# What are Your Five Greatest Armies Of All Time?



## pardus (Oct 18, 2007)

This will be a thread to state what you think your 5 top Armies etc... of all time are, state them and be prepared to explain why you choose them.


Mine:

Spartan, Thermopylae, enough said.

Mongol, largest landmass empire ever.

Samurai, Best swordsmen, individual warriors of ancient times.

Rhodesian, best modern counter insurgency campaign ever fought.

German WW2, took on the world against overwhelming numbers and were defeated by a relativly narrow margin..


State and justify yours!

Don't get pissy and patriotic over this, you have been warned!

I'm keeping this thread as a serious, intellectual one.

So please try and keep that theme.

I will delete all BS on this thread without warning. :)


----------



## Olive Drab (Oct 18, 2007)

Wheres Parthia?  I cant remember reading about anyone who went against them winning


----------



## pardus (Oct 18, 2007)

Olive Drab said:


> Wheres Parthia?  I cant remember reading about anyone who went against them winning



Make a list then.


----------



## 0699 (Oct 18, 2007)

Okay, what are the criteria?  Define "great".  My definition of a great army would include successfully defending the homeland and expanding its power and influence.

Roman Legions - combined discipline and technology to conquer most of the western world.

Spanish Conquistadores - with a miniscule force (comparatively) they used technology, their enemy's religion, and politics to win Central America.

VC/NVA - won the Vietnam War and fought the greatest country on earth.  Yes, politics were involved, but isn't war just an extension of politics by other means?

The Franks under Charles Martel - stopped the Muslims at Tours and kept Europe Christian.  They also conquered the majority of Western Europe and created one empire, slowing/stopping Europe's descent into the Dark Ages.

That's four.  I'll have to think some more on this...


----------



## pardus (Oct 18, 2007)

Good choices, very interesting.

'Great' is a subjective term in this context.


----------



## Mikko1208 (Oct 18, 2007)

pardus762 said:


> Samurai



Best army or best soldier type ?


----------



## pardus (Oct 18, 2007)

Fionlannach said:


> Best army or best soldier type ?



Yeah that doesnt quite fit into army, wasn't really sure how to word it.

Army, warriors/people e.g. the Viking people 

Doesnt have to be a standing Army.



To make myself clear, I'm not meaning the society as a whole just the warriors within it.


----------



## Mikko1208 (Oct 18, 2007)

pardus762 said:


> Yeah that doesnt quite fit into army, wasn't really sure how to word it.
> 
> Army, warriors/people e.g. the Viking people
> 
> Doesnt have to be a standing Army.




Yep, any samurai Shogunate is one of my picks... complete list coming soon...


----------



## Mikko1208 (Oct 18, 2007)

1.- Saladins muslim army. So hoe many crusade that man destroyed ?

2.- Samurai shogunates ( Kamakura, Ashikaga etc., pick any ) Probably the finest warriors ever.

3.- Roman legions. Most skilled and organised at their time, almost from a different planet.

4.- Spartan. No need to explain

5.- Finnish army WW2. I know Pardus, this is a bit of patriotic. But what were the Russians thinkin 1939, and what were their thoughts in 1944 ?


----------



## pardus (Oct 18, 2007)

Fionlannach said:


> 5.- Finnish army WW2. I know Pardus, this is a bit of patriotic. But what were the Russians thinkin 1939, and what were their thoughts in 1944 ?



No that is totally legit, I have an extremely high regard for the 30's - 40's Finnish Army.

You have the greatest sniper of all time IIRC.

I have high regard for the German Army circa WW2 as I stated, I read that a Finnish General etc... complained to the German high command about the compedancy of the German troops, the troops he was refering to was a Waffen SS unit, one of the best the Germans had, such was the high standard of the Finnish Army!


----------



## Mikko1208 (Oct 18, 2007)

pardus762 said:


> You have the greatest sniper of all time IIRC.



Simo Häyhä. 705 kills in 100 days with iron sights.


----------



## pardus (Oct 18, 2007)

Fionlannach said:


> Simo Häyhä. 705 kills in 100 days with iron sights.



Incredible!


----------



## Mikko1208 (Oct 18, 2007)

pardus762 said:


> Incredible!



Yeah. And thinkin the fact that those 100 days were due the Winter War, which means you have only 5-6 hours of daylight, it is simply amazing.


----------



## Cabbage Head (Oct 18, 2007)

Ok, I will give this one a shot.

American Indians: of all kinds, they knew the terrain but lost due to technology, not lack of warrior spirit.

Confederate Army: most of their Generals were West Point grads.  Grew up in a society that led to strong leaders.  Again lost due to having poor manufacturing in the suthern states.

I too have to list the WWII German Army as one of the best.  For it was due to politics that they lost.  Not because the Generals didnt know how to campaign.  

The army under Alexander the Great.  Just look what he accomplished. He was one of the most successful military commanders in history, and was undefeated in battle.

And for the last, WWII British Army, Air Force and Navy.  They were cut off, surrounded and bombed all the time.  They kept going, fought on and never gave up!!!!


----------



## x SF med (Oct 19, 2007)

Fionlannach said:


> Simo Häyhä. 705 kills in 100 days with iron sights.



And the Finns produced Larry Thorne (a bit patriotic, and a bit Unit specific, but very true).


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Oct 19, 2007)

Some random ones:

Macedonian/Greek army under Philip and Alexander. Conquest of most of the known world, defeating numerous numerically superior forces.

Roman Army after the Marian reforms until the Imperial era, when the decadence of the army and Empire took its toll.

Swedish Army in the Thirty Years' War, after Gustavis Adolphus's reforms.  Sweden was a small country on the periphery of Europe, with the ugliest furniture, yet managed to defeat the Imperial armies in many battles and dominate the region until eclipsed by the rise of Prussia and Russia.

British Army in the colonizing era.  Other than a defeat at the hands of the Continental Army, itself mainly manned by Brits and their descendants, the British Army was generally triumphant over all comers, be they first world armies like the French in 1815, second world armies like the Marathas of India, or tribal levies in Africa.

French Grande Armee under Napoleon.  Like the Wehrmacht in World War II, which has already been mentioned, the Grande Armee was the class of its day, outfighting virtually every major army it faced, and only defeated by the hubris of its leader in taking on practically the entire world.

A random five, to which could be added the Prussian Army under Frederick the Great, the Prussian Army in the wars of unification, the German Army in World War II, the Spartans, and others.


----------



## AWP (Oct 19, 2007)

Good thread.


----------



## The91Bravo (Oct 19, 2007)

1.  Israeli army of 1967 era.  Tenacity, simple tenacity.

2.  Spartans, 'nuff said

3.  USA in WWII.  Simultaneous two front campaigns.

4.  Roman Legions- Especially if land occupied is a measured standard

5.  Cold War Warsaw Pact nations -specifically Russia-  Even with the friggin citizens eatin virtually nothing, and low standards of living as an understatement, they managed to build an incredible sized force. That I believe would be able to march into anywhere they could get to.

That's all I got....

Steve


----------



## RackMaster (Oct 19, 2007)

Ok, I'm not going to them in any specific order and I'm just add a few on to the ones already mentioned.  Some that were probably not thought of. ;)

New Zealand Expeditionary Force (NZEF) as part of the ANZAC's circa WW1.   





> New Zealand with a population of one million lost 18,000 men out of 110,000 and had 55000 wounded. These New Zealand figures (62%) represent the highest percentage of all units from the Anglo-Saxon world.


http://www.anzacs.net/AnzacStory.htm

Australian Imperial Force circa WW1 - taking of Sinai, Palestine and Syria.  Battle of Passchendaele, from 31 July until 12 October 1917 the Australians continued a barrage of attacks on Passchendaele Village; costing them 36,500 lives.  The Canadian Army ere ordered to take over for the Australians and eventually took the village on 12 Nov.  The battle is synonymous with the Canadian Army but I truly believe that the Australians deserve to carry this Battle Honour.

Canadian Expeditionary Force WW1  The Battle of Vimy Ridge.  In one day all four Canadians forces fought as one distinct unit and swept Vimy Ridge.


----------



## hidesite (Oct 20, 2007)

All of you have pointed out great military "army's" no question but one of note not mentioned yet, and yes I am completely biased...

The US Military from 11 SEP 2001 to Present.

They have fought in a war where their enemy's have no faces, no honor nor integrity, no mercy nor civility, no adherence to any "rules of war" yet they still maintain, not stooping to the level of said enemy's, a PROUD face, honor and integrity of the highest degree, great mercy and civility, and a extremely strict adherence to the "rules of war" all the while whilst the vast amount of it's own nations civilian populist have either forgotten about them, or have taken steps to thwart there noble efforts and some might say that a large proportion of it's nations elected politicians have went as far as to betray them. All this and they ARE STILLING WINNING THEIR GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR.

This "army" (The entire US Military) is the most devastating, powerful, technically advanced military EVER and it is comprised of the best collective group of Warriors this nation has ever known. Twofold, It's most "elite" warriors amongst them are definitely of what the stature of a Samurai, Spartan, Roman Legionnaire (and etc.) would be in these modern times and history will most certainly reflect that.

Additionally, Unlike the US Military of the past [with conscripts drafted in it's ranks in time of war] it is comprise of ONLY those to whom have volunteered, all to well knowing that they have the greatest possibility of having to engage in its Global War On Terror. This war has extended longer in duration than that of either WW1 and WW2 so [with little exception] any cowardly individuals that were hiding in their ranks merely for the financial benefits, educational benefits and with no desire what-so-ever to actually SERVE have [for the most part] long since left it's ranks. And, any such type of person that was considering joining the ranks for said reasons other than service, since the onset of it's war on terror, have mostly thus chosen not to join at all. 

The US Military has [for the most part] always been a direct reflection of it's populist... That is until the Global War On Terror... As of the Global War On Terror the US Military is no longer a direct reflection of it's populist, it's comprised of the absolute best people that it's nation has to offer.


----------



## AWP (Oct 20, 2007)

Hmm....

The Allies in WWII in Europe. Multiple nations with a common gaol but many paths to that goal, personalities, logistics, leveraging the industrial might of nations...it took a lot to beat....

....The German Army in WWII. The technology was great, better than our at times but had weaknesses too. Superb military leadership they were let down by a fanatical maniac and his henchmen. The nearly dominated the world and for a brief period left the great industrialized nations shaking in their boots, or conquered beneath them. There are parallels to....

...the Army of Northern Virginia. Long on leadership and courage, short on logistics they defied the odds for several years until shear numbers and better supply trains beat them. They should have lost in 1862, but held on for three more years. Similar to....

...the French under Napoleon. They just bit off more than they could chew. Contrast that with....

...Alexander the Great. His army conquered almost the whole of the known world at that time. Years from home they took on all comers and won, even when vastly outnumbered. Great leadership, a true combined arms force, and shear tenacity did it for them.


----------



## hidesite (Oct 20, 2007)

The African Zulu Nation from aprox 1815 to 1828 under their Chief Shaka was an incredible "warrior" nation to which all men under the age of 40 served as Soldiers similar to the Spartan warrior nation except that the Spartan's lived a more "prestigious" type of day-to-day life since they had personal "slaves" that framed and kept their personal homesteads up. The Zulu women did these such things while the men trained in the art of battle...  The only thing that derailed this great "army" was Shaka's betrayal and assassination by his Half brother who subsequently burnt his village to the ground and moved the people to a new location (Back to where their ancestors originated in the mid 1700's) and renamed the tribe Mgungundlovo. This "new" warrior nation thrived for a while but later was defeated by a rival warrior nation, the Voortrekkers.

The Zulu nation, in it's heyday under King Shaka was one of the most devastating army's, thus great army of all time.

Also, The Zulu tribe actually still exists which is different from most of the "great" army's of mention here... Some have integrated with other African tribes and/or nations in more urban settings but most still live in remote areas where the Zulu ways of Shaka (in part and parcel) still live on. There's even actually still a Zulu King even though Shaka's reign as Chief / King ended almost 200 years ago...


----------



## Mikko1208 (Oct 20, 2007)

Even if the US army was not in my top five, I have to say this ;

What I find interesting, is that in my opinion, US has probably the thoughest streak of opponents. 

WW2 - US had to fight against Japan. Soldiers even used themselves as weapons.

VC, Al-qaida. Both of these used/use tactics from a different world (thinkin of a "honest" style of war). and of course they are not fightning the Taleban/Al-qaida alone, but still.

And even if thre is a big gap in time, add the indians and the list is full.

In my opinion, which makes the US army a great one, is their readiness to act, no matter what or who is the opponent.
And about the leadership ? 

Hitler was a loonie.
Could US army leadership on higher levels be better ? Maybe.

What an army be without leadership ?
A good bunch of grunts and NCOs getting the job done ? Or bunch of guys running in to all directions shooting ?
 Judging an army without its highest leadership, political and the non-political aspect is like judging a football team and not include the quarterback and coaching staff.


----------



## hidesite (Oct 21, 2007)

Well, I think it too can be said for many other nations such as the UK and Australia (And a few other's that pay tribute to the Royal family of England's Queen) just to name a couple. They have stepped up many times and lead from the front and they have developed some of the most skilled warriors the world has ever known to which the US, over the years, owes a dept of gratitude. Particularly the UK during WW2...  

The US, in recent years (last 200+) has shown to be exactly what you say, I agree, but we don't hold the patent on standing firm for the sake of what's right.

How about the South Korean Army to whom, though not glorious in any particular battles of note, they have held the DMZ at the 38th parallel (with the US) firm thus holding the spread of communism for almost 60 years now. This was very crucial in it's part and parcel with regards to winning the cold war. Sometimes it's not a glorious campaign of battles that define an Army as great, sometimes it's the fact that they vigilantly stand ready to do so that makes them great....

The Israeli ("Jewish") Army, from any era dating back to the times of Jericho and beyond have always impressed me too...


----------



## QC (Jan 17, 2008)

Pretty diverse here

Agincourt -  5,000 British ex-crims and excellent archers outnumber about 15,000  unmounted French Knights. 

Prussian Corps at Waterloo - After a day long march, arrived in time to turn the tide of battle.

Australians, Kokoda Campaign - Poorly equipped but well led fight a great fighting withdrawl and counterattack.

Carthage - Contrary to opinion, there were no elephants. Hannibals army had fought the Gauls etc. all the way there and the elephants had died en route from the cold. The classic encircling move. 

British - Rourkes Drift. Welshmen fight off the zulus who vastly outnumbered them. When Lord Kitchener found out that Gonville Bromhead was one of the offers in charge, he replied " He's the only one fool enough to do it". 11 VC's before breakfast.


----------



## pardus (Jan 17, 2008)

Queens Cadet said:


> When *Lord Kitchener* found out that Gonville Bromhead was one of the offers in charge, he replied " He's the only one fool enough to do it". 11 VC's before breakfast.



Kitchener?
He was a 29 yr old Lt at the time in a different continent... :confused:


----------



## QC (Jan 17, 2008)

I'll get back with the correct answer.


----------



## The91Bravo (Jan 17, 2008)

pardus762 said:


> Kitchener?
> He was a 29 yr old Lt at the time in a different continent... :confused:





Queens Cadet said:


> I'll get back with the correct answer.



I can sense the bytes flying back and forth between Google and Wikipedia.. lol


----------



## RackMaster (Jan 17, 2008)

The91Bravo said:


> I can sense the bytes flying back and forth between Google and Wikipedia.. lol



I was thinking that his "motherboard" was melting from the search and Pardus was getting ready to crash his "server" from anticipation.    lol


----------



## pardus (Jan 18, 2008)

:cool:


----------



## x SF med (Jan 18, 2008)

And nobody mentioned The Mongols under Ghenghis Khan, notably the Mongodai (sp?).


----------



## pardus (Jan 18, 2008)

First post mofo :cool:


----------



## QC (Jan 18, 2008)

The answer is Lord Chelmsford Commander in Chief of Her Majesties British Forces, Natal Colony, South Africa.


----------



## The91Bravo (Jan 18, 2008)

Queens Cadet said:


> The answer is Lord Chelmsford Commander in Chief of Her Majesties British Forces, Natal Colony, South Africa.



Three hours and one minute....

You have GOT to do better....:doh:

do it again.....


----------



## pardus (Jan 18, 2008)

Sorry mate if I knew it was the Brit leader you were talking about I could have saved you that searching.
Chelmsford was a twat, evidenced by his being fired for the unauthorised invasion of Zululand, an action that had been forbidden by London IIRC.

In fact I'm very surprised Chelmsford even knew of Bromhead who was a mere Lieutenant at the time and not a particulary well thought of one.


----------



## QC (Jan 18, 2008)

No worries with the search. But you're right about Bromhead. I think he was on the cusp of being binned as he wasn't much good.  His offsider, Chard and himself both were awarded VC's but did not progress past Major.


----------



## hoepoe (Jan 18, 2008)

In no particular order:

* The Israelites of yore: Judah and the Maccabees - defeated the Assyrian Greeks when outnumbered greatly
* Israel Defense Force: 1947 - 1947, a new country without a united army (yet) or equipment defeated mainly Russian armed Lebanon and Syria in the north; Iraq and Transjordan - renamed Jordan during the war - in the east; Egypt, assisted by contingents from the Sudan - in the south; and Palestinians and volunteers from Arab countries in the interior of the country.
Please see http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/History/Modern+History/Centenary+of+Zionism/The+Arab-Israeli+Wars.htm to see why i say IDF 

Zulu's of Southern Africa - as mentioned in a  previous post 

US Military - No explanation necessary


----------



## pardus (Jan 18, 2008)

Queens Cadet said:


> No worries with the search. But you're right about Bromhead. I think he was on the cusp of being binned as he wasn't much good.  His offsider, Chard and himself both were awarded VC's but did not progress past Major.



Funny eh, good enough to win a VC but not to get a promotion :uhh:


----------



## pardus (Jan 27, 2008)

Don't worry about gd, his dog pissed in his cornflakes this morning!


----------



## RackMaster (Jan 27, 2008)

pardus762 said:


> Don't worry about gd, his dog pissed in his cornflakes this morning!



lol, nah the little fucker always steals my warm spot in the bed when I get up for a piss.  Maybe I should piss in his cornflakes.


----------



## Swill (Feb 6, 2008)

hidesite said:


> The African Zulu Nation from aprox 1815 to 1828 under their Chief Shaka



I see your Zulu nation, and I raise you one British Empire. Rorke's Drift. I know, I know... 50 yr difference. But who else was I going to use to lead in to my all time favorite battle?


----------



## pardus (Feb 6, 2008)

Swill said:


> I see your Zulu nation, and I raise you one British Empire. Rorke's Drift. I know, I know... 50 yr difference. But who else was I going to use to lead in to my all time favorite battle?



You cannot forget the engagement that proceeded the one at Rorke's Drift! Isandlwana!


----------



## QC (Feb 7, 2008)

Troopies poorly deployed. They were out too far from their perimeter and put in positions individually up to 100 metres apart. No chance against Zulus hyped up on the local ganja. But granted, an emphatic win.


----------



## hidesite (Feb 7, 2008)

Swill said:


> I see your Zulu nation, and I raise you one British Empire. Rorke's Drift. I know, I know... 50 yr difference. But who else was I going to use to lead in to my all time favorite battle?



Yall, but the Zulu nation did it with sharp and blunt objects which for me gives them a light advantage. However, your point is well taken...


----------



## riptide (Feb 26, 2008)

1) Roman Legions- Conquered the known world, very adaptable.
2) French(Under Napoleon)- Conquered Europe, as well as made that deceptively "easy" push for Russia.
3)Ottoman Empire-Lasted till WWI
4)United Kingdom, Great Britain, England-whichever way you hack it, "The sun never sets on the British Empire"
5)United States of America-We showed Hitler's "Supermen" what's up.


----------

