA
Russia
China
India
France
UK

One could argue the the USA is the only Tier 1 military. With Russia, China, France, and the U.K. As Tier 2 powers.

The US is the only country that can project uninterrupted power globally. And they can do it with all three branches. It may not last this way for long, but no other country can match the US ability to be in multiple conflicts all the time. Having 11 super carriers and 9 assault carriers plus the strategic bombing and transport assets puts the US in a Tier of its own.

MikeDrop wrote:

One could argue the the USA is the only Tier 1 military. With Russia, China, France, and the U.K. As Tier 2 powers.

The US is the only country that can project uninterrupted power globally. And they can do it with all three branches. It may not last this way for long, but no other country can match the US ability to be in multiple conflicts all the time. Having 11 super carriers and 9 assault carriers plus the strategic bombing and transport assets puts the US in a Tier of its own.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children...This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

I'll let you google that.

LMP737 wrote:

MikeDrop wrote:

One could argue the the USA is the only Tier 1 military. With Russia, China, France, and the U.K. As Tier 2 powers.

The US is the only country that can project uninterrupted power globally. And they can do it with all three branches. It may not last this way for long, but no other country can match the US ability to be in multiple conflicts all the time. Having 11 super carriers and 9 assault carriers plus the strategic bombing and transport assets puts the US in a Tier of its own.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children...This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

I'll let you google that.

I think you are in the wrong thread. The topic author clearly described the ground rules for the conversation and this post doesn't seem to fit with the intent of the thread.

MikeDrop wrote:

I think you are in the wrong thread. The topic author clearly described the ground rules for the conversation and this post doesn't seem to fit with the intent of the thread.

Oh yes, because everyone here sticks to the original subject.

Dublinspotter wrote:

Evening,

Dutchy wrote:

What is a tier 1 armed forces? One with nuclear devices?

I too was unsure as to what requirements were necessary for a military to be classified as a Tier 1 force. Although I am sure there is literature somewhere that covers this

UK newspapers, they are discussing staying a tier 1 military or not all the time.

MikeDrop wrote:

One could argue the the USA is the only Tier 1 military. With Russia, China, France, and the U.K. As Tier 2 powers.

Only if you fiddle the definition. The US may be multiple Tier 1 forces under one command, but it is still just tier 1.

The US is the only country that can project uninterrupted power globally. And they can do it with all three branches. It may not last this way for long, but no other country can match the US ability to be in multiple conflicts all the time. Having 11 super carriers and 9 assault carriers plus the strategic bombing and transport assets puts the US in a Tier of its own.

Even the US isn't so sure of they can fight two major conflicts at a time and the proliferation of area denial weapons seem to be quite deliberately to counter those carriers.
There is also lots of places you can't go without other countries approval. When B2 strike far away from home, you need tanker support from bases in friendly nations. The attack on Lybia in the 80s was already quite the strain on logistics for such a small operation, because overflight rights where hard to get. America's military might is real, but dependent on the good will by friends. Qualitatively the same problem smaller tier 1 forces have.

Best regards
Thomas

MikeDrop wrote:

One could argue the the USA is the only Tier 1 military. With Russia, China, France, and the U.K. As Tier 2 powers.

The US is the only country that can project uninterrupted power globally. And they can do it with all three branches. It may not last this way for long, but no other country can match the US ability to be in multiple conflicts all the time. Having 11 super carriers and 9 assault carriers plus the strategic bombing and transport assets puts the US in a Tier of its own.

Exactly. The US is a class on its own.

Everyone else follows several degrees of operational capability below that. Bunching the US with Russia, UK or China doesn't make sense.

But that's for conventional forces, anyone with a nuclear warhead and a delivery system is tier 1, just on a different, binary, list. Nuclear or not.

Afternoon,

I think MikeDrop offers a good answer in relation to the United States. Although the US military is not the best force, (can any military be perfect?) there are certain capabilities that only the Americans can deliver without the dependence on other states making them for sure a Tier One status. I would say America's Military supremacy is only so capable because of its economic and diplomatic status as the "worlds last/only superpower", for example basing nuclear defence systems in other states requires extensive trust that few other bilateral relationships can offer. Economically the US had the Marshall Plan which effectively helped rebuild European economies.

The USA is a country with so many angles when it comes to this particular topic.

Really enjoying the discussions!

The UK a "Tier 1" Military country


The UK hasn't been a tier 1 military power for years.

We have a defence force at best.

I should hope the USA is a level above every over nation, hell they should be several levels ahead, the spend more on their military than the next 20+ top spending counties combined, and all but one of them is officially an ally to the USA

That said if we are looking to counties with the ability to project force when required rather than just police actions as it were then you’d have to say that the following three are definitely on the list

France
UK
Russia

China I’d say has certainly got the man power and equipment but not sure if the desire is truly there beyond the local theatre

Australia
New Zealand
India
Canada
Turkey
Spain

Will certainly be able to put out a solid force but are likely to only come out to fight as part of a broader force backed by the USA, UK or France

Then you have

Israel
UAE
Qatar

These have a modern capable force but are only really interested in local conflict and defence but will come along as part of a coalition

I would put the US alone in the Tier 1 category.

Then countries with diverse capabilities along with the industry behind it to make the hardware, such as if an arms race happened, they could participate. Current capabilities including a well trained force are also important in that context. If you suddenly mobilise millions of civilians to fight, you must be able to train them on top of equipping them.

Japan has a first rate air force and navy and now that China has awakened them, they are venturing farther from home.
As much as I like New Zealand, their military is very small. The army is composed of 2 infantry battalions with LAVs and the navy only has two frigates and a support ship. The air force has no fighter or attack aircraft. They are like the little brother of Australia.