Russia has stronger army than both However all of them including Russia don't have sustainable armies and within 30 years none of them will have a decent army anyway
@@baha3alshamari152 Tell that to private Conscriptovich with his wood stock ak, sheet metal ballistic plate and paper armoured APC who's getting grenades dropped on him from consumer grade drones because the $20m pantsir system that's supposed to protect him can't run due to all the fuel and tyres being sold off by their commander. The best! 🤪
@@ImtheHitcher You are talking about the mobniks not the professional army The mobniks are cannon fodders their purpose is to attack the Ukrainian positions in order to reveal the position of the Ukrainians so the professional soldiers with artillery support can target them Russia has 8 millions men unneeded for the society so they can be thrown to the meat grinder without a problem
@@baha3alshamari152 their active army maybe, but they would have more soldiers than Poland at war time because of their conscription they have so much in reserves
@@ganjabandit5074 That may be true but the Finnish have always (by always I mean since the country was founded) designed their military against a Russian invasion. I don't think they could bring an unstoppable force as much as an immovable object. Poland would be out of its element either forced into a likely contested naval invasion or going through one of the two big neighbors (Russia) that's already subjugated them. That being said if Russia tried to pick on them given how well Ukraine is doing I think Poland or Finland by itself would probably fold Russia.
@@annoyedbipolar7424 well I never said they were an offensive country, simply that their military is big. Although they did go on the offensive during ww2 against the Soviet Union to try to reclaim their land
Lol i highly doubt america has more than 205k personel just hanging around in europe, especially considering that would be 1/5th of their army Edit: I looked it up and the us has around 64k personnel in europe, which would put them at about 9th place for just personnel, and 200 aircraft which would put them at 11th place in terms of that. So no it is not "technically true lol"
The UK and France have an advantage due to the most powerful land force in Europe right now is Poland. They are continuing to get military equipment from the United States including a deal announced in early December where the US approved a $3.7 billion M1-A1 Abrams deal. Poland is becoming a chad land force in Europe.
@@MrSkully49 But didn't the countries which do want to change it simply do it now because of war in Ukraine? When Trump was in office everyone was laughing at him. His geopolitical influence is vastly overstated. He only made the USA less trustworthy in the eyes of his allies...
@@Skyrimfan002 I mean from 2016 the spending was $262bln and by 2020 it increased to $313bln which is a around a 20% increase over his term, so you can’t say Trump didn’t have a role in that. I’d say the recent investments by European countries due to the war Ukraine were because countries such as Germany realised if it came to it, their army is crippled
@@MrSkully49 The spending increased beforehand due to a longwinded disagreement in the past coalition. The CDU wanted to increase spending while the SPD was fairly pacifist and wanted to maintain the status quo. In fact, because the SPD lost some votes in the past, the CDU could increase spending. The spending increase was a very slow trend which already started in 2014. Ukraine accelerated this and kind of forced Scholz to change party policy. As always, national policies aren't soley influenced by the USA. Trumps antics were made fun of in the whole political spectrum of Germanys politics. If in any way he did influence Germany, he made more here be in favour of Frances policy of strategic indepedence. And even that anti-USA sentiment is already disappearing again since Biden got elected.
France is by far the strongest military power in Europe. Only totally autonomus nuclear power of Europe, Only to master all the needed tech. Second place to UK, the most close one.
@@carwyngriffiths The french nuclear program has nothing with americans. The French deployed it alone with their own technology. this is why for example France does not need F35 whereas Germany yes.
I know two dudes who are 25 now and served in the Bundeswehr. One of the them didn't even get new army boots upon joining. It's just sad. Imagine the state of the vehicles when the budget isn't even allowing every soldier to get his own fucking boots.
Its not AK, its MSBS Grot, new Polish rifle. Its a Magpull Masada, ACR Bushmaster grade rifle. Better than AK, one of the best in the world right now, propably.
It's also impossible because how much equipment (i.e number of APCs, IFVs, etc) a Military has does not necessarily equate to operability, for instance France needed to use the RAF and the UK's Chinook's to help transport their equipment and troops around Mali.
I'd like to point out in terms of 'ships". The UK is clear of France. The French as usual love to put on a display and count their tugboats and support vessels as part of their numbers. In reality they have 69 'Ships'
Yes it’s true but the UK has massive manpower shortages. With the 2 new carriers the UK had to cannibalize crew from other ships. So in reality the UK can’t even properly escort its own carriers, that’s an L
@@alextoso100 i mean manpower shortages wont be nearly as big of an issue in an actual war far more people would enlist to join the military and would be able to fill the gaps and if mobilisation occurs then there would be more than enough
To be fair it failed to take note of 2 major developments for the British army,. After a decade of essentially rebuilding the entire navy/air force, its now the armies turn. Everything from body armour, upgraded L85's, Challenger 3's, Boxer and potentially Ajax IFV's along side more M270's, multiple thermal optics per squad and integrated combat networks with drones through the future soldier program are all coming on line by 2030. And that was all before Ukraine, which has seen Parliament expand our military spend up to 3% of GDP by 2030. Thats an increase of 50% which should mean we'll be spending in the vicinity of £70 billion a year. So watch this space, and as always, Germany, sort your shit out lol
artillery is useful when, like russia, your aim is to destroy a smaller opponent military and not necessarily capture ground. but if you want to capture ground you still need tanks etc. which is why at the start of the war there were so many russian tanks moving around in ukraine.
What you truly desire is a combined arms operation, with airplanes, cavalry (tanks and other armoured vehicles), and infantry Russia is doing badly because they forgot that they need to combine arms, else tanks are terrible/tanks are only good in such operations, else they're basically death traps)
Finland and Poland are 2 most ready for war coutrys in EU. Cuz they know their neighboors very well... whole eastern europe was screaming for 2 decades what is coming , but ofc west thought they know better and they can do business with Putler... well guess who was right all along ?
As a German, without having seen the video, I can say the French. They haven't ruined their military as far as we can see from the outside, maintain competent forces in all 3 classical branches and they're a nuclear power too and that is just a factor of it's own. Modern Day Germany would never build their own nuclear weapons, for one we signed treaties not to, for two the Germans are nowadays highly skeptical of anything that has to do with nuclear power or.... nuclear powered stuff, to put it mildly.
I believe it's France haven't watched the vid yet (The reason I believe it's France was when they conducted a military operation in Africa and absolutely destroyed the rebels aswell as having pretty impressive Military Equipment they made Napoleon proud that's for sure) Edit: saw a couple replies questioning as to why it is impressive at all. After all they're rebels not full fledge militaries. I'll give you a brief explanation The rebels at the time they joined controlled half of Mali I believe is the country France turned the tide immediately with modern tactics additionally it is Africa so supply and attrition would be a problem (If you play hoi4 you know what I'm talking about) so yeah. It isn't Desert Storm levels of impressive but impressive nonetheless
Being french I would say that no, France is not scary, it is just the rest of europe which is so pitiful these days. At least the UK has increased its spending a lot for quite a few years now, and Germany has just awoken with the ukraine crisis. PS: GDP is higly dependent on population size. That is why Germany is cruising in front, and sweden has such a small GDP on the graph.
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 nobody is competitive with the US. And russia is a sad joke, even historically, it needed the help of the rest of the major powers of the time to survive a german or french invasion.
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462The point of Europe building up their own militaries is not to compete with the US…. the point is that Europe as a whole should be logistically prepared for and more invested for defense. Russia is not even in the picture lol they’re only taken seriously because they have nukes.
The UK has done larger deployments than the French have and fought a war in the South Atlantic within that time, France needed British and American heavy lift helicopters and transport planes to operate in Mali. With that said though France has a a capable military, but is severely lacking in naval and air logistics. Both have their strengths and weaknesses and neither are really stronger than the other, but I'd say the UK military is better prepared to operate in the modern world due to its expeditionary capabilities and extensive logistics that is second only to the US. I mean for this video the French naval stat is a load of bull, the UK has double the tonnage of the Marine Nationale.
@@noelgrippen4707 If we're talking about a war here. Sure the UK has the capability but they couldn't sustain that longer than France could. unless we're talking air superiority but even with that in today's world air defense is absurd and downright scary, and drones have changed the dynamic entirely. Navel power doesn't prove superiority it only allows you to project limited control over a different front. Edit: but I see your point. I think the English military has some great ability with the resources they have but fighting the long game its just not possible without the US.
@@GODFRY524 Oh yeah I agree, by the British military focusing on logistics more than the French this definitely leads to the French having overall more firepower regionally. I'd say where the British military make up in logistics they sometimes lack in firepower whereas the French make up in firepower sometimes lack in logistics. At the moment I wouldn't rate the chances of the RAF against the French air force, with too few in number F35s and not enough Typhoons it wouldn't look great but I'm British so I'm a bit biased :). I think the British military has more cruise missiles than France but I'm not too sure on that I could be wrong, which if I'm correct would definitely be a plus for the British military. However the UK is severely lacking in sophisticated air defence systems, we're only just replacing Rapier with SkySabre and even SkySabre is not an air defence system designed for high end threats like ballistic missiles. Drones are definitely interesting and the UK military is very invested with drones I'm not sure about France though. I think something people don't realise is how intertwined the UK and France are militarily, French military contractors do very well in the British market and if I remember correctly about a decade ago there was talk about covering each others nations nuclear deterrent patrols if for whatever reason the other was unable to do theirs which shows a lot of trust at the time but I don't know about now. And yeah I agree no country can conduct a sustained war without the US right now, unless France and the UK go total war, in their current peacetime postures it just isn't possible without the US.
He wasn’t exactly the first American politician to bring it up, just the loudest. Lots of American politicians have been complaining that the rest of NATO, especially Germany and Canada, are not hitting the 2% goal for a while.
@@bruh5361 Yeah, but you didn't hear Tommy referring to other Presidents before Trump at 0:38? I was commenting on what Tommy said. But of course if I was talking about Obama you wouldn't commented that....
@@InAeternumRomaMater lmao as if I was an Obama fan. He was, after Trump and Bush jr., the president who conducted the dumbest foreign policy. He announced the pivot and then didn't pull through, giving the Chinese an extra 6 years to prepare, he drew red lines but didn't defend them and he didn't pull out of Afghanistan
The french copied UK special forces but it’s not all one way. From what I’ve seen, both countries use eachother as a metric in which to improve themselves
Probably not, crossing the channel is difficult to the point that even the Germans didn’t even want to try despite being the strongest power in Europe to have ever existed. If it was only France they were facing the war would likely drag on for a few years but ultimately come to a stalemate, perhaps Britain could dare another Dunkirk invasion but I reckon the French navy must have been studying such things for decades now.
Elaborate cause at the moment the French defence budget does not even compete with the British ( who have the 4/3rd largest defence budget in the world and the largest in Europe) also the fact they're the only nation on earth other than the United States than can deploy anywhere in the world within 48 hours, including the logistical capabilities that France needed support from the UK with their recent deployment to Mali, oh and the two Supercarriers in His majesty's fleet.
The thing with Britain is that many people here just don’t want to join the military. The military here is constantly begging for more men to join and gives many bonuses to those who join (such as free houses, military benefits etc). Less soldiers means a smaller army and less people making weapons
yep , lack of patriotism and general lack of "need" historically and still presently in other countries , most military recruits were poor , relatively uneducated men that wanted Jobs that require little qualifications and pay decently , and this was and is obviously compounded by patriotism and pride but presently in the UK if you are poor and uneducated , there are far better options than joining the military , and without patriotic fervour , people simply just don't have any motivation to become a solider instead of say just a bricklayer if there is ever a major war many more people would of course enlist but that isnt exactly a good thing lmao
Where are you getting that from? It’s actually the complete opposite but the government keep cutting the numbers. It’s really a dumb move from them because if war breaks out with Russia(entirely possible given current events) then they would be so vulnerable and would take them at least a year to fully mobilise. Let’s just hope that doesn’t happen I guess..😬
poland has the most quality to quantity(aka. most well equipped armies, up to date equipment compared to others nations, etc.) ratio, so if a country invades, even germany rn it can probably hold but maybe lose some of the north
Who has the strongest army? Why of course it's Turkey. It has 20 million sleeper agents settled across Europe who actively vote in Turkish elections and are required by law to answer the draft.
0:38- every other President before him (and I am sure Biden) has made the same point about 2 percent GDP, they were just less oafish about it because they understood the value NATO brings to the US.
You can relax. Germany is not what it used to be. The core issue was that Germany was so much more populated than anyone else. They are still the largest nation in europe, but not by the huge margin they used to during the 1850-1950 period.
Mmm... there is about 60.000 US troops in europe. I am sure they are equiped better than any other nation, but still, that doesn't make them the 1st force in Europe.
Yeah I believe nato tactics in Poland and Germany in the face of a Russian invasion is to hold the Russians off as long as possible until the United States has the logistics to deploy. But I don’t think Russia has that capability tbh
1:57May be back in the 50s and 60s....but after that I think we allowed them to build up there army after the Korean war....with American supper vision of course
yeah but it's not in NATO and it's a small country (still a rich one) and the tiny amount of population it has doesn't allow it to have a very strong military
German has better tech and economy but French have foreign legion, and nuke. I would say French mainly for the nuke. Edit: oh I forget German is not a full normal state yet😅
Japan has removed the restrictions from the 2nd WWII so now there modernizing there army navy and airforce they will become the 3rd major military expenses in the world
Its all well and good having all the equipment. Last time I checked the UK has never asked France to help us. France in Vietnam help France in Mali Help
@@Solveig.Tissot what about it? We where there defending you again. Whilst meeting our agreed promise to.poland both French and British troops held the rear so you can calm down.
Falkland. According to both the prime minister and minister of defence respectives autobiographies, France was their best ally in this war. And Farnce has answered every demands for help from its allies, appart from Vietnam and irak, as it opposed both. Your xenophobic non sense is sad
@@MN-vz8qm xenophobic are you saying the French are a different species? 🤔 also last time I checked you didn't hand over the excocet missile frequencies and we lost warships to them. France was a hindrance
Mmm... there is about 60.000 US troops in europe. I am sure they are equiped better than any other nation, but still, that doesn't make them the 1st force in Europe.
I mean democracy and capitalisn does have the means to combat climate change. What people forget is that there's millions of liberal and democratic people wanting to do something but the right doesnt wanna do anything and even occasionally denies it.
Also he ignores the fact that capitalism by far breeds innovation more than any other system, China only has high tech stuff because they steal from the west, it’ll be people like bezos and musk that pay for innovations that will help the climate, because it’ll be very profitable in hundreds of years when the climate is actually in danger
That’s why I’m hoping to vote left leaning this upcoming election in the United Stares. But either way I don’t see either side successfully creating a green wave. Geopolitically, we source 85% of rare metals like cobalt from Russia and Ukraine and those are essential for creating solar panels and some of the components we need for electric vehicles. Unfortunately the hard truth of the matter is that if we want to completely go green we need to rely on Russia or work with the cobalt the United States have which is not much of the global supply. This war essentially is going to make it very difficult to rely on nonrenewable energy
The video is focused on who will become stronger, Italy is unlikely to get A LOT stronger, It will get a little bit stronger and just remain in the current position. Germany might become stronger and italy will be in between germany and Poland But those lists are wrong. They make 0 sense.
![เปิดใจ “ต้นหอม ศกุนตลา” หลังโดนพาดพิงธุรกิจที่เคยทำ และผลกระทบทำถูกปลดฟ้าผ่า! | แฉ 24 ต.ค.67 [2/3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vCi5OIqlxaE/mqdefault.jpg)
Tommy when Germany militarises: 'Prussia's theme comes in'
Tommy when he hears about Poland becoming the most powerful military: 🤨😳😢😠
8:30 Tommy's reaction to Poland is the most German thing ive ever seen LMAO
I laughed so hard, especially with his little patriotic antics just before xD
Accurate
We're coming for them and their sausages........and we're not even gay 😎
UK & France have the most capable militaries in Europe. Poland probably has the, relatively, best land army in terms of size and capability
Russia has stronger army than both
However all of them including Russia don't have sustainable armies and within 30 years none of them will have a decent army anyway
@@baha3alshamari152 Tell that to private Conscriptovich with his wood stock ak, sheet metal ballistic plate and paper armoured APC who's getting grenades dropped on him from consumer grade drones because the $20m pantsir system that's supposed to protect him can't run due to all the fuel and tyres being sold off by their commander.
The best! 🤪
@@ImtheHitcher
You are talking about the mobniks not the professional army
The mobniks are cannon fodders their purpose is to attack the Ukrainian positions in order to reveal the position of the Ukrainians so the professional soldiers with artillery support can target them
Russia has 8 millions men unneeded for the society so they can be thrown to the meat grinder without a problem
@@ImtheHitcher
In any case neither Russia nor any other European army will be decent after 30 years so enjoy it while it lasts
@@baha3alshamari152 Russia has a strong army but awful logistics
Perun makes good video essays on military expenditures I recommend watching his video on Germanys army expansion.
He also has a really good video on how the German procurement prosses works, or rather how it doesn't lmao
Perun is great, but I believe Tommy is too adhd to watch content in his format
@@jonathanvtorp yeah i watch his stuff at 2x speed
@@jonathanvtorpdeath by PowerPoint
Polish rifle is MSBS GROT
Idk who it’ll be but Finland has a lot better army than most people realize or think about
As an American I would never want to fight the Finn's, nor the French.
But their numbers are so small
@@baha3alshamari152 their active army maybe, but they would have more soldiers than Poland at war time because of their conscription they have so much in reserves
@@ganjabandit5074 That may be true but the Finnish have always (by always I mean since the country was founded) designed their military against a Russian invasion. I don't think they could bring an unstoppable force as much as an immovable object.
Poland would be out of its element either forced into a likely contested naval invasion or going through one of the two big neighbors (Russia) that's already subjugated them.
That being said if Russia tried to pick on them given how well Ukraine is doing I think Poland or Finland by itself would probably fold Russia.
@@annoyedbipolar7424 well I never said they were an offensive country, simply that their military is big. Although they did go on the offensive during ww2 against the Soviet Union to try to reclaim their land
"Who has the strongest army in Europe?"
America.
My answer too
„No no, he has a point"
With all the US bases in Europe that is technically true lol
Lol i highly doubt america has more than 205k personel just hanging around in europe, especially considering that would be 1/5th of their army
Edit: I looked it up and the us has around 64k personnel in europe, which would put them at about 9th place for just personnel, and 200 aircraft which would put them at 11th place in terms of that. So no it is not "technically true lol"
@@r.e4161 I bet you remind the teacher about homework
japan has basically been allowed to rearm because of China. We (USA) just let them convert 2 ships to aircraft carriers for the first time since ww2
I get a feeling the peace treaty with them will be drastically reworked within this decade.
plus with japans technology they are very powerful
@@chaost4544 probably even sooner
The only problem would be manpower right now Japan doesn't have the best situation when it comes to population
@@architech02 yes grandpas battalion
The UK and France have an advantage due to the most powerful land force in Europe right now is Poland. They are continuing to get military equipment from the United States including a deal announced in early December where the US approved a $3.7 billion M1-A1 Abrams deal. Poland is becoming a chad land force in Europe.
Poland will continue to arm itself heavily until 2039 where it will announce revenge on Germany for events a century prior
2% has been the NATO “standard” for decades. Trump just simply brought it up.
It may have been the 'standard' but most countries didn't follow it, until Trump came along and piled pressure on the other countries
@@MrSkully49 But didn't the countries which do want to change it simply do it now because of war in Ukraine? When Trump was in office everyone was laughing at him. His geopolitical influence is vastly overstated. He only made the USA less trustworthy in the eyes of his allies...
@@Skyrimfan002 I mean from 2016 the spending was $262bln and by 2020 it increased to $313bln which is a around a 20% increase over his term, so you can’t say Trump didn’t have a role in that.
I’d say the recent investments by European countries due to the war Ukraine were because countries such as Germany realised if it came to it, their army is crippled
@@MrSkully49 The spending increased beforehand due to a longwinded disagreement in the past coalition. The CDU wanted to increase spending while the SPD was fairly pacifist and wanted to maintain the status quo. In fact, because the SPD lost some votes in the past, the CDU could increase spending. The spending increase was a very slow trend which already started in 2014. Ukraine accelerated this and kind of forced Scholz to change party policy.
As always, national policies aren't soley influenced by the USA. Trumps antics were made fun of in the whole political spectrum of Germanys politics.
If in any way he did influence Germany, he made more here be in favour of Frances policy of strategic indepedence. And even that anti-USA sentiment is already disappearing again since Biden got elected.
@@Skyrimfan002 Also Twumpy Wumpys influence was a bit of a double edged sword as very few took anything he said seriously.
France is by far the strongest military power in Europe. Only totally autonomus nuclear power of Europe, Only to master all the needed tech. Second place to UK, the most close one.
Lmao only autonomous nuclear power in Europe? lmao show me you know nothing without telling me you know nothing
@@carwyngriffiths The french nuclear program has nothing with americans. The French deployed it alone with their own technology. this is why for example France does not need F35 whereas Germany yes.
@@nod1610 not what we were talking about, British is too an autonomous nuclear power in Europe.
Nowadays almost all countries could be a nuclear power . Even North Korea has nukes.
what of that when they surrender
I know two dudes who are 25 now and served in the Bundeswehr. One of the them didn't even get new army boots upon joining. It's just sad.
Imagine the state of the vehicles when the budget isn't even allowing every soldier to get his own fucking boots.
Its not AK, its MSBS Grot, new Polish rifle. Its a Magpull Masada, ACR Bushmaster grade rifle. Better than AK, one of the best in the world right now, propably.
Germany finally decided it was best to stick to the treaty of Versailles. Then the war in Ukraine happened and they realised how outdated it was
France is there anyways who need germany.
@@Indra-hx5vq thank god for the French army
@@tijmenwillard2337 the surrenderflags
@@tijmenwillard2337 I see what you did here^^
@@oc5058 this is 2023*
8:30 the disgust we he mentions Poland is hilarious
Makes sense for Poland . They have a Border with Belarus which is a Russian Puppet LOL
It's also impossible because how much equipment (i.e number of APCs, IFVs, etc) a Military has does not necessarily equate to operability, for instance France needed to use the RAF and the UK's Chinook's to help transport their equipment and troops around Mali.
I'd like to point out in terms of 'ships". The UK is clear of France. The French as usual love to put on a display and count their tugboats and support vessels as part of their numbers. In reality they have 69 'Ships'
cap
@@cia5649 you've got an internet connection, fucken use it
Yes it’s true but the UK has massive manpower shortages. With the 2 new carriers the UK had to cannibalize crew from other ships. So in reality the UK can’t even properly escort its own carriers, that’s an L
@@alextoso100 i mean manpower shortages wont be nearly as big of an issue in an actual war
far more people would enlist to join the military and would be able to fill the gaps
and if mobilisation occurs then there would be more than enough
@@alextoso100 What are you talking about lmao royal navy is missing 6% manpower but has 2 full crews for the carriers...
“If grandpa would know” got me ded 🤣🤣
To be fair it failed to take note of 2 major developments for the British army,. After a decade of essentially rebuilding the entire navy/air force, its now the armies turn. Everything from body armour, upgraded L85's, Challenger 3's, Boxer and potentially Ajax IFV's along side more M270's, multiple thermal optics per squad and integrated combat networks with drones through the future soldier program are all coming on line by 2030. And that was all before Ukraine, which has seen Parliament expand our military spend up to 3% of GDP by 2030. Thats an increase of 50% which should mean we'll be spending in the vicinity of £70 billion a year. So watch this space, and as always, Germany, sort your shit out lol
Not to mention 2 aircraft carrier and type 83 super destroyers
Using global firepower index is a meme.
God, for the french companies you don't say THALES but it's pronounced "TA LESS"
artillery is useful when, like russia, your aim is to destroy a smaller opponent military and not necessarily capture ground. but if you want to capture ground you still need tanks etc. which is why at the start of the war there were so many russian tanks moving around in ukraine.
What you truly desire is a combined arms operation, with airplanes, cavalry (tanks and other armoured vehicles), and infantry
Russia is doing badly because they forgot that they need to combine arms, else tanks are terrible/tanks are only good in such operations, else they're basically death traps)
@@tuluppampam Russia's military is artillery based. If they cannot capture a country quickly they will resort to slowly grinding them down.
Finland and Poland are 2 most ready for war coutrys in EU. Cuz they know their neighboors very well... whole eastern europe was screaming for 2 decades what is coming , but ofc west thought they know better and they can do business with Putler... well guess who was right all along ?
"Sweden has only 5 people" I come for the chat lol
Sweden believes that what the Finns are for LOL
As a German, without having seen the video, I can say the French.
They haven't ruined their military as far as we can see from the outside, maintain competent forces in all 3 classical branches and they're a nuclear power too and that is just a factor of it's own.
Modern Day Germany would never build their own nuclear weapons, for one we signed treaties not to, for two the Germans are nowadays highly skeptical of anything that has to do with nuclear power or.... nuclear powered stuff, to put it mildly.
A German saying based things,I never saw that,what an extraordinary specimen !
Germans are woke af now and it’s really sad. Used to be such a great country
I love that tommy is a person that will talk bad even about his own country most of the people in the world wouldnt even dare
15:54 it’s the Polish rifle MSBS Grot inspired by HK
Not inspired by HK but ACR
I believe it's France haven't watched the vid yet (The reason I believe it's France was when they conducted a military operation in Africa and absolutely destroyed the rebels aswell as having pretty impressive Military Equipment they made Napoleon proud that's for sure)
Edit: saw a couple replies questioning as to why it is impressive at all. After all they're rebels not full fledge militaries.
I'll give you a brief explanation
The rebels at the time they joined controlled half of Mali I believe is the country France turned the tide immediately with modern tactics additionally it is Africa so supply and attrition would be a problem (If you play hoi4 you know what I'm talking about) so yeah. It isn't Desert Storm levels of impressive but impressive nonetheless
Yep, you're talking about operation Serval, which was a great demonstration of french modern tactics AND logistics prowess.
Yeah beating african rebels is a big achievement
@@jones877 Cope harder
@@Nigsple. Cope harder
Being french I would say that no, France is not scary, it is just the rest of europe which is so pitiful these days.
At least the UK has increased its spending a lot for quite a few years now, and Germany has just awoken with the ukraine crisis.
PS: GDP is higly dependent on population size. That is why Germany is cruising in front, and sweden has such a small GDP on the graph.
France isn't competing with Russia and America she is competing with Africa and the Middle East.
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 nobody is competitive with the US.
And russia is a sad joke, even historically, it needed the help of the rest of the major powers of the time to survive a german or french invasion.
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462The point of Europe building up their own militaries is not to compete with the US…. the point is that Europe as a whole should be logistically prepared for and more invested for defense.
Russia is not even in the picture lol they’re only taken seriously because they have nukes.
France hands down. After seeing what they've been involved in within the last 40 years. (this is before watching the video)
The UK has done larger deployments than the French have and fought a war in the South Atlantic within that time, France needed British and American heavy lift helicopters and transport planes to operate in Mali. With that said though France has a a capable military, but is severely lacking in naval and air logistics. Both have their strengths and weaknesses and neither are really stronger than the other, but I'd say the UK military is better prepared to operate in the modern world due to its expeditionary capabilities and extensive logistics that is second only to the US. I mean for this video the French naval stat is a load of bull, the UK has double the tonnage of the Marine Nationale.
😂 france is the biggest joke
@@linglingpingping3171 did you ever serve with both?
@@noelgrippen4707 If we're talking about a war here. Sure the UK has the capability but they couldn't sustain that longer than France could. unless we're talking air superiority but even with that in today's world air defense is absurd and downright scary, and drones have changed the dynamic entirely. Navel power doesn't prove superiority it only allows you to project limited control over a different front.
Edit: but I see your point. I think the English military has some great ability with the resources they have but fighting the long game its just not possible without the US.
@@GODFRY524 Oh yeah I agree, by the British military focusing on logistics more than the French this definitely leads to the French having overall more firepower regionally. I'd say where the British military make up in logistics they sometimes lack in firepower whereas the French make up in firepower sometimes lack in logistics.
At the moment I wouldn't rate the chances of the RAF against the French air force, with too few in number F35s and not enough Typhoons it wouldn't look great but I'm British so I'm a bit biased :). I think the British military has more cruise missiles than France but I'm not too sure on that I could be wrong, which if I'm correct would definitely be a plus for the British military. However the UK is severely lacking in sophisticated air defence systems, we're only just replacing Rapier with SkySabre and even SkySabre is not an air defence system designed for high end threats like ballistic missiles. Drones are definitely interesting and the UK military is very invested with drones I'm not sure about France though.
I think something people don't realise is how intertwined the UK and France are militarily, French military contractors do very well in the British market and if I remember correctly about a decade ago there was talk about covering each others nations nuclear deterrent patrols if for whatever reason the other was unable to do theirs which shows a lot of trust at the time but I don't know about now.
And yeah I agree no country can conduct a sustained war without the US right now, unless France and the UK go total war, in their current peacetime postures it just isn't possible without the US.
Ey, ginger, Trump was right about Germany to be honest
He wasn’t exactly the first American politician to bring it up, just the loudest. Lots of American politicians have been complaining that the rest of NATO, especially Germany and Canada, are not hitting the 2% goal for a while.
And almost everything else
Y'all too young or know too little about US foreign policy if you think that Trump was the first to push Europe to spend more
@@bruh5361 Yeah, but you didn't hear Tommy referring to other Presidents before Trump at 0:38? I was commenting on what Tommy said. But of course if I was talking about Obama you wouldn't commented that....
@@InAeternumRomaMater lmao as if I was an Obama fan. He was, after Trump and Bush jr., the president who conducted the dumbest foreign policy. He announced the pivot and then didn't pull through, giving the Chinese an extra 6 years to prepare, he drew red lines but didn't defend them and he didn't pull out of Afghanistan
army? france hands down, would kick uk arse, but all of armed forces? geography beets most and UK would end up winning i reckon
Disagree. Uk has very specialised infantry forces ranging in capabilities
I'll put my money on Polish ground forces at this point in history.
The french copied UK special forces but it’s not all one way. From what I’ve seen, both countries use eachother as a metric in which to improve themselves
Probably not, crossing the channel is difficult to the point that even the Germans didn’t even want to try despite being the strongest power in Europe to have ever existed.
If it was only France they were facing the war would likely drag on for a few years but ultimately come to a stalemate, perhaps Britain could dare another Dunkirk invasion but I reckon the French navy must have been studying such things for decades now.
Elaborate cause at the moment the French defence budget does not even compete with the British ( who have the 4/3rd largest defence budget in the world and the largest in Europe) also the fact they're the only nation on earth other than the United States than can deploy anywhere in the world within 48 hours, including the logistical capabilities that France needed support from the UK with their recent deployment to Mali, oh and the two Supercarriers in His majesty's fleet.
9:15 bruh sweden got 10 milion pepole living inside of it and spain got like 40 milion come on tommy
The AK-69, not to be confused with the AK-420
The thing with Britain is that many people here just don’t want to join the military.
The military here is constantly begging for more men to join and gives many bonuses to those who join (such as free houses, military benefits etc).
Less soldiers means a smaller army and less people making weapons
yep , lack of patriotism and general lack of "need"
historically and still presently in other countries , most military recruits were poor , relatively uneducated men that wanted Jobs that require little qualifications and pay decently , and this was and is obviously compounded by patriotism and pride
but presently in the UK if you are poor and uneducated , there are far better options than joining the military , and without patriotic fervour , people simply just don't have any motivation to become a solider instead of say just a bricklayer
if there is ever a major war many more people would of course enlist
but that isnt exactly a good thing lmao
Where are you getting that from? It’s actually the complete opposite but the government keep cutting the numbers. It’s really a dumb move from them because if war breaks out with Russia(entirely possible given current events) then they would be so vulnerable and would take them at least a year to fully mobilise. Let’s just hope that doesn’t happen I guess..😬
@@oracle8589 I’m getting it from multiple lectures we got at grammar school from the British Army itself
2022. And we're complaining about Germany NOT Re-arming....
”I love republic, I love democracy“ I‘ve heard that before somewhere 🤔
”Zeitenwende basically means peaceful radio station attack“ - TommyKay
Everybody has the strongest army until war breaks out.
I love your reference to radio station attack man ...
Why Finland always neglected largest artillery im europe..
2:12 round 3 lol
I would never fight for my country unless it is a civil war/revolution or a war with France.
**OR A WAR WITH FRANCE**
What a bri'ish thing to say 😂
Based tbh
A tiny island we can have it ?
@@LeRectificateur British have fought most countries in the globe
"I love peace, I love democracy." - Emperor Tommy
"Peaceful radio station attack"
poland has the most quality to quantity(aka. most well equipped armies, up to date equipment compared to others nations, etc.) ratio, so if a country invades, even germany rn it can probably hold but maybe lose some of the north
This. Poland is the strongest right now, cope and seethe germs and baguettes. I love it and I'm not even polish.
@@razvansfirlogea3134 I mean, why would we seethe? We're allies, dude. They clearly need an army more than we do right now...
@@razvansfirlogea3134 i dont see why us French would be mad at a strong Poland. That’s what we advocated for years
@@SchusT45 the French ego is well known around the world
@@adrien5834 You might consider yourselves allies of Poland but they consider you about as good neighbors as the russians.
The United States has the strongest army in Europe.
15:55 its not not AK, its GROT rifle
Poland mainly uses domestic Beryl and MSBS Grot rifles
America since we have troops all over Europe
Nothing in France, and i'm happy with that.
Who has the strongest army? Why of course it's Turkey. It has 20 million sleeper agents settled across Europe who actively vote in Turkish elections and are required by law to answer the draft.
0:38- every other President before him (and I am sure Biden) has made the same point about 2 percent GDP, they were just less oafish about it because they understood the value NATO brings to the US.
Italy third european military Power 🇮🇹
Damn Tommy is becoming German Al Gore
Everyone gangsta until Germany is really building up again
You Lost ww2 and got the entire country demilitarized
America has the strongest army in eu
15:55 it's polish-made rifle GROT, Ukrainians are really fond of it btw
Europe: Increases defense spending to 2%
USA: Still subsidizing European armies
?????
As a Pole, I would prefer that the Germans did not reinforce their army, they did it twice and both times it did not end well
You can relax. Germany is not what it used to be.
The core issue was that Germany was so much more populated than anyone else. They are still the largest nation in europe, but not by the huge margin they used to during the 1850-1950 period.
Yeah I don’t think we need to worry about Germany in that regard, I’d actually be more worried about any far right in the US going crazy with power
Erm, it was a joke
🤣
Guys if your ever going to sign up do the smart thing join an artillery division
This is basically European Army (Germany) vs African Army with European commanders (France)
Average Virgin Cringe Brainless Fatherless Anti France Troll Fanboy taking Copium over here ⬆️
@@Solveig.Tissot Lmfao nice 😂 Thumbs up
@@JayJay5244 🗿🇨🇵❤️
Whaaaaa? Not just African, middle eastern too, cmon
@@Freedmoon44 Yeah true but most Arabs in France are from North Africa and not the Middle East.
Only 35 f 35s? Netherlands already has 24 and 28 more are coming so we will have 52
It would be a very different scenario if the German Navy and ground force wasn't reduced twice...
I have the strongest army in Europe. Just don't tell anyone!
Japan has not an army, they have a JDF Japanese defense force. So that's basically an army that can't attack, they are not allowed to.
In actuality the strongest army in the EU is the US European command.
Mmm... there is about 60.000 US troops in europe. I am sure they are equiped better than any other nation, but still, that doesn't make them the 1st force in Europe.
Yeah I believe nato tactics in Poland and Germany in the face of a Russian invasion is to hold the Russians off as long as possible until the United States has the logistics to deploy. But I don’t think Russia has that capability tbh
1:57May be back in the 50s and 60s....but after that I think we allowed them to build up there army after the Korean war....with American supper vision of course
D/NL is then Deutsch Niederländische Korps. Cool so is it for people for the netherlands or for dutch speaking people like the flemish in Belgium?
its more or less the army of netherlands, integrated in the BW.
So France is the strongest🇨🇵
No France army is a joke we all no they throw up white flags
Based France,as it should be ! 🗿🇨🇵❤️
The twitch chat in this video is absolutely wild
If Opa would know lmao
And then there is Switzerland, buttering 6% of its GDP into the Army. :D
yeah but it's not in NATO and it's a small country (still a rich one) and the tiny amount of population it has doesn't allow it to have a very strong military
Prussia may have been the founders of the state of Germany, but modern Germany certainly has nothing to do with Prussia
I just read the title and thought America 😅
German has better tech and economy but French have foreign legion, and nuke. I would say French mainly for the nuke. Edit: oh I forget German is not a full normal state yet😅
Dankus does
Tommy is great but he knows absoltuley nothing about modern militaries lol
Hands down... It's Finland. Come here with your guns and Bombs and lets see what happens.
Poland will be a powerhouse in 10 years or so.
5:30 give France 6 weeks and they will be last lol
Japan has removed the restrictions from the 2nd WWII so now there modernizing there army navy and airforce they will become the 3rd major military expenses in the world
Its all well and good having all the equipment. Last time I checked the UK has never asked France to help us. France in Vietnam help France in Mali Help
Wanna talk about Dunkirk ?
@@Solveig.Tissot what about it? We where there defending you again. Whilst meeting our agreed promise to.poland both French and British troops held the rear so you can calm down.
Falkland. According to both the prime minister and minister of defence respectives autobiographies, France was their best ally in this war.
And Farnce has answered every demands for help from its allies, appart from Vietnam and irak, as it opposed both.
Your xenophobic non sense is sad
@@MN-vz8qm xenophobic are you saying the French are a different species? 🤔 also last time I checked you didn't hand over the excocet missile frequencies and we lost warships to them. France was a hindrance
@@michaelblackshaw6117 you know better than the brit prime minister and minister of defence then, little xenophobic brexiter.
Technically it's America since there's more American equipment in Europe than all of the EU nations combined
Mmm... there is about 60.000 US troops in europe. I am sure they are equiped better than any other nation, but still, that doesn't make them the 1st force in Europe.
@@MN-vz8qm Typical Americans who think that everything the US does is perfect, and that everyone else is doing shit.
Hollywood propaganda is powerful.
not germany like u hoped thats for sure
I don't buy Germans being 16th. Their engineering alone is worth being at least in top 10.
Engineering yes but they don’t use it due to low budget. Most german engineered military products are exported
Who has the strongest army in europe? The USA 🤣🤣🤣
France or Poland
I mean democracy and capitalisn does have the means to combat climate change. What people forget is that there's millions of liberal and democratic people wanting to do something but the right doesnt wanna do anything and even occasionally denies it.
Also he ignores the fact that capitalism by far breeds innovation more than any other system, China only has high tech stuff because they steal from the west, it’ll be people like bezos and musk that pay for innovations that will help the climate, because it’ll be very profitable in hundreds of years when the climate is actually in danger
That’s why I’m hoping to vote left leaning this upcoming election in the United Stares. But either way I don’t see either side successfully creating a green wave. Geopolitically, we source 85% of rare metals like cobalt from Russia and Ukraine and those are essential for creating solar panels and some of the components we need for electric vehicles. Unfortunately the hard truth of the matter is that if we want to completely go green we need to rely on Russia or work with the cobalt the United States have which is not much of the global supply. This war essentially is going to make it very difficult to rely on nonrenewable energy
we need more army
Of course FRANCE !!
America or russia. Depends on how many troops the americans have in europe.
Italy?
The video is focused on who will become stronger, Italy is unlikely to get A LOT stronger, It will get a little bit stronger and just remain in the current position.
Germany might become stronger and italy will be in between germany and Poland
But those lists are wrong. They make 0 sense.
I laughed my ass off when he made a france surrender joke
Average Virgin Cringe Brainless Fatherless Anti France Troll Fanboy taking Copium over here ⬆️
This joke is expired.
Damn thise GPD numbers are outdated 9:15
2021 Dutch GDP was 1 trillion USD and it hasn't shrunk
8 million Swiss generate a larger economic output than 80 million Turks.🤔
UK army is understaffed btw Dommy.
11:40 😂😂😂
Wars+Sava=Warszawa, It has nothing to do with war
no one cuz no men left