We are so close to hitting 50k on this channel! I wanted to upload a particularly lengthy and, in my opinion, exciting video to thank everyone. This video will compare the top 10 largest armies in the world from 1816 to 2021. Be sure to like, comment, and subscribe! Enjoy!
Sudden Increases: 1:02: Egyptian-Ottoman War (1839-1841) 1:39: Crimean War 1:59: American Civil War 2:05: January Uprising 2:24: Franco-Prussian War 2:43: Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) 4:16: Second Balkan War 4:21: World War I 4:31: Russian Civil War 5:14: Second Italo-Ethiopian War 5:27: World War II 5:56: Korean War
@816Li That's not the comparison he was using. The vietnam war lost troops because troops didn't want to go over to fight. Also there was a ton of draft dodgers for good reason.
@@vik24oct1991 If it was graphed by percentage of population, Israel might be in the running for the highest percentage of their population in the military.
@@vik24oct1991 or sweden. At the height of the cold war, they could draft half to three quarters of a millon (5-8 million in population, count away half as they are women)
@@newandoldtech5634 In Greece every abled male is required to join and serve in the military for 9-12 months (used to be up to 2 years) and it has been that way since our civil war from what I know. Meaning that at least 80+% of age men in Greece have been active military personel at some point in their lives.
@@vik24oct1991 Now maybe, but before there would be competition, say during the dawn of the 20th century Bulgaria had maybe 5-6 million population and 1 million military ready soldiers. Thats just one example.
Although i cannot give the exact number for each year of the strenthg of Napoleon's Grande Armee the highest peak of military came at about 600.000 men with half of the force French troops and the rest from conquered, allied and sattelite states of the French Empire, this had to do with the Invasion of Russia in 1812.
Today, it is not how many soldiers you have, but how many sophisticated weapons you have at your disposal. One weapon ( bomb ) can kill hundreds of thousands. It's all about intelligence and proper deployment of what you have. Great Britain colonized 1/4 of the world with one of the smallest militaries.
True, but don't forget that, for Britain, the primary arm of both defence and offence was not the army, but the navy. Personnel numbers do not accurately show the amount of money spent on naval power: most of it goes into the ships, the docks, etc.
The British empire worked more as a business than other traditional empires. It;s why it was more successful and took less lives as it dissolved. Fewer soldiers needed when locals were paid to get onside and jump on the commerce train. The natural evolution from that are the empires of the US and China today.
@@criticaltheories5222 Taiwan has never been a country, did you go to the United Nations to recognize it yourself? This stupid point of view can only reflect your ignorance and arrogance, without history and culture, please read more books?ok？？ The mentally retarded who watch the BBC every day。 Taiwan is part of China
The one million strong Qing army was merely nominal. Throughout the 19th century, the Qing Empire was basically occupied with foreign wars (mostly invasions by european powers), rebellions (white-lotus-cult rebellions, muslin rebellions, the christian-cult/taiping rebellion, the restoration movement for the former dynasty and the uprisings led by revolutionaries) and peasant wars(one of them was the tremendous Nian Jun/Army of Bands, an umberalla term for thousands of armed peasant bands that were active across the Central China from early 1850s to late 1860s, killed at least 100k Qing soldiers). All those above demanded and eliminated uncountable soldiers. It is hard to calculate their actual number of soldiers, since the Emperor might neither not know the accurate number at that time. Also, the military system changed and varied a lot during the time, which makes the thing even more complex. So, to be simple, we have no idea how many soldiers Qing deployed in its last decades, apart from the fact that it surely had many soldiers.
The mere fact that the figure for the Qing dynasty shown in this video remains unchanged at a nice round 1 million. That tells us right away that it is a big fat GUESS.
And to think the US also built all the equipment necessary for all those men to fight effectively and to get them to the fight, while fighting on two fronts, and at least at first at a disadvantage on both fronts.
Also foreshadowed how both world wars would be fought and trench warfare. Grant is the grandfather of modern combat and siege tactics are done . the american civil war was the first real mechanized war
As the caption says, these are active duty personnel only. When you add in reserves, these numbers can as much as double in size. But as Russia is currently leaning, an smaller number of highly motivated and well-trained troops with advanced weapons can make up for superior numbers.
Several factors hamper the Russian (and some other military forces). An all volunteer military force can be selective and choose the right people for service, so right off the bat you have people who are a cut above conscripts. Training matters. Train how you fight.. just putting people in a uniform and giving them a few months of instruction makes cannon fodder, not professional soldiers. Having a chain of command that lets commanders improvise and intelligently expand on orders with officers backed up by a professional NCO cadre is something Russia does not have. That being said, if this conflict goes on the Russian military will learn and get better as time goes on.
5:48 Indo-Pak War 1 (1947) India WON 6:28 Sino-Indian War (1962) China WON Due to utter ignorance and trusting china 6:37 Indo-Pak War 2 (1965) India WON 6:52 Indo-Pak War 3 (1971) India WON and Bangladesh got independence even though US and it's allies were on the side of military dictatorship Pakistan but still India won due to USSR(thank you) 8:06 Indo-Pak War 4 (1999) India WON
India is a terrorist country that invaded Goa junagda Pondicherry dadra and Nagar havily and Kashmir and Hyderabad and diu and East Pakistan and siachin glacier and occupied them illegally and forcefully. India invaded occupied kashmir against the wishes of Kashmiris and occupied it illegally and forcefully and according to UN resolution illegally Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir is not a part of india it is a disputed territory
The fact the US mobilized as much as the Qing just to fight it’s self in the 1860s should show you how much of a threat the US was to European Hegemony if something changed in the timeline.
@@beckyweiss6072 100,000s of white people died for slavery to be over so I don't know why we all hate each other if you knew that. Gov makes races hate each other on purpose I swear. What's with the plantations in the south still where 74% of the black men are serving life to run it. Shits crazy AF to me. There's other ways nowadays to run a state than that shit! I'm random AF sorry
There were a number of things I found especially interesting: The rapid expansion and deflation of armies around the world wars and the American Civil War, how Sweden stayed in the top 10 for so long, and the Qing Dynasty having a million way before anyone else. I was wondering about the Qing number, because it did not fluctuate for long periods of time. Is that because there wasn't significantly reliable data, and the 1 million is an approximation?
Sweden has very detailed historical conscription records, that could be a reason. Also the aggressive russian and prussian power houses to the east and south respectively made defense warrented.
@@alexanderzippel8809 There are 360,000 archived books written in ink with the names of soldiers from Qing spanning 35 years. How many names are in one book? I don't know, but let's say 100. You do the math. Remember: This is ALL the soldiers in a 35 year span. And these are only the books that survived Mao and the Intellectual Revolution.
Not even in the top 10 in the 80s but the British military still committed to its territories back then... and making a presence to a well known terrorist group (I would know, I was there) Also a certain South American country and holding the line in Germany. Not forgetting posts in the far East, Mediterranean and Central America.
It would be neat to see this video overlayed with military machinery and/or weapons. Some nations may reduce the numbers as they get better machines/weapons that make each enlisted soldier more effective.
Is that when the United States hit 11 million active personnel? The most of any country ever. Then, we're back to a little over 1 million. That was crazy.
Watched an interview with a retired American general a couple days ago. He was asked about the Russia invasion and he said, "We over estimated the capabilities of the Russian military. We thought that because it was so big that it was good. Turns out there is just a lot of it".
Тем не менее. Объединение из почти всех крупных стран включая США, Британию, дезертировавших российских частей ничего не смогли сделать в 1919-1921 годах против уступавшим в количестве и богатстве большевикам.
@@GospelFire have you been there and seen it all clown? or do you believe in the news at the age of 21, which is powdering everyone's brains everywhere, no one can be trusted, not Ukrainian, not Russian, especially not American media
Which is reflective of the US's longstanding distrust of large standing armies in peacetime, that and there is literally no one on the continent that poses a threat. The disadvantage of having to rapidly expand the military with men that have never had a second of military training is that they are very green and will be mistake prone and not as effective early on, but they have no training or muscle memory to unlearn when the nature of the war changes, everything will be "on the job".
@@IcyFemboi China has a different geopolitics. It is surrounded by a lot of nations who are not necessarily always friendly. It has a huge open border line. It is literally vulnerable on all sides. Hence the urge to maintain a large army is understandable. Not to mention its huge population with very diverse cultures and languages, meaning keeping everything inside the country in order is already a challenge. A large army therefore is needed for that job.
I have a challenge for you, if you can develop the tech to do it. Do a timelines as map pings/circles. I personally would like to see one outlining the creation and proliferation of the banking systems by association.
Imagine there’s no war tomorrow, every where you go it’s nice and safe, no army needed, there’s no enemies, all these money would be spending for education, health, economies, there are no borders, anyone can go & live anywhere, What the life would that be… But that dream would never happen 😔
When there is no army/soliders/Officers, then in public some people miss use this advantage and try to rule or take over land or area, this is called HUMAN GREED that never Ends. That's because there is need of forces that discipline the People
This video really shows the diff between conscription and volunteers. If you look at the massive armies that fought significantly smaller volunteer armies that lost its pretty clear that conscription doesn't work well.
conscription works well if all else is rougly the same and if you don't use the draft, you're outmanned. however when you look at firepower, morale, logistics, leadership being better with a professional army with a superior economy, then for sure just conscription is not going to win it for you by default. Superior manpower then becomes useless.
At 3:53. Also gotta love the Russo-Japanese War. The fledgling industrial nation of Japan barely increased the number of soldiers in its its army of roughly 200,000 while Russia increased its numbers massively, to become an army of 2.3 million. Yet the Japanese won that war as a resounding success, totally destroying Russia in every battle it fought, on land and in the seas. Bravo, Japan, for showing that quality and not size is really what matters in an army and navy.
@@somedudeonline1936 The Russians had built the Trans-Siberian railroad just in time for the start of the Russo-Japanese War. So they could transport their army all the way to the Far East against Japan. The problem--these were barely literate peasant conscripts who were provided the most basic supplies. Some didn't even know why they were fighting. The Russians were just utterly shredded apart when they fought in the land battles in Manchuria. That's because the Japanese, unlike the Russians, built up a professional army under the tutelage of the best French and German generals. These were armies filled with the best soldiers equipped with the latest, most high-tech supplies. Clearly pitting peasants against some of the best professional soldiers in the world was going to be a disaster. Big time. And that's exactly what happened.
Props to Bulgaria going to bloody fourth on this list at one point. There is a reason it was called the Balkan Prussia, the entire peninsula had to fight against it to win.
I like these videos. I wish they authors would take more care in their color choices. Yellow graph bar with white background and small font? Hard to read.
idk if theres a way to really do this, but a chart of major inventions from each country would be cool. I'm from scotland and I know scottish inventors have created an insane amount of things relative to the small population. would love to see that chart if theres a way to get the data
I read a few years ago that per capita, Scotland has the highest number of patents of any country ever. As someone with significant Scottish ancestry, I'm pleased but not surprised. I'd love to see charts about inventions and patents, too.
I don't care how many things Scotland has invented. You invented golf and that's good enough to keep you on the top of the charts forever as far as I'm concerned.
A follow-up video to show these same numbers, but compared to the population of these countries would be interesting. Active military personnel per capita would show how richer countries have the money for large armies vs poorer countries that have vastly larger populations.
Well these charts are, of course, mostly based on official records. So if the Qing Dynasty officially recorded an army size of 1M for several years then... that's what went into this video :D
A la venue des nazies cela est flagrant🤮 Mais il est évident que la France a toujours gardé une armée puissante jusqu'au début des années 80...ensuite l'U.E et l'OTAN l'ont déconstruire😞
The United States' military is fast becoming mechanized, meaning we don't need as many soldiers as we can basically destroy our enemies' infrastructure from above crippling basically any other country without the need for a massive army... which we also have.
9 army personnel in the US army are supporting 1 frontline combatant. They emphasize their logistics much more than armies of similar size. That is why they have a big army but their composition is very different.
@@csmth96 The US never gets enough credit for their ability to wage war anywhere in the world. Even in WW2 they were a large part of feeding not just the UK war machine, but even her people - plus the Soviet war machine PLUS their own war machine in North Africa, Italy AND France. And oh, and let's not forget that that was the easy part compared to waging a war thousands of miles away across the Pacific on various islands... at the same time! It's truly insane, if you think about it and it's why the US spends SO much on maintaining a navy that's more powerful than the rest of the world combined. This isn't even someone bragging because I'm not even American, just a history buff and former military man.
@@smgdfcmfah Thats why china purely runs off of destabilization and subversion tactics. They need to weaken the us just enough for china to increase influence. An all out assault on the us is crazy and invasion without emps and nukes is off the table
The UK barely had 200K army yet the entire South Asia -- India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Berma -- were colonized along with Africa and the Middle East. So even back then, pre high tech era, numbers never mattered. Economy, Technology, and a high standard society matter over the just number of soldigers.
@@malopephasha5341 эм, разве дело не в наличии высокотехнологичного оружия? Я не оспариваю квалификацию солдат, но думаю, решающим фактором были именно флот и пушки. Хотя, ещё где-то читал, что успех Британской империи был в идеальном контроле территорий малым контингентом. Хорошая логистика?
@@malopephasha5341 data is not really correct at the time of world war 2. About 1.5 million soldiers were South Asian. British empire was just hiding their military strength.
Most of the european countries started focusing more on the tech side and keeps a relatively lower elite manpower nowadays. That's why UK, France, İtaly, Turkey etc. Dropped out of top 10. But if you compare the army strength, they would be in top 10.
imagine the Chinese hordes crossing the Yellow River in the Korean conflict if the US had MLRS systems and modern aircraft. It would have been an absolute slaughter. It was bad enough as it was and all the NATO forces had was WW2 weapons, for the most part.
Not in active service though and I guess that large army after 1938 mobilisation was just too short lived to appear in the video... BTW I'm personally more disappointed that the video doesn't distinguish between various forces in civil wars and counts them all into one (or doesn't mention the losing side?) - like USA vs CSA in 1860's or Russian and China during their civil wars...
Would have been interesting to see the major rebel factions like the Confederate States, Spanish Republicans (or Nationalists, depending on your perspective) and the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom.
The Germans conscripted almost 17,3 million man into the Wehrmacht + 1 million to the Waffen SS over the entire war 5,2 million soldiers died and many more get woundet and because of it out of service
@@kathycaldwell7126 no not millions, hundres of thausends but no not German get in the Wehrmacht, all got in the Waffen SS, the 17,3 Millions are all Germans and Austriens. It is 1/6 to 1/6 og the Population that is not a great thing for a totally militaristic Country like the third Reich when the most from 16/17 to 45 get conscriptet.
@@Arcaist 17.3 million is a little too much, the total who served in the Wehrmacht was more about 13.6 million excluding the Waffen-SS with about 900.000 to 1.000.000.
@@wesleyjaskulsky9414 you are wrong Truppenstärke Nach den Recherchen des Historikers Rüdiger Overmans dienten in der Wehrmacht in Heer, Luftwaffe und Marine 17,3 Millionen Soldaten, zusammen mit der Waffen-SS waren es 18,2 Millionen Soldaten, die im Verlauf des Krieges eingezogen wurden und nicht alle gleichzeitig Dienst taten.[27] Im November 1943 hatte die Wehrmacht eine Stärke von ca. 6,345 Millionen Soldaten. Davon waren 3,9 Millionen Soldaten an der Ostfront stationiert (zusammen mit 283.000 Verbündeten). 177.000 Soldaten standen in Finnland, 486.000 Soldaten besetzten Norwegen und Dänemark. 1.370.000 Mann Besatzungstruppen standen in Frankreich und Belgien. Weitere 612.000 Mann waren auf dem Balkan stationiert und 412.000 Mann in Italien.[28] de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrmacht#:~:text=Geländeübung%2C%20Anfang%201939-,Truppenstärke,nicht%20alle%20gleichzeitig%20Dienst%20taten. or Wehrmacht 18 Millionen deutsche Männer dienten im Zweiten Weltkrieg als Soldaten der Wehrmacht. Bis in die Neunziger hielt sich die Legende von der sauberen deutschen Armee, die keine Schuld an den Gräueltaten der Nazis und der Judenvernichtung trug. Doch Studien belegen: Die Armee war voll in den nationalsozialistischen Unrechtsstaat integriert. www.spiegel.de/thema/wehrmacht/ put it on Google translate the German Reich had more or less 80.000.000 Citizens in a period were the most are young not like today, so it is not a big problem to put less than 1/5 in the Army when you have slavery and woman in the workforce.
Kinda weird how the U.S count didn't rise sharply after 9/11. A lot of young guys enlisted In the wake of the attacks. I'm suspicious about the accuracy of these videos
The Maratha Confederacy was dissolved in 1818 after the third anglo Maratha war. This video starts near that point so they don't exist as such. I am a Maratha btw.
As someone born in the 90s it’s interesting to see how much more Spartan the US was during the Cold War: 2-3 million troops despite having half the population it does now throughout much of that period. Growing up hearing from strong anti-war advocates against our interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, even now hearing about Ukraine, it’s difficult to imagine how much more militarized our society must have been back then. Troop numbers barely moved during these recent wars but surely numbers would spike if America was to put itself in a position to have to actually intervene against Russia or China or even North Korea. I’m pro-peace but at least one of those three doesn’t seem to be.
Well war has changes as well. Raw numbers don't matter as much anymore, look at the gulf war. The US destroyed one of the worlds largest militaries under a year with help from allies. We lost almost nothing. The US has gotten really good at using a smaller, professional force since the end of Vietnam when the draft was banned. We lost less men in the decades of the war on Terror than Russia has in the couple weeks it's been in Ukraine. In other words, we don't need a lot of people. For that to change we would need a direct war with a major regional power
@@spartanparty3894 That’s kind of my point. Is the US military even in a position to fight that kind of conflict as is? Do we actively avoid conventional conflict because of our inability to wage it, especially for long periods? Even if it’s the right thing to do? In this video you can see huge spikes in numbers in in the years leading up to major conflicts or potential ones but that obviously includes conscription/drafts/enlistment bonuses for untrained troops. Would it make sense to have a standing army ready to deploy in a world where Russia aggressively invaded its neighbors and some of its neighbors are our allies? I’m not encouraging unnecessary adventurism, but I wonder how safe the tip of the spear is when the shaft is not reinforced.
@@Bern_il_Cinq world isn't black and white like in marvel's movies. Don't forget about NATO expansion for absolutely no reason. Remembered the crisis in Georgia? Russia clearly said that there will be no more NATO countries near its board. And still NATO pushes Ukraine towards this disaster. This blood is 50/50 on NATO and Russia's hands
@@mw2k6 It doesn’t even cross your mind that Russia could one day be a NATO or EU member. Russia lashes out at its former puppets for trying to better their situations and responds with overt military action when it’s propaganda, bribery, election fraud, spies, special forces and foreign rebels fail. It defines itself as an outsider in the international community so on the outside it will stay: a walled-off rogue state that makes North Korea look like a peaceful neighbor. Putin and United Russia lead Russia to ruin. Nuclear armed states can fight conventionally. Unfortunately India and Pakistan do it somewhat often. I’d say the fact that your mind jumps directly to the worst case scenario of nuclear war indicates the hesitancy to even respond to Russian aggression. You’re afraid and perhaps rightfully so. It’s clear that Putin will sacrifice his own people for his twisted ideal of autarky: Russia has lost more troops in Ukraine in less than a month than the United States lost in Iraq during the entire war and occupation there combined. Like I said, it’s probably time for an actual election in Russia.
An assumption to clarify: A country at war with itself (American Civil War) the countries total number of soldiers are not broken out by sides? No Army of the Confederacy?
No. France's army was huge, sure, but the thing is that it was spread out throughout the world (with he colonies and all). There were less than 200k soldiers at the beginning of the invasion, while Germany had more than the double. And as someone else said higher up in the comments, the French high-command was terrible at its job
We are so close to hitting 50k on this channel! I wanted to upload a particularly lengthy and, in my opinion, exciting video to thank everyone. This video will compare the top 10 largest armies in the world from 1816 to 2021. Be sure to like, comment, and subscribe! Enjoy!
Are you getting monetized for your content?
Yo I like the music you used, what is it?
Congrats on 50k (and then some)!
err⁴4⁴⁴⁴
m.j
You left out the Confederate army estimated at 750,000 to 1,000,000 strong between 1861 and 1865.
Sudden Increases:
1:02: Egyptian-Ottoman War (1839-1841)
1:39: Crimean War
1:59: American Civil War
2:05: January Uprising
2:24: Franco-Prussian War
2:43: Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878)
4:16: Second Balkan War
4:21: World War I
4:31: Russian Civil War
5:14: Second Italo-Ethiopian War
5:27: World War II
5:56: Korean War
Awesome thanks! :)
Egypt actually was a province of Ottoman Empire. The governor rebelled againist empire.
@Adora Tsang there was no increase though
Taiping rebellion (Chinese Civil War) largest war casualties and total death after ww2
@@alonglongchannel indeed but it was a civil war
Austria 200 years ago: 2. largest country in Europe, 2. largest army in the world
Austria today: People think kangaroos live there.
U talking abt Austria no kangaroos there or Australia? where kangaroos live.
@@kenney1050 You got the point.
@@kenney1050 😂
he he
Are you from Austria? "Let's put another shrimp on the barbie."
This reminds me of what my girlfriend tells me, it's not about size, what really matters is quality
Coz your country is not in the list😂😂😂
@@soumit123 you didn't understand the joke
Lmfao.
@@soumit123 It aint about countries tho...
@@gababa4286 yeah I got it bro😂😂😂
When a military shrinks during peace: oh cool they are cooling off tensions
When a military shrinks during war: oh… oh no
Vietnam war is that
Russia in WW1 : Bodies to the slaughter!
@816Li That's not the comparison he was using. The vietnam war lost troops because troops didn't want to go over to fight. Also there was a ton of draft dodgers for good reason.
Seeing the historical countries in action is so awesome
It would be interesting to have the same graph showing the percentage of the population that was in the active military
north korea would be your winner without any competition.
@@vik24oct1991 If it was graphed by percentage of population, Israel might be in the running for the highest percentage of their population in the military.
@@vik24oct1991 or sweden. At the height of the cold war, they could draft half to three quarters of a millon (5-8 million in population, count away half as they are women)
@@newandoldtech5634 In Greece every abled male is required to join and serve in the military for 9-12 months (used to be up to 2 years) and it has been that way since our civil war from what I know. Meaning that at least 80+% of age men in Greece have been active military personel at some point in their lives.
@@vik24oct1991 Now maybe, but before there would be competition, say during the dawn of the 20th century Bulgaria had maybe 5-6 million population and 1 million military ready soldiers. Thats just one example.
The US Civil War was pretty amazing about how quickly the numbers grew and then how quickly they subsided.
What happened to the Confederate numbers?
@@wadehampton1737
I think both the Union and the Confederacy were added together.
Well, a lot of those guys were killed in the war. Like, A LOT.
@@wadehampton1737 Combined I suppose but the Union had a much larger army
@@keldonmcfarland2969 no both it was a lot more
1M army of Qing came out of nowhere made me laugh
That’s where the dataset started to report the figures for China.
Because Qing Government annonced they have "百万大军" (1M soldiers), and nobody want to caculate how many they are. LOL.
@@carterzeng5756 agree
Qing dynasty did come and go rather fast
@@RankingCharts oh I see
It's a shame this doesn't go back to the 1780s. Would love to see France's Army during the Revolution and the Napoleonic era.
I wish they started at 1805 as I would like to have seen how large Napoleons Grand Army would have been at different stages of the Napoleonic Wars.
Although i cannot give the exact number for each year of the strenthg of Napoleon's Grande Armee the highest peak of military came at about 600.000 men with half of the force French troops and the rest from conquered, allied and sattelite states of the French Empire, this had to do with the Invasion of Russia in 1812.
The French Army alone was well over 1 million in 1812 with troops from Spain to Russia.
Every time Germany tops the charts , the world war happens 😂
And know we have one of the smallest and unpracticed army’s 😂
China will be new nazis from Asia, they believe they already won, “eastern raising and western falling” they said ☹️
@@Light-jk3uican only assume he’s talking about Germany
@@MsDebbie0611 nope, you are deluded
@@MsDebbie0611 so,you even don't know what is nazis?
When you realize how much smaller Prussia was than it's contenders, you realize why it's called "an army with a state."
Keep making those high-quality videos!
Bulgaria does quite a sprint during every war,for then 5-6 mil people,800 thousand people is impressive l think.
Today, it is not how many soldiers you have, but how many sophisticated weapons
you have at your disposal. One weapon ( bomb ) can kill hundreds of thousands. It's
all about intelligence and proper deployment of what you have. Great Britain colonized
1/4 of the world with one of the smallest militaries.
True, but don't forget that, for Britain, the primary arm of both defence and offence was not the army, but the navy. Personnel numbers do not accurately show the amount of money spent on naval power: most of it goes into the ships, the docks, etc.
It's true we Italian / Roman Empire killed an immortal being just with normal iron strategy is everything 👍
But Britain had the world's largest Navy at the time, and an even larger merchant fleet to carry away the spoils of colonialism.
Portugal too.
The British empire worked more as a business than other traditional empires. It;s why it was more successful and took less lives as it dissolved. Fewer soldiers needed when locals were paid to get onside and jump on the commerce train. The natural evolution from that are the empires of the US and China today.
For Korea and Taiwan to be in the top 10 must have been a massive effort during the 60s
Taiwan's military at that time was China's army in exile, read more history
@@rubylee5754 Fun Fact: Taiwan 🇹🇼 has never been a part of China.
@@criticaltheories5222 Taiwan has never been a country, did you go to the United Nations to recognize it yourself? This stupid point of view can only reflect your ignorance and arrogance, without history and culture, please read more books?ok？？ The mentally retarded who watch the BBC every day。
Taiwan is part of China
@@rubylee5754 historically NEVER has Taiwan 🇹🇼 been a part the CCP-s China.
@@criticaltheories5222 Turns out I was talking to an ignorant unread kid, so be it, bye傻逼
The one million strong Qing army was merely nominal. Throughout the 19th century, the Qing Empire was basically occupied with foreign wars (mostly invasions by european powers), rebellions (white-lotus-cult rebellions, muslin rebellions, the christian-cult/taiping rebellion, the restoration movement for the former dynasty and the uprisings led by revolutionaries) and peasant wars(one of them was the tremendous Nian Jun/Army of Bands, an umberalla term for thousands of armed peasant bands that were active across the Central China from early 1850s to late 1860s, killed at least 100k Qing soldiers). All those above demanded and eliminated uncountable soldiers. It is hard to calculate their actual number of soldiers, since the Emperor might neither not know the accurate number at that time. Also, the military system changed and varied a lot during the time, which makes the thing even more complex.
So, to be simple, we have no idea how many soldiers Qing deployed in its last decades, apart from the fact that it surely had many soldiers.
The mere fact that the figure for the Qing dynasty shown in this video remains unchanged at a nice round 1 million. That tells us right away that it is a big fat GUESS.
Fascinating video but so much war is depressing 😢
that US climb in 1941. just.. incredible! 😯
And to think the US also built all the equipment necessary for all those men to fight effectively and to get them to the fight, while fighting on two fronts, and at least at first at a disadvantage on both fronts.
@@Michael-cf9cj wooow. amazing.
Uncle Sam is such an authority.
I don't give a fuck what anyone says. Go USA forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I really like these animated charts. Thank you so much for uploading them. And probably creating them
The civil war bit, really was a foreshadow of what the US would eventually become
Also foreshadowed how both world wars would be fought and trench warfare. Grant is the grandfather of modern combat and siege tactics are done . the american civil war was the first real mechanized war
As the caption says, these are active duty personnel only. When you add in reserves, these numbers can as much as double in size. But as Russia is currently leaning, an smaller number of highly motivated and well-trained troops with advanced weapons can make up for superior numbers.
Several factors hamper the Russian (and some other military forces). An all volunteer military force can be selective and choose the right people for service, so right off the bat you have people who are a cut above conscripts. Training matters. Train how you fight.. just putting people in a uniform and giving them a few months of instruction makes cannon fodder, not professional soldiers. Having a chain of command that lets commanders improvise and intelligently expand on orders with officers backed up by a professional NCO cadre is something Russia does not have. That being said, if this conflict goes on the Russian military will learn and get better as time goes on.
In Russian case there are not 900 000 active personnel as we see right now in the Ukrainian war. This number includes reservists.
Only 200 000 in Ukraine
@@latometoy2872 you really thought that Russia would've send all its troops even from Karelia and Vladivostok? You wish
@@scottwhite1247 Russia has relied on canon fodder tactic for a while now, if they didnt learn after ww2, doubt they will now
Viewing data sets like this can really put some things into perspective
5:48 Indo-Pak War 1 (1947) India WON
6:28 Sino-Indian War (1962) China WON
Due to utter ignorance and trusting china
6:37 Indo-Pak War 2 (1965) India WON
6:52 Indo-Pak War 3 (1971) India WON
and Bangladesh got independence even though US and it's allies were on the side of military dictatorship Pakistan but still India won due to USSR(thank you)
8:06 Indo-Pak War 4 (1999) India WON
India and Pakistan never should have had all those wars anyways
Absolutely wrong India not win only Indian terrorist army occupied kashmir East Pakistan and siachin glacier with invasion of terrorist Indian army
India is a terrorist country that invaded Goa junagda Pondicherry dadra and Nagar havily and Kashmir and Hyderabad and diu and East Pakistan and siachin glacier and occupied them illegally and forcefully. India invaded occupied kashmir against the wishes of Kashmiris and occupied it illegally and forcefully and according to UN resolution illegally Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir is not a part of india it is a disputed territory
@@coffeetea786 suruwat apne hi kia , kia mila Kashmir to mila nai upar sa Bangladesh chla gya hath sa
I'd say 1947 and 1965 were stalemates and 1999 was more of a border skirmish than a war
The fact the US mobilized as much as the Qing just to fight it’s self in the 1860s should show you how much of a threat the US was to European Hegemony if something changed in the timeline.
Italy as a nation did not exist until 1861
@@marcellogenesi6390 What does that have to do with anything
@@marcellogenesi6390 😮
no threat at all, they didnt have a Navy
@@Bluesonofmantry thinking maybe .
Keep up this great content!
Prussia just chilling for 30 years no biggy
Seeing the United States jump on the charts from 1861 to 1865 gave me goosebumps.
Why
its obvious fucking civil war duh
@@ogan2631 it was herpes
It shows how fucking *brutal* the Civil War was.
@@beckyweiss6072 100,000s of white people died for slavery to be over so I don't know why we all hate each other if you knew that. Gov makes races hate each other on purpose I swear. What's with the plantations in the south still where 74% of the black men are serving life to run it. Shits crazy AF to me. There's other ways nowadays to run a state than that shit! I'm random AF sorry
Awesome music and awesome video!
There were a number of things I found especially interesting: The rapid expansion and deflation of armies around the world wars and the American Civil War, how Sweden stayed in the top 10 for so long, and the Qing Dynasty having a million way before anyone else. I was wondering about the Qing number, because it did not fluctuate for long periods of time. Is that because there wasn't significantly reliable data, and the 1 million is an approximation?
Probably lack of data and a tough estimation based on population
Sweden has very detailed historical conscription records, that could be a reason. Also the aggressive russian and prussian power houses to the east and south respectively made defense warrented.
@@alexanderzippel8809 There are 360,000 archived books written in ink with the names of soldiers from Qing spanning 35 years. How many names are in one book? I don't know, but let's say 100. You do the math. Remember: This is ALL the soldiers in a 35 year span. And these are only the books that survived Mao and the Intellectual Revolution.
@@viktor8552 中国的历史记录比起西方来说只会更加详细和久远，关于历史记录这块请不要怀疑一个发明了纸张和活字印刷术的古老国度。
@@magellank The fact that a country invented paper and movable type doesn't mean you can trust it.
"Hey Qing is your internet working"
"Yeah I'll be on in just a sec...there we go...oh darnit my laptop froze my army is stuck"
Not even in the top 10 in the 80s but the British military still committed to its territories back then... and making a presence to a well known terrorist group (I would know, I was there)
Also a certain South American country and holding the line in Germany.
Not forgetting posts in the far East, Mediterranean and Central America.
It would be neat to see this video overlayed with military machinery and/or weapons. Some nations may reduce the numbers as they get better machines/weapons that make each enlisted soldier more effective.
The numbers in 1944 and 1945 at the end of WWII are crazy
Is that when the United States hit 11 million active personnel? The most of any country ever. Then, we're back to a little over 1 million. That was crazy.
Gotta love Hearts of Iron music
I had to look up the Russian flag change, I never knew that. Great detail.
Watched an interview with a retired American general a couple days ago. He was asked about the Russia invasion and he said, "We over estimated the capabilities of the Russian military. We thought that because it was so big that it was good. Turns out there is just a lot of it".
Тем не менее. Объединение из почти всех крупных стран включая США, Британию, дезертировавших российских частей ничего не смогли сделать в 1919-1921 годах против уступавшим в количестве и богатстве большевикам.
@@-turtle-600 and now those days are done and we see Russia is definitely weaker than originally expected
@@Assembled-Saints, ух.... Поверь мне, если бы Вооруженным силам России нужно было бы сделать из Киева котлету, они бы сделали это за полчаса....
@@Christian_Straw Yet they don't, instead the cowardly Russian soldiers shoot innocent women and children along the border towns.
@@GospelFire have you been there and seen it all clown? or do you believe in the news at the age of 21, which is powdering everyone's brains everywhere, no one can be trusted, not Ukrainian, not Russian, especially not American media
"In warfare, numbers alone confer to no advantage." -Sun Tzu
A large enough quantity replaces quality.
- Stalin
@@DominikRoost "Ten soldiers wisely led is better than 100 without a head."
-Unknown
@@mattleofric1766”which would you rather fight? 1 horse sized duck or 100 duck sized horses?” - somebody
A list that the United States does not dominate with the exception of 1864-65' and 1942-45'.
Which is reflective of the US's longstanding distrust of large standing armies in peacetime, that and there is literally no one on the continent that poses a threat. The disadvantage of having to rapidly expand the military with men that have never had a second of military training is that they are very green and will be mistake prone and not as effective early on, but they have no training or muscle memory to unlearn when the nature of the war changes, everything will be "on the job".
@@williammerkel1410 something China won’t learn a lesson from. Cause they are on top-
@@IcyFemboi China has a different geopolitics. It is surrounded by a lot of nations who are not necessarily always friendly. It has a huge open border line. It is literally vulnerable on all sides. Hence the urge to maintain a large army is understandable.
Not to mention its huge population with very diverse cultures and languages, meaning keeping everything inside the country in order is already a challenge. A large army therefore is needed for that job.
@@IcyFemboi there on top because they conscript soldiers while the US army is only based on volunteers.
There will be many lists in the future where US will not dominate. US is a declining superpower… Their won’t be any world power in the near future.
I have a challenge for you, if you can develop the tech to do it. Do a timelines as map pings/circles. I personally would like to see one outlining the creation and proliferation of the banking systems by association.
Can u do national debt
Imagine there’s no war tomorrow, every where you go it’s nice and safe, no army needed, there’s no enemies, all these money would be spending for education, health, economies, there are no borders, anyone can go & live anywhere,
What the life would that be…
But that dream would never happen 😔
No
When there is no army/soliders/Officers, then in public some people miss use this advantage and try to rule or take over land or area, this is called HUMAN GREED that never Ends. That's because there is need of forces that discipline the People
@@ResistorPlayer still a good thought
@QuantumMeme
#Z
@@ResistorPlayer is it the truth or is it our conditionnement? 🤔
1:57 QING : 1,000,000 soldiers coming from no where
lack of data I guess.
Amazing video as always!
1941, pearl harbor attack
America: And I...took that personally
This video really shows the diff between conscription and volunteers. If you look at the massive armies that fought significantly smaller volunteer armies that lost its pretty clear that conscription doesn't work well.
conscription works well if all else is rougly the same and if you don't use the draft, you're outmanned.
however when you look at firepower, morale, logistics, leadership being better with a professional army with a superior economy, then for sure just conscription is not going to win it for you by default. Superior manpower then becomes useless.
@Awoudex
Russia during ww2: hehe soldiers printing machine go brrrrrrhhrr!
At 3:53. Also gotta love the Russo-Japanese War. The fledgling industrial nation of Japan barely increased the number of soldiers in its its army of roughly 200,000 while Russia increased its numbers massively, to become an army of 2.3 million. Yet the Japanese won that war as a resounding success, totally destroying Russia in every battle it fought, on land and in the seas. Bravo, Japan, for showing that quality and not size is really what matters in an army and navy.
Yeah cant use your army if you cant get it to Japan in the first place
@@somedudeonline1936 The Russians had built the Trans-Siberian railroad just in time for the start of the Russo-Japanese War. So they could transport their army all the way to the Far East against Japan. The problem--these were barely literate peasant conscripts who were provided the most basic supplies. Some didn't even know why they were fighting. The Russians were just utterly shredded apart when they fought in the land battles in Manchuria. That's because the Japanese, unlike the Russians, built up a professional army under the tutelage of the best French and German generals. These were armies filled with the best soldiers equipped with the latest, most high-tech supplies. Clearly pitting peasants against some of the best professional soldiers in the world was going to be a disaster. Big time. And that's exactly what happened.
@@Luboman411 the problem was that the trans-siberian railroad's infra was very bad compared to what other countries had.
@@Luboman411 the war was fought over manchuria right?
Russia were big country and they have only 300,000 warrior at far east
It's impressive how well the UK have done considering they're tiny. Brave men.
Particularly during the 19th century when they were the largest empire in the world and never cracked the top three.
Proud to be BRITISH!!!
Brave? You consider terrorists brave? Are you on drugs? Ask how Indians do feel about the British? The only worse are Nazis....
Really big navy during their heyday though.
@@kenney1050 yeah sure be proud that your country lied killed back stabbed
Russia, The US and China just being like *strong*
Germany every now and then: „Guten Tag Fräulein!“
Props to Bulgaria going to bloody fourth on this list at one point.
There is a reason it was called the Balkan Prussia, the entire peninsula had to fight against it to win.
1:56 I'm Chinese and I was like what lol where have you been this whole time
How can you use RUclips on chian
@@atulshukla8473 Not all Chinese people live in China. 🧍♀️
可能OP在1860以前沒有找到資料
India is growing 😊 🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
I like these videos. I wish they authors would take more care in their color choices. Yellow graph bar with white background and small font? Hard to read.
Thanks for the feedback. And, yes, a lot of people have been bringing this up. I’ll definitely keep that in mind!
It was interesting to see Ethiopia repeatedly pop up on the list.
Thanks for an excellent video.
idk if theres a way to really do this, but a chart of major inventions from each country would be cool. I'm from scotland and I know scottish inventors have created an insane amount of things relative to the small population. would love to see that chart if theres a way to get the data
Scottish ingenuity, coupled with English investment capital and entrepreneurship.
It was a world beating formula.
I read a few years ago that per capita, Scotland has the highest number of patents of any country ever. As someone with significant Scottish ancestry, I'm pleased but not surprised. I'd love to see charts about inventions and patents, too.
I don't care how many things Scotland has invented. You invented golf and that's good enough to keep you on the top of the charts forever as far as I'm concerned.
Amazing stuff!
Which programming language and framework do you use? Is there any open source code? Awesome visualization!
You can do this in python with some pandas installed :)
VERY educational. You can see the build ups for war. It would be helpful to add a light in each bar showing when a country was at war.
A follow-up video to show these same numbers, but compared to the population of these countries would be interesting. Active military personnel per capita would show how richer countries have the money for large armies vs poorer countries that have vastly larger populations.
North Korea would likely be number one for almost all of the time since Kim Il Sung...
Ah-10 Hut!
At ease! The list will be made all the more easier to wrap your head around! 😁👍
I like the background music 🎶🎶
Surprised to see Sweden-Norway peeking above 11th position most of the 1800s :)
Quality over Quantity!
So qing dynasty just magically appear with 1 mil army one day?
Well these charts are, of course, mostly based on official records. So if the Qing Dynasty officially recorded an army size of 1M for several years then... that's what went into this video :D
@@C.A.P.F. yeah. The soviet union stayed steady for like 2 decades because they were very "tight lipped"
Love how the qing showed up, stayed at a fixed spot, refused to elaborate, and left.
Could you make a chart about top 10 countries who eliminated most native people in the world?
Britain will come first
Britain offcourse on the top
I would like to see this graph overlayed with the wars that each nation was involved in during those timeframes
Yes, that's a great idea! Some countries are engaged in multiple wars with multiple countries over a period of time
I would be interesting to see these armies with a list of wars if any and seeing how the graph changes.
A la venue des nazies cela est flagrant🤮
Mais il est évident que la France a toujours gardé une armée puissante jusqu'au début des années 80...ensuite l'U.E et l'OTAN l'ont déconstruire😞
I like how the US said bye have a good day 2:08
The United States' military is fast becoming mechanized, meaning we don't need as many soldiers as we can basically destroy our enemies' infrastructure from above crippling basically any other country without the need for a massive army... which we also have.
9 army personnel in the US army are supporting 1 frontline combatant. They emphasize their logistics much more than armies of similar size. That is why they have a big army but their composition is very different.
@@csmth96 The US never gets enough credit for their ability to wage war anywhere in the world. Even in WW2 they were a large part of feeding not just the UK war machine, but even her people - plus the Soviet war machine PLUS their own war machine in North Africa, Italy AND France. And oh, and let's not forget that that was the easy part compared to waging a war thousands of miles away across the Pacific on various islands... at the same time! It's truly insane, if you think about it and it's why the US spends SO much on maintaining a navy that's more powerful than the rest of the world combined. This isn't even someone bragging because I'm not even American, just a history buff and former military man.
@@smgdfcmfah Thats why china purely runs off of destabilization and subversion tactics. They need to weaken the us just enough for china to increase influence. An all out assault on the us is crazy and invasion without emps and nukes is off the table
Mr Lin: I would like to join the Qing dynasty army. Can I join ?
Recruiter : I am sorry candidate. We have to wait for someone to quit.
Missing the CSA during the American Civil War 1860-1865
Fantastic presentation. Thanks
The UK barely had 200K army yet the entire South Asia -- India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Berma -- were colonized along with Africa and the Middle East. So even back then, pre high tech era, numbers never mattered. Economy, Technology, and a high standard society matter over the just number of soldigers.
Well Britain has always had high quality level soldiers
@@malopephasha5341 эм, разве дело не в наличии высокотехнологичного оружия? Я не оспариваю квалификацию солдат, но думаю, решающим фактором были именно флот и пушки. Хотя, ещё где-то читал, что успех Британской империи был в идеальном контроле территорий малым контингентом. Хорошая логистика?
@@malopephasha5341 data is not really correct at the time of world war 2. About 1.5 million soldiers were South Asian. British empire was just hiding their military strength.
Amazing Music I feel I am at War. Great Video too 💥💥💥
If you count the militias in Iraq, then the count is 5M since 2006; literary everyone in Iraq is either soldier or militia
Same potentially for the U.S. if we were pushed to war nearly half the population would fight as militia or even more
Are you from Iraq, by chance?
@Lucas©^ not a joke most american men could be drafted if america needs more military personel if a war broke out. id say atleast 20-50mil could be drafted if its really that bad.
@Lucas©^ Its not about loving the country dude. Its about loving your family and your love ones. il give you an example lets say russia bomb US and destroyed half of state or a state do you rlly think they wont come together and protect it?
@Lucas©^ Just because most of the population dont like Putin, do they hate Russa then? Your logic doesnt make sense. Because half the country (your numbers) don't like Joe Biden doesnt mean they dont like the United States. They are very patriotic in the US
Most of the european countries started focusing more on the tech side and keeps a relatively lower elite manpower nowadays. That's why UK, France, İtaly, Turkey etc. Dropped out of top 10. But if you compare the army strength, they would be in top 10.
Exactly! For example look at that current top 10 there no Turkey but we have TB2 and that drones a game changer in Ukraine, Lybya, Syria etc.
Because today to have 1 000 000 soldiers with rifles against guided rocket or planes bomb guided is unusefull.
imagine the Chinese hordes crossing the Yellow River in the Korean conflict if the US had MLRS systems and modern aircraft. It would have been an absolute slaughter. It was bad enough as it was and all the NATO forces had was WW2 weapons, for the most part.
Czechoslovakia had more than milion men army before WWII when expecting German attack.
Not in active service though and I guess that large army after 1938 mobilisation was just too short lived to appear in the video... BTW I'm personally more disappointed that the video doesn't distinguish between various forces in civil wars and counts them all into one (or doesn't mention the losing side?) - like USA vs CSA in 1860's or Russian and China during their civil wars...
It's where this video sucks
Would have been interesting to see the major rebel factions like the Confederate States, Spanish Republicans (or Nationalists, depending on your perspective) and the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom.
5:29 loving how switzerland, even if was neutral, had a big army
Imagine being in the Swiss army, what are you even gonna do?
@@kanedawong stab people...
@@kanedawong accidentally walk into Liechtenstein
Training, before serving as a mercenary in a foreign country
@@salmon2470 i.e. the Vatican?
Great vid thanks!
Thanks!
Why do these videos always start just after Napoleonic France? The French army with Napoleon would be at the top of the ranking for sure!
Нет
Yay!! Good job!
That American Army from World War 2, wow. And the fact that Germany could put 8 million in the field, impressive.
The Germans conscripted almost 17,3 million man into the Wehrmacht + 1 million to the Waffen SS over the entire war 5,2 million soldiers died and many more get woundet and because of it out of service
Nazi Germany collected/conscripted millions of non-Germans to their “cause.”
@@kathycaldwell7126 no not millions, hundres of thausends but no not German get in the Wehrmacht, all got in the Waffen SS, the 17,3 Millions are all Germans and Austriens. It is 1/6 to 1/6 og the Population that is not a great thing for a totally militaristic Country like the third Reich when the most from 16/17 to 45 get conscriptet.
@@Arcaist 17.3 million is a little too much, the total who served in the Wehrmacht was more about 13.6 million excluding the Waffen-SS with about 900.000 to 1.000.000.
@@wesleyjaskulsky9414 you are wrong
Truppenstärke
Nach den Recherchen des Historikers Rüdiger Overmans dienten in der Wehrmacht in Heer, Luftwaffe und Marine 17,3 Millionen Soldaten, zusammen mit der Waffen-SS waren es 18,2 Millionen Soldaten, die im Verlauf des Krieges eingezogen wurden und nicht alle gleichzeitig Dienst taten.[27]
Im November 1943 hatte die Wehrmacht eine Stärke von ca. 6,345 Millionen Soldaten. Davon waren 3,9 Millionen Soldaten an der Ostfront stationiert (zusammen mit 283.000 Verbündeten). 177.000 Soldaten standen in Finnland, 486.000 Soldaten besetzten Norwegen und Dänemark. 1.370.000 Mann Besatzungstruppen standen in Frankreich und Belgien. Weitere 612.000 Mann waren auf dem Balkan stationiert und 412.000 Mann in Italien.[28]
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrmacht#:~:text=Geländeübung%2C%20Anfang%201939-,Truppenstärke,nicht%20alle%20gleichzeitig%20Dienst%20taten.
or
Wehrmacht
18 Millionen deutsche Männer dienten im Zweiten Weltkrieg als Soldaten der Wehrmacht. Bis in die Neunziger hielt sich die Legende von der sauberen deutschen Armee, die keine Schuld an den Gräueltaten der Nazis und der Judenvernichtung trug. Doch Studien belegen: Die Armee war voll in den nationalsozialistischen Unrechtsstaat integriert.
www.spiegel.de/thema/wehrmacht/
put it on Google translate
the German Reich had more or less 80.000.000 Citizens in a period were the most are young not like today, so it is not a big problem to put less than 1/5 in the Army when you have slavery and woman in the workforce.
Imagine being a Russian soldier from 1816 to 1960 just losing your job every other year
Long live in France 🇫🇷
OMG…I spend an hour watching your channel. I supposed to watch a movie with wife..this is addictive to me. Weird right. Lol
For some reason, I thought Iraq had the 4th largest military when they enter Kuwait. But I didn't see Iraq anywhere...
For a small period of time but that’s it
America during ww2 casually gaining soldiers like it’s harvesting season
Kind of weird that at the beginning of the 1800s you didnt mention the Qing Empire or the Maratha Empire
The Marathas must have been considered in british army
Kinda weird how the U.S count didn't rise sharply after 9/11. A lot of young guys enlisted In the wake of the attacks. I'm suspicious about the accuracy of these videos
The Maratha Confederacy was dissolved in 1818 after the third anglo Maratha war. This video starts near that point so they don't exist as such.
I am a Maratha btw.
These are fun to watch. Thank you.
As someone born in the 90s it’s interesting to see how much more Spartan the US was during the Cold War: 2-3 million troops despite having half the population it does now throughout much of that period. Growing up hearing from strong anti-war advocates against our interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, even now hearing about Ukraine, it’s difficult to imagine how much more militarized our society must have been back then. Troop numbers barely moved during these recent wars but surely numbers would spike if America was to put itself in a position to have to actually intervene against Russia or China or even North Korea. I’m pro-peace but at least one of those three doesn’t seem to be.
Well war has changes as well. Raw numbers don't matter as much anymore, look at the gulf war. The US destroyed one of the worlds largest militaries under a year with help from allies. We lost almost nothing.
The US has gotten really good at using a smaller, professional force since the end of Vietnam when the draft was banned. We lost less men in the decades of the war on Terror than Russia has in the couple weeks it's been in Ukraine. In other words, we don't need a lot of people.
For that to change we would need a direct war with a major regional power
@@spartanparty3894 That’s kind of my point. Is the US military even in a position to fight that kind of conflict as is? Do we actively avoid conventional conflict because of our inability to wage it, especially for long periods? Even if it’s the right thing to do? In this video you can see huge spikes in numbers in in the years leading up to major conflicts or potential ones but that obviously includes conscription/drafts/enlistment bonuses for untrained troops. Would it make sense to have a standing army ready to deploy in a world where Russia aggressively invaded its neighbors and some of its neighbors are our allies? I’m not encouraging unnecessary adventurism, but I wonder how safe the tip of the spear is when the shaft is not reinforced.
@@Bern_il_Cinq world isn't black and white like in marvel's movies. Don't forget about NATO expansion for absolutely no reason. Remembered the crisis in Georgia? Russia clearly said that there will be no more NATO countries near its board. And still NATO pushes Ukraine towards this disaster. This blood is 50/50 on NATO and Russia's hands
@@Bern_il_Cinqevery country avoids big conflicts due to nuclear weapons. You need army mostly to push your interests in other countries
@@mw2k6 It doesn’t even cross your mind that Russia could one day be a NATO or EU member. Russia lashes out at its former puppets for trying to better their situations and responds with overt military action when it’s propaganda, bribery, election fraud, spies, special forces and foreign rebels fail. It defines itself as an outsider in the international community so on the outside it will stay: a walled-off rogue state that makes North Korea look like a peaceful neighbor. Putin and United Russia lead Russia to ruin.
Nuclear armed states can fight conventionally. Unfortunately India and Pakistan do it somewhat often. I’d say the fact that your mind jumps directly to the worst case scenario of nuclear war indicates the hesitancy to even respond to Russian aggression. You’re afraid and perhaps rightfully so. It’s clear that Putin will sacrifice his own people for his twisted ideal of autarky: Russia has lost more troops in Ukraine in less than a month than the United States lost in Iraq during the entire war and occupation there combined. Like I said, it’s probably time for an actual election in Russia.
It would be Nice if you showed wars so we know why a country has buffed up its military
India 🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
It's not how big you make it,
It's how you make it big.........
An assumption to clarify: A country at war with itself (American Civil War) the countries total number of soldiers are not broken out by sides? No Army of the Confederacy?
Interesting video...
5:28
So for a brief moment, at the start of WWII, France had the world's largest army.
They must've sucked.
@@vanonu no they just had terrible generals. French tanks in 1939/1940 where from far the best in the world, but deployed badly
@@redrushun6328 oh thanks. I mixed up polish army with them
No. France's army was huge, sure, but the thing is that it was spread out throughout the world (with he colonies and all). There were less than 200k soldiers at the beginning of the invasion, while Germany had more than the double.
And as someone else said higher up in the comments, the French high-command was terrible at its job
@@vanonu French had more tanks than Germany in 1940
@@redrushun6328 French don't have bad generals in WW2. Normal level of command
Neutral United States: active military personnel increases
World: Oh no