Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Genghis Khan.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Salvation army?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lukejoshjedi)
    The Roman legions (in general) at the height of the Roman empire, mid 2nd century BC or so when Rome had most of England, parts of North Africa, Gaul, Germania, Spain (back then) etc etc etc. SPQR!

    You could also say Alexander the greats' army at the height of his conquest and sweeping of Saudia Arabia
    / Turkey / surrounding areas

    Then again the best, most successful, largest and most feared single army in ancient history? Probably The Mongols, they had the largest single continuous empire (bigger than the British empire as it wasn't all connected) They invaded pretty much ALL of Russia, took ALL of China, India, modern day pakistan, Turkey and kept going west into Europe even, taking parts of Eastern Europe - historians say they could have taken all of Europe if they kept at that pace and just bulldozed everything the way

    No army or country stopped them or beat them in a single battle during Ghenghis Khans' and his son (Ogedei Khan?) reigns respectively. (I may be wrong about that) but they were more or less undefeated

    But just branding one specific army as 'the best' is a little... hard to say the least, so many factors contribute to a good army and we have no way of comparing the best against each other aside from just speculating to ourselves
    Alexander didn't reach Arabia. He went beyond it but he never set foot there.

    Does nobody mention Cyrus?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_the_Great
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Cuck Norris.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCount.)
    spartans? didn't you see 300! True story, bro.

    Mongolian or British? two biggest empires in the world. Imperiallists wouldn't get very far without an army.
    Real quote from one of the Spartan leaders when they were fighting the Greeks, when he was told that the enemy had brought "enough archers to blot out the sky with their arrows" he replied..

    "Well at least we'll get to fight in the shade :cool:"


    I think the best ancient army were the Spartan's (training), closely followed by the Mongol hordes (accomplishments).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    In terms of training and discipline: the Spartans. They had an entire culture based on military excellence. But their main weakness was that they failed to adjust their tactics and weapons to respond to the oblique formation of Thebes, which led to their downfall.

    In terms of tactics: the Mongolians. Their example of hit-and-run tactics (there might be an official name but I'm not sure) and cavalry tactics overall are emulated even up to WWII. I was tempted to say Alexander the Great or Napoleon, but both of their armies' tactics depended very much on their exceptional leaders, and was unsustainable in the long term.

    In terms of strategy (long-term and 'holistically' speaking): Royal Navy. The point of the Royal Navy's existence was to guard the British Isles and to protect British colonial interests around the world with sea supremacy. In this the British succeeded phenomenally until the Americans took over (with loads of money more than anything).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned. Outnumbered 5 to 1 and we only lost 112 men.

    I love winning





    Uploaded with ImageShack.us
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DH-Biker)
    It was only large once they'd managed to reform themselves after Stalingrad. Up until that point, they'd been beaten back and back relentlessly. Had the Germans defeated Britian, not had to worry about the Africa-Campaign, they'd have easily beaten the Russians into submission.

    Largest? Yes. Most disciplined? Certainly not. The had no constraints on them whatsoever. Granted, Germany had done some pretty morally inconviviable things to them, but the Russians did worse on their return. The Commisars couldn't control them at all.
    Nor did they have high-morale. Need only look at the number of men killed by their own Commisars and men due to retreating, for that.

    Lastly, the T-34 could NOT take on a Tiger II with a high chance of winning. Firstly, there were only 25 Tiger IIs on the Eastern-Front. Belonging to the s.Hz.P.Abt 501.
    The Tiger II's armour ranged up to 7" thick, and with the T-34 only armed with a 76.2mm weapon, it would have to fire point blank to even have a remote chance of penetration.
    The T-34's armour, even with the revolutionary sloping-design, was still only 2-5" thick. The Tiger II was armed with an 88mm weapon; it would punch through it like wet paper.
    Perhaps if the Tiger II had a damaged track unit, there were multiple T-34s and it was the only enemy around - then yes it might. Even then it'd be slight, the Tiger II had the new German turret-motor in it, and could turn 360 degrees in about 8-10 seconds. The T-34's could only turn in 15.

    The T-34 was a terrific tank. And I've no qualms with the title "best tank in World War II" - But the German supiriorty in armour meant they took the prize there. Well, would depend what you catagorized them in; "Most kills", "Most numerous", etc etc.
    It would, however, be the Tiger I that fought them more often. Even then, it would be a fairly one sided fight. Sloping armour was revolutionary, no doubt, but the fact the Tiger used the Flak-88 as its main-weapon just left the Russian tanks in pieces left, right and centre. Were the T-34 not a tank they could quickly mass-produce, it'd have been a loss on Russian Armour again, and again.



    Firstly, T-34/85 can take out King tiger. King tiger production varient with henschell turret had no electric drive, it takes 7 mins to rotate turret to 360 degrees (manual ), your mixed up with the porsche turret which hardly saw combat ;-). King tiger had awful tactical field mobility, they can be only used as stationary tank destroyers, in field combat they were hopelessly outmaneuvered. And King tiger has no suprise factor, being extreamly heavy, it cannot take many different routs to cause elemant of suprise, making it predictable.

    T-34/85 can easily flank king tiger and hit it in the side. Dont believe me? 11nth Augast 1944, Commander Oskins T-34/85 managed fought against 5 king tigers and won engagement.

    "The Commisars couldn't control them at all. " Where do you read this stuff? Commisars had less power after 1942 army reforms.

    "Need only look at the number of men killed by their own Commisars and men due to retreating, for that"
    Tell me if i dont know better, what did Hitler do to people who didnt obey him? And actually, most nations would have done same. Eastern front was a battle for survivability, if people fled they would have been masquerader and enslaved. Its easy for western arm chair generals to say how "evil" the reds are. A lot of these cold war russiophobic conspiracies has been disproved after collapse of USSR when archieves were released, also the real crimes of USSR (every nation commits crimes, no less USA) such as katyn was acknowledged.


    "Nor did they have high-morale. Need only look at the number of men killed by their own Commisars and men due to retreating, for that. "

    You sound like a person who takes history very seriously and probably got all that from watching enemy at the gates, frankly i never hurd that much BULL from any serious historians. There is mass exaggerations of shootings of red army soldiers. And most shootings took place after military trials where for soldiers leaving battlefield. This was also because there were lot of Nazi collaborators at the time and deserters were often recuited by the axis. And i bet If Hitler lunched massive land campaign over UK, burning towns and villages, looting and raping and exterminating the population indiscreetly, i can bet you tommys would have been shot for retreating... May i remind you people in stalingrad sometimes had to put up with 100g of bread a day, if lucky. Red army also had the best medical facilities by far of any army, 78% recovery rate on average, far higher than any army... Also, red army had highest number of SMG PER HEAD of any army that ever existed at the time.


    "The Tiger II's armour ranged up to 7" thick, and with the T-34 only armed with a 76.2mm weapon, it would have to fire point blank to even have a remote chance of penetration"

    T-34/85 had 85mm gun with 52-56 caliber barrel. It was almost the same size as the tiger I 88mm gun and similar performance. It can fire HE-frag rounds (unlike german tanks) which can cause spalling on even front armour of king tiger. And since all german tanks have front located gearbox and clutch, there vunrable to spawling where HE-frag shells can cause it, without even penetrating the Armour causing drive train damage, making king tiger stationary duck.


    About morality of red army? Are you serious? How can axis army have better moral than red army when they were fighting a totally unwinnble immoral war (which most soldiers thought after stalingrad)? Red army had total moral advantage, they were fighting against extermination and enslavement, and it was a "peoples war" not a politicians one. German army were totally bunkrupt when it came to morallity in eastern front.


    About losses. Get your facts straight. There was no "swarming of enemy lines" and "incredible high losses" either LOL)) Total combat losses of USSR was 11,2 mln (of which 2,7 mln is POWs slaughtered by nazis) while Axis at eastern front lost 8,6 mln. And USSR had to fight through 1600km of defenses while nazis only 1000km. Not to mention dea axis soldiers are STILL discovered in russian and ex soviet lands every single day)

    Red army were mainly attacking during WW2, and attacking side usually always takes more losses. Also, Germans bombed army hospitals, USSR did not.

    "But the German supiriorty in armour meant they took the prize there"
    Really? Germans lacked materials during late war which hindered quality of steel, USSR also pioneered in cast metal technology as well as electric welding, they had the best mettalurgy science in the world then.



    PS. Comparing king tiger with T-34 is foolish. T-34 is comparable to Panzer III and IV, bulk of whermacht medium tanks. Most king tiger broke down before they even made it to the battlefields... Speaks volume of "supirior german army" doesnt it? ;-)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Genghas Khan's army?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The nazis and german army are pretty hard to beat to be honest.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Alexander and the Macedonian army
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Alexander and the Macedonian army
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The Irish Army, like, duhh. Keeping the peace for several decades in various unsettled places.

    Otherwise, any army that prides itself on military excellence and training and really thrives off it- Spartans are one obviously, The Red Army another and possibly the German army of WWII as well.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The ever-growing army of the undead of course
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    At the moment its got to be the british SAS

    http://listverse.com/2010/01/11/top-...pecial-forces/

    Look who's at the bottom.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Monkey Face)
    At the moment its got to be the british SAS

    http://listverse.com/2010/01/11/top-...pecial-forces/

    Look who's at the bottom.
    MI6 isn't special forces. And that article is written in the style of a typical internet warrior who gets his information from the interwebs
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    MI6 isn't special forces. And that article is written in the style of a typical internet warrior who gets his information from the interwebs
    still... the sas bit is true
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StarsAreFixed)
    The Irish Army, like, duhh. Keeping the peace for several decades in various unsettled places.

    Otherwise, any army that prides itself on military excellence and training and really thrives off it- Spartans are one obviously, The Red Army another and possibly the German army of WWII as well.
    Lol the Red Army were awful! They were disorganised and ill-equipped (admittedly not their fault). The Wehrmacht was possibly the greatest army, very efficient and disciplined, the Roman army circa Vespasian is impossible to ignore as well. Then there are individual cases of particular armies defying great odds eg. the Spartans etc.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Monkey Face)
    still... the sas bit is true
    The SAS are certainly amongst the best and they help to train and work witih many forces and special forces from around the world so yes in a way it is true, in it's own simplistic fashion.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StarsAreFixed)
    The Red Army another and possibly the German army of WWII as well.
    You mean the Red Army that was so ill equipped it was one rifle between two, the Red army where soldiers were forced to advanced and shot if they retreated, the red army that was so poor supplied the soldiers at the bottom stole clothes and equipment from the dead, enemy and friendly, and as it pushed the German army back into Germany they began raping and looting what was left of Germany?
    Yeah, what a great army [/sarcasm]
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.