![Europe_countries_map_en_2[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/dJTsrBv.png "Europe_countries_map_en_2[1].png")
What is the most powerful European country?
For the purposes of this thread, the Eurasian countries (Russia and Turkey) can also be considered, as they are partly in Europe.
We european nau, sweet
>>52199138
>wanting to be European
I think being Eurasian is pretty cool. Partly in Europe, partly in Asia
Portugal
Luxembourg is up there too.
>>52199086
turkey or russia
and you should do opposite, its too easy choice with them around.
>>52199205
I disagree I don't think either of them are the most powerful
>>52199182
>wanting to be European
Sorry, real countries don't need to invent artificial transnational identities to feel relevant.
>Eurasian
literally what
>>52199278
>literally what
Eurasian. That's how I define Russia.
>>52199086
>What is the most powerful European country?
Literally America.
>>52199328
Idiot. That's how I define you.
>>52199362
Rude 2bh famfams
very clever albion
very clever, you included russia so its not germoney or france
then you ally with the ruskies to meddle in european politics
>>52199086
Britain, with Germany and France in a close second.
>>52199397
I actually included Russia in order to avoid accusations that I left them out because they're strongest. My British sense of fair play also came into it. I don't think Russia is the strongest though.
However,
>then you ally with the ruskies to meddle in european politics
This is a very interesting idea...
![nagy-Magyarorszag-2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/vGJQY9A.jpg "nagy-Magyarorszag-2[1].jpg")
>>52199086
Look this is what Europe looked like a few houndred years ago...Todays "big" european powers, included russia and turkey is nothing compared to what Hungary used to be like!
Mems aside the superpower of europe is up between France or UK close runner ups are Spain Italy and Germany
>>52199086
eesti is most powerful
>>52199532
Why would you go all that way and NOT take Crimea?
Italy
We just hide our power level
>>52199511
as if you havent done that already a number of times
![migransok[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/JvK6tll.jpg "migransok[1].jpg")
>>52199588
You can read about it if you want, some history learning never hurts you know.
Crimea was too valuable for the russians they protected it at all costs, though the population would have prefered to be a part of Hungary their voice werent respected.
![Great_Game_cartoon_from_1878[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/hGRgwod.jpg "Great_Game_cartoon_from_1878[1].jpg")
>>52199663
Yes but it was always quite an awkward relationship
- The Great Game after Napoleonic Wars
- Fighting Reds in Russian revolution after WW1
- Cold War after WW2
Russia and the UK are actually ideal strategic partners, they compliment each other perfectly, land and sea power, opposite sides of the continent. However the UK is the home of Liberalism and is arguably Europe's most liberal country, while Russia has never stopped being Despotic.
It's easier to be allies with other liberal-minded countries, which is why we have an alliance with the US despite the Americans being a bit rubbish.
>>52199401
>Britain, stronger than France
>>52199086
estonia ofc.
Bravo estonia
>>52199532
>having coast with three different sea
must be hard to face losing all.
Germany France UK
Russia
Italy
Turkey Spain Netherlands
>>52199588
>>52200015
that map is a meme
its literally an enlarged hungarian kingdom
you both have been trolled
we were great once indeed controling naples and having a personal union with poland
but that doesnt look anything like this
ID set up power ranks as following, keep in mind, im a history student.
The rnaks are descending, beginning with first place.
>France: boosting the biggest population and being the most orderly
>Italy: Great geographical location, furthermore they basically control the meditarrenean
>Germany: Great industry but lacks seaport and they have a habbit of loosing war (see world war 1-2)
>Russia: Great military and huge land area, lacks navy and science
>England: Great navy but havent got advanced land technology. Also small land area is not good because it limits the industrial areas
>Spain: Great location and good navy
>Sweden: Has a strong army tradition and good snipers in the marshes (remember winter war)
This is my list, i think its pretty good and accurate if we take all factors into consideration.
The eternal swamp jew
>>52200123
Yes its the enlarged version which it existed in from 1698-1919. Please provide source to your information or else we must regard it as unprooven.
>>52200165
Soooo the netherlands own half of europe?
>>52200123
I was aware that I was being trolled, I took the opportunity to play along
>>52200131
This troll is more subtle but the "im a history student" really does give it away
>>52200171
proven Zolika
master memester
shouldnt you be sleeping?
>>52200131
>im a history student
>after sweden he puts(remember winter war)
Yeah no volunteir corps dont count as fighting in a war
OFFICIAL EUROPEAN MILITARY POWER RANKINGS
1. UK
2. France
..
...
3. Poland
4. Italy
.....
....
.....
....
.....
5. Germany
6. Spain
7. Finland
8. Norway
9. Denmark
10. Netherlands
11. Poortugal
.....
......
.....
......
.....
......
9000. Sweden
9001. Ireland
>>52200131
>>52199532
Troll detected just like >>52200208 and >>52200219 actually pretended. I think we did ashemed him here with our detection.
0/10 score at attempt into trolling
Personly i think that Germany is strongest in peace time but England is strongest in war times.
But i think if V4 groups (Slovakia, Hungary, Chezh republic, Romania) gets united we can be in first place in peace time soon in 15 years maybe.
>>52199086
How is this even a question?
5000 or so nukes > 200 or whatever France or UK has.
150 mil population vs 50 mil or whatever
etc
Russians are just Europeans who expanded into Asia.
>>52200458
I should add that Russia and Turkey are not consideres European for purposes of these power rankings and that I forgot Greece existed.
>>52199086
Overall, Russia.
Of countries only in Europe proper, UK with Germany a close second only because of germonies.
>>52200490
I think the thread is about geopolitically not a war. Russia might be big but it is a very poor country
>>52200636
FUG
>>52200598
It's true though. Your tanks are inferior, you fighters are inferior, and you can't project power unless the US strategic airlight gives you a lift.
>>52200458
>he puts fance after the uk
Oh man i can already hear the butthurt arrogant frencies coming
1. European Union
2. Russia
3. Turkey
4. Ukraine
5. Serbia? Switzerland?
>>52200672
Topekwhatamireading
most powerful european country reporting in
>Russia is not in Europe meme
I hate Russia but people that do this are always geographically and historically illiterate, or are cuck European federalists that think EU =/= Europe. Literally nobody lives in the Asian part and they only acquired it fairly recently relative to history. It does not make them Eurasian rather than European anymore than French Guyana makes France a "Euro-American" country.
>>52200490
Yes but if you compare the countries in an older map you get easely other results my friend.
>>52200458
These are the official military ratings
>>52200687
Go to sleep, Alberto
>>52199086
Russia of course. But of course this thread will dwell into patriotic and hateful replies, so i won't even bother reading the rest.
>>52200840
What about this is incorrect? Please state your undoubtedly wrong reasons.
>>52200794
>European Union
Hilarious.
>>52200866
No they aren't, none of your planes can fucking fly.
>>52200687
To be fair it's true, the UK simply does have more capability and it has a greater investment in future capabilities
>>52200672
No, France has strong land technology because their large population gives a lot of science output
>>52200877
They have arrived
>>52200866
Just because of the budget
>>52200672
>your fighters are inferior
Wot
>you can't project power unless the US strategic airlight gives you a lift
Mali ? Tell me about brits ? They follow you in the ME and...?
>>52200958
I just hate lies
>>52200933
I know i know
But the frog eater have the ilusion that they have a better military
>>52199086
Best ones are eventual cucks demography wise.
Rest is either monie dependant pigs or corrupt shitholes.
Except Finland, Austria, Switzerland, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia and Czech Republic I don't foresee a bright future.
Turkey isn't great and there's an impending civil war. Even there won't be any, we'll get cucked anyway.
>>52200988
I think he might be thinking of Germany.
>>52201004
Well, also there's the fact you're not European.
>>52200950
>Population 2015
>UK: 64,679,700
>France: 64,982,894
pretty close desu
I dont know. I only know that all people always complain about Germany controlling everything when something bad happens.
>>52200988
>but its not a lie
USA, China and Russia are the most powerful european countries.
>>52200988
>Mali ? Tell me about brits ?
We helped you out there, the French military forces used RAF strategic airlift
EU is just "Greater Germany".
>>52200950
And yet the Leclercs are fucking garbage even when compared to the Challenger 2.
I remain unconvinced.
And what good is a land army if you have no ability to move it rapidly without assistance? What good is it without an elite Air Force or Navy. 21st century battlefields are not static 2 dimensional spaces that are only fought on land.
>>52201050
Yes but the land area is higher in France so they have more experience with land technology, whereeas England has a higher number of ports and trade routes so they have access to higher level naval technologies.
>>52200995
Ours army is as powerful as their army, Bobarsa
>>52201050
STOP FUCKING, OK !?
>>52201071
>GlobalFirePower
Oh, I understand, now
>eurokeks place the whole EU on charts just to compete against america
AYYYYYY
>>52201071
Why is Germany top 10?
>>52201113
>Technologies
FUCK
IT
M8
Levée en masse !
...and nukes
>>52201113
Yes but america has strongest land area so its easy for you guys to make so much science with 320+ million peoples.
France needs its army to defend itself, not to go and export democracy to other countries...So no need to transport it across the world just to please your jewish overlords.
>>52200988
>Wot
The Rafle is objectively inferior to both the Typhoon and F-35. The Brits have two planes better than your best.
>Mali ?
We LITERALLY flew most of your heavy shit to Nali for you because you could not.
>Tell me about brits ?
The Brits have an excellent strategic sealift capability. And their airlift capability, while not anywhere near US tier, is far better than the shitshow France currently has.
>>52201049
like I give a fuck about your opinion.
OP says "Eurasian" countries also counts.
Why even bother making these threads? They usually just end in French and British posters fighting who is the most powerful, while blaming Germany for controlling their gouvernments.
>>52201231
Wow WOW WOW
DON'T INSULT RAFALE
>>52201260
Yea, I agree, we should unite against the eternal kraut
>Military dickwagging with people who actually know what they're talking about
But that's no fun, desu.
>>52201220
France's Army isn't bad but one would think a land power would be able to make an MBT that could spend more than 90% of its time out of a shop even if they were on a budget.
The Leclerc is a bad fucking tank.
>>52201302
we should unite with the german against the eternal anglo
>>52201183
>160k active troops
>408 tanks
>663 combat aircraft
> Technologically advanced
>great economy
Take your pic
>>52201310
Yea, I'm sorry...
Let's just remove kebabs together
>>52201352
The Heer only has 250 tanks now.
>>52201242
If Paraguay annexed my kitchen tomorrow they would be ten times more European then you are at this very moment.
>>52201231
>f-35
You meam those that arentt even in service in the RAF or do you meam the ones that havent been made yet because of the aircrafts stupid price?
(Shit im helping a frencie out, im sorry for this)
>>52201503
>can't even meme with a straight face
Why even bother bro?
>>52201503
>frencie
mate pls, Francie was something like 1200 years ago
>>52201454
Really!?
What the fuck happend to the other 200?
>>52201566
>thinks that is a meme
>>52201586
Sold some of them to Poland and some to..honestly I want to say you. Maybe I'm wronf about that second bit, but yeah they sold a bunch to Poland.
>>52201503
The RAF has 2 or 3 although so far it's just training. In a couple of years we will have a squadron in service. By 2025 we'll have 42 of them.
So.. they're on the way. Our version of the F-35 is already in service with the US Marines so we know it works.
>>52201637
>/b/
Anon, come on
>>52201467
annexing Poland ain't a hard task though.
>>52201637
It is a meme because it doesn't matter.
Right now the Brits have Typhoons which are better than the Rafale. In five years the Brits will have Typhoons and F-35s, both better than the Rafale.
Is France buying anything new in the next five years better than even one of those aircraft?
>>52201695
Neither is taking Vienna.
Russians are Europeans who expanded into Asia.
Turks are middle eastern people from Asia who expanded into Europe.
>>52201675
Not argueing with the fact
Just pointing out the fact that the aircraft has a stupidly large aircraft and its not even in service in the RAF
>>52201767
Typhoon, better than rafale ?
F-35, maybe, but Typhoon...?
>>52201767
>it doesnt matter
They have two f-35 and only plan to make a squad of them in 2025
But yeah the french suck they dont even buy tycoons
>>52201767
>>52201835
Depends what Tranche of Typhoon.
I would say the later Tranche 3 Typhoons are better. But the Rafale probably beats the early model Typhoons
>>52201858
No we will have a squadron much sooner than that
>>52201772
because it can't be partitioned.
>>52201835
Yes, the Tranche II and III Typhoons are better than Rafales.
>>52201891
>>52201899
Don't wanna act like a little cunt but...PROOF
>>52201858
>and only plan to make a squad of them in 2025
Nope. 2017.
>>52199086
UK is only good at sea , there is a reason they are limited in that island
German army is a meme , Germany is a demilitarized nation
French Army is better than British one in the land , still nothing to exaggerate.
Scandinavian armies are a joke
Poland is somewhat good , maybe half as good as France in land but zero in sea.
Russia has a big army with lots of shit but many of it is outdated , but still is stronger than the French at the land and as good as UK at the sea.
Spain and Portugal just meh. Spain still suffers from civil war and is about to be Balkanised , Portugal is memes.
I'm not going to comment on Turkey , I let the others do it.
Rest of those are just ( and Germany and Scandinavia combined ) is just pseudo level and only good at meat shields
>>52201990
Sorry i mean a few squads by 2025
According to the brits fag in here they will buy 42 of them
this many altogether
>>52201858
>buying Typhoon
Nah, unlike you, we build our own planes
>>52202061
meant for: >>52202030
oops...
>>52202006
The only porpuse our military has is to go on nato peace keeping missions and military exercises
And spain suffers from civil war?? What
>>52202109
They never recovered did they
>>52202030
They're buying 140, and it very likely might be more if their defense spending keeps going up. The RAF really likes the As.
>>52202065
>we build our own planes
They are french made thats the first sign they cant be any good i mean just look your home made tanks
And we have f-16 not tycoons
>>52202146
The war was in 1936
Im pretty sure they recovered from it already
>>52202189
Oh...!
I'm sorry but you should DELET this
>>52202189
You should buy Typhoons.
Typhoons and F-16s would be an elite tier high/low mix.
Literally almost US tier in quality, if not quanitity.
>>52202030
>According to the brits fag in here they will buy 42 of them
42 by 2025 m8. In total we're getting 138.
>>52202156
I doubt we'll buy even more, any extra money will go into developing the next generation fighters. My guess is that if we do get As it will be a split buy. We need a minimum of 90 Bs to max out the carriers + have spares for training, testing and sustainment. Leaving almost 50 As.
Doing this would give us, approximately,
6 frontline squadrons of F-35Bs + 1 larger sustainment/training squadron.
3 frontline squadrons of F-35As + 1 sustainment squadron
It's enough. Because the Typhoon is being made into a bomber there's no great need for many of the As.
I have a feeling that we may even do a total B order if the fighter proves itself to be as flexible as I think it can be.
>>52202278
we are actualy selling our f-16's to romania
And then we are going to buy more f-16's
>>52202442
Block 50s?
Hope so. Those are some mean birds.
>>52202430
You're aleady getting As in a split buy though, it's already confirmed. The buzz is though that the RAF wants more.
Not saying it's likely but if the unit price keeps dropping and the UKs economy and defense budget keep growing then who knows what could happen?
>>52202649
>You're aleady getting As in a split buy though, it's already confirmed.
This is news to me. Where was this confirmed?
>>52202574
I think so
Ik that our asas de portugal(our version of the blue angles)already had a play time with them just to see how they are
>>52202726
It's on your chart right here,
>>52202061
and bongs had been talking about it on /k/ for awhile. I had thought it was set in stone at this point.
>>52202811
>It's on your chart right here,
No it isn't. That chart shows an order for 138 F-35Bs, look at it again. You might be getting confused with Denmark?
>and bongs had been talking about it on /k/ for awhile
Anons on /k/ talk about a lot of stuff that doesn't end up materialising.
>>52202803
I think so too. As I recall you fly block 25 or 30s right now.
Pretty decent upgrade from those.
>>52202871
Maybe you're right. I guess I was mistaken.
Well then why the fuck isn't this happeneing? It seems so out of character for the RAF to not want at least a couple squadrons.
An upgunned, more maneuverable fighter that shares commonality with what they already fly seems right up their alley.
>>52203042
Firstly splitting an order is more expensive because it reduces commonality, secondly the SDSR plans for a future force 10 years ahead. All we know is about firm orders for 42 Bs up to 2025, and a commitment to eventually get 138 of whatever type.
There is no need for the MoD to rush the decision, circumstances may change. F-35 software and hardware will be continually upgraded over the years and that may be change what the MoD wants.
Personally I can see advantages of having squadrons of Bs that aren't meant for the carriers, whose job is to stick with an expeditionary force moving across land. Launching from places that no other fighter could even dream of doing.
>>52199086
The UK. It and France are on par militarily, but the UK has more cultural and economic influence.
>>52203295
I didn't realize the 138 commitment was of any type, I thought it was specific to the Bs.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens then. Should be fun.
>>52203330
>The UK. It and France are on par militarily
They really aren't though. France needs to get their socialist shit together quick or risk ending up like Germany.
>>52203383
Technically the 138 order IS for Bs, but that could be changed because they're only 'planned orders' not firm orders. The first 42 are firm orders for F-35Bs so we know about them for sure.
Some sharp people were paying attention when the Chancellor made the commitment to 138 again this year, he never specified the variant.
>>52203470
How many do you need to effectively operate and keep people trained for the carriers? Clearly not 138 right.
I always assumed the RAF would be operating at least a couple squadrons off of land.
>>52202932
Not that is really needed the old ones are just fine we just do this to keep up with nato
Pic of the old ones doing their job
>>52203569
The old ones are almost certainly not fine. Airframes only have so many hours on them before they fall out of the sky and skill very expensive and highly trained pilots. Yours are nearing that stage.
>>52201352
Why do they train with brooms? Why are none of their Tornadoes airworthy?
>>52203625
>skill
*kill
Trained fighter pilots are more valuable than old planes usually. Smarter to just buy new ones.
>>52203554
A QE carrier tops out at 36 fighters.
So that's 72 frontline jets + 18 strong training squadron. That's the 90 minimum I mentioned earlier.
I heard from someone who knows the RAF that their rule of thumb is to keep an extra third of the frontline fighter force in 'depth', ready to supplement or replace the frontline squadrons without touching the training fleet. That's an extra 24-30 planes bringing the total needed to ~120
But those extra squadrons could be with the RAF when the Royal Navy doesn't need them. And for 99% of the time the Royal Navy won't need to fill both of its carriers. All F-35s will be shared between both branches, so using that model the RAF will always have *at least* a couple of squadrons to play around with.
There's another advantage of keeping them all Bs - each squadron can go where it's needed most. It fits in with the UK concept for the F-35, different to the US concept, where the F-35B is a "Joint Combat Aircraft" (JCA) meant to be shared across the armed forces.
>>52199362
Ouch. Bringing the bantz.
>>52204031
I've got to admit, Ivan does get pretty damn banterous when he's been hitting the vodka.
>Frenchmen insisting they are the most powerful
>literally nobody else agrees but frogs still cannot accept reality
This is an amusing thread
>>52200866
>ukraine
turkey
We all know Poland could kick your ass anytime. Russia can't because Nato.
