Most Powerful Military in Janurary 1914?

[GlobalHumanism]

Taking supply capacity, command structure, troop mobilization potential, economic strength of its military industrial complex, army tech, etc. all into account. (leaving out the political realities for now)

On paper, which nation's military (land, sea, and air combined) could be considered the most powerful on earth in Jan of 1914?

 

[Kevin Renner]

At sea the UK followed by Impetial Germany. In terms of absolute potential due to industrial base, population etc its either there UK or US. On land Germany in terms of existing ability. In terms of absolute potential the US, UK if one allows for manpower from India or Russia. But the world is more complicated than that. So I'll go with Germany.

 

[MaghrebUnited]

Germania , it took 4 years for Britain and France with some help from the states to get Germania to surrender .

 

[GlobalHumanism]

7 votes for Germany already? Jeez

I'd say Republic of China, really because of the mobilization potential and the nature of warfare at the time. You can't win an attrition war with China after all.

 

[NoMommsen]

Taking supply capacity, command structure, troop mobilization potential, economic strength of its military industrial complex, army tech, etc. all into account. (leaving out the political realities for now)

On paper, which nation's military (land, sea, and air combined) could be considered the most powerful on earth in Jan of 1914?

Without a doubt : The British Empire
- it had the biggest fleet
- it had the biggest opart of all land mass under its rule (or very closy allined)
- it had the technological knowledge
- it had the industrial potential not only in Britain but also in South Africa, Canada, Australia
- it had access to every economical resource you can think of and that in masses (leaving aside intricates of financials, but even there : Britain was THE GLOBAL creditor)
- it had access to an almost uncountable human resource base (if you don't ask for its ability to mobilise all of them)

...

To focus this power somewhere in specific for a certain circumscripted task ... is another question.

 

[wcv215]

I'd say Republic of China, really because of the mobilization potential and the nature of warfare at the time. You can't win an attrition war with China after all.

Question, do you know what the actual situation in China was at this time?

Anyway:

On land, Germany. Industrial base, population, and the large standing army gave them the edge here by a long way.

At sea: United Kingdom. Again, industrial base and large standing force gives it to them.

Absolute: I'm not sure you can really compare the two really, as their militaries were geared toward different things. On land the UK couldn't beat Germany, but it wasn't meant to. The UK's allies were for that, with British support and troops fighting alongside them to overcome Germany's preexisting advantages. That means ultimately Germany can (and was) worn down by the overall allied powers on land even if none of them could individually beat it straight up on their own.

By contrast Germany's military was built to win a land war quickly, but as was shown by the blockade and war at sea was basically helpless in the face of the British fleet. So I think I'll give it to Britain, as her military was strong overall, and the relative weaknesses were made up for by the strength's of her allies. Germany by contrast had allies who did not offset its weakness at sea (amongst other things because there really wasn't an option).

In order I'd go:

United Kingdom
Germany
United States (yes it had a relatively weak military the geographic realities of North America as well as the vast potential of American mobilization offer enormous long-term advantages, while being able to thoroughly hold back short-term defeat)
France (which remember fought with much of its industrial base under occupation)

 

[GlobalHumanism]

Question, do you know what the actual situation in China was at this time?

yes, but this is why I said on paper only.

 

[Astrodragon]

I find it somewhat amusing, the number of people voting for the 'most powerful country' that, well, lost

 

[wcv215]

yes, but this is why I said on paper only.

So you want us to ignore their actual military capacity and power; and base it solely on the idea of this country has more people therefore it wins?

 

[GlobalHumanism]

So you want us to ignore their actual military capacity and power; and base it solely on the idea of this country has more people therefore it wins?

Didn't say that...I assumed you were referring to the political realities plaguing the country. If not, I'll fetch some stats to back up my point

 

[okmangeez]

Didn't say that...I assumed you were referring to the political realities plaguing the country. If not, I'll fetch some stats to back up my point

You do realize the China wasn't even united at the time? The Chinese are fighting among themselves.

To say that they have the best military on paper is laughable at best. To say that China has a better military than Germany or Britain on paper means you don't know history.

 

[riggerrob]

By 1914, the Emperor had lost control of much of China. The rest was ruled by a variety of warlords, hereditary nobles, criminal gangs and opportunists. Every private army had a different level of armament from spears to airplanes.

 

[GlobalHumanism]

You do realize the China wasn't even united at the time? The Chinese are fighting among themselves.

To say that they have the best military on paper is laughable at best. To say that China has a better military than Germany or Britain on paper means you don't know history.

The warlord period didn't start untill after Yuan Shikai abdicated in 1915. Untill then, from about 1913 to 1916 (apart from the Second Revolution which the highly trained and modernized Beiyang Army crushed decisvely) , there was a moniker of central government control out of Beijing, enough at least to identify China as a unitary state, under the leadership of Shikai, and the KMT(National Assembly), and affirmed by/protected by the Beiyang Army

 

[wcv215]

Didn't say that...I assumed you were referring to the political realities plaguing the country. If not, I'll fetch some stats to back up my point

Yes I am referring to the political realities of the country. Specifically that there was barely a country. The Republic of China was under military rule by this point and was fracturing. In a year the provinces are going to be breaking away into warlord states. Inside of two years there would basically be no central government. How can you describe a country like that as having the most powerful military in the world?

 

[RodentRevolution]

Germania , it took 4 years for Britain and France with some help from the states to get Germania to surrender .

It took 41 years and a second stab at world war to get Germany to admit it could not get Britain to surrender....

Being slow at learning does not equal powerful.

 

[Ferreti]

While Germany had the most powerful and most effective military in reality, on paper it is definetly the UK.

They had the biggest fleet and with their Indian and African empire could mobilize the most men.

 

[Riain]

Germany gets my vote, that is why it took a much more powerful coalition 4 years to defeat it.

 

[martymcfly]

In 1914 the world was dominated by Pax Britannica.

So while the UK may not have been the strongest power in every single area, it's overall strength in a combination of areas (industrial, naval, financial, economic, etc) compared to the other Great Powers made it the number one world power (as it had been since 1815).

 

[LeX]

Most powerful military overall is UK. Most powerful army is Germany, considering it went against France, Britain and Russia at the same time and held out for four years while making advances for much of that time.

 

[zeppelinair]

I voted China. Because why the fuck not.