Nepal, mostly because I dont really know anywhere else that has had such little outside interest. Apart from brief semi-control from the Indians during the 8th century BC it remained independent till Britain came along and even then they didnt conquer it more turn it into a mass recruitment centre.
>>528249 Not true, russians have litterally twice the the army size of the whole nato union, when the russians attacked the ukranians the usa tried to come up with defend strategies and even with the help of all of its european allies they still couldn´t find a scenario in their favour, fag.
>>528283 Oh I´m sorry did you not see the >no favourable outcome for the US or NATO vs russia? let me tell you again just so the autistic retard you are might actually be able to comprehend it. The US found no scenario in which they with or without the whole of NATO could defeat russia in a war now, fuckign illiterary degenerate
>>528184 They never controlled Nepal though. Just made a deal that they would never invade again if they were allowed to recruit. Nepalese were impressed by bravery of brit officers and that they didn't sack towns so took it as a compliment. Pretty sure in ww2 the Nepalese king offered to loan the brits his entire army too. Gurkhas kick ass
>>528261 No it couldn't. Britain's massive navy meant it went for a professional army of about 200k at the height of its imperial might. Strongest army Britain ever had at any point was from 1917 to the early 1920's. Where it briefly had the strongest land army in europe before it went back to its normal set up. Brit soldiers are often extreamly good individually but basicly never had enough to be considered a land army. Prussians/french/Russians are Europe's natural land powers (and therefore the worlds) for most of modern history up till after ww2
>>528418 The Ottoman empire was stronger then the Spain till the financial fallout from the fourth Venetian-Ottoman war, namely from the cost of rebuilding their fleet after the battle of lepanto in 1571. The Spanish and Ottoman empires were both bankrupt by late 1573 & early 1575 respectably, but the Spanish crown recovered much faster.
>so I can tell you only since the beginning of European supremacy in the mid 1400s
A bit of loaded thing to say, because that was during the rise of the Ottomans. I would say that China fell well behind European/Ottoman artillery & firearms starting in ~1423 with invention of the arquebus.
>>530794 Non but it means nothing since most other countries military personnel don't have experience in combat against other countries personnel. If you think driving around and IEDs going off every week or two or the odd 10 minute firefight against combatants of maybe 5 fighters you can't even see is valuable experience you're deluded.
>>529147 Briefly after ww1 it did. Though it didn't last long. France and Germany suffers much more during the war and the brits finished with a fairly modern looking army with tanks modern tactics and a lot of men. It got rid of it by the early 1920's however.
>>530802 China's problem is that they have zero force projection. Having a big army is all fine and dandy, but you need the ability to move large numbers of troops and pieces of equipment in short periods of time as well. The US Air Force and Navy are respectfully the two largest air powers on the planet. The US naval fleet is capable of moving enormous amounts of troops and gear around the globe.
>>530792 >current day is China You're basing this on what, exactly?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.