Most powerful state/empire/kingdom through history - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Those who do not remember the past are condemned to relive it. Note: nostalgia *is* allowed.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14367472
You are missing the point (although I am not the creator of this thread), whether its for few years or days, this thread is explicitly asking for most powerful military power.

Of course there is no completely objective criteria for it just like there is none for measuring cultural or economical hegemony.

btw, I have already made that mistake in this very thread by listing most significant Historical entities (rather than focusing specifically on military power) as I saw fit.
#14367475
How do you determine if a "military power" is a hegemonic power if its reach is not global or is transitory? For example, you proposed a Han dynasty versus Roman empire scenario. This scenario is not viable as the two states existed in mutually isolated spheres of influence. Thus, comparing their "military power" during a specific chronological epoch is fruitless. Furthermore, this debate seems tautological to me. The most "militarily powerful" states are evidently those that have been victorious in wars. Thus, it is obvious which states possess the "power" criteria identified by the OP.
#14367476
How do you determine if a "military power" is a hegemonic power if its reach is not global or is transitory?


In the same way you determined cultural significance of these isolated empires. I mean egyptians, sumerians, athenians etc had almost zero influence of any kind on South and East asian civilizations. It is obviously very subjective thing.

For example, you proposed a Han dynasty versus Roman empire scenario. This scenario is not viable as the two states existed in mutually isolated spheres of influence.


Its not impossible as both these empires had relations with Parthia and shared border with it.



btw, I don't see what's the point of this debate, if you just want to discuss "most significant" then create such a thread rather than searching for holes in this thread.
#14369756
Parthia paid tribute to Hans and latter send many emissaries too Parthia while maintaining many border garrisons alongside the Parthian border which were only a few days march from the Parthian capital Ctesiphon. In fact during Trajan's campaign, Roman army was within 2-3 days march from Chinese garrison.

see Ban Chao, the protector of the western regions.

Image
#14369791
fuser wrote:Parthia paid tribute to Hans and latter send many emissaries too Parthia while maintaining many border garrisons alongside the Parthian border which were only a few days march from the Parthian capital Ctesiphon.


Only a "few days" march from Ctesiphon on the euphrates! If by "a few" you mean a week or less, I doubt even the Romans ever reached it that fast.

In fact during Trajan's campaign, Roman army was within 2-3 days march from Chinese garrison.


He got to the head of the Persian gulf and then IIRC struck into Iran proper, at Susa(?). But not very far and I'm assuming Parthia had Iran.
#14373176
The reason I brought up Rome under Hadrian and France under Napoleon III was about their respective positions relative to other powers of their time, and how that compares to later periods. It strikes me that France under Napoleon III was further from the top spot then Rome during Hadrian, yet I think France would be considered more powerful than Rome (military hardware aside) due to France's direct political and trade power world wide, as well as it's soft power.
#14373179
Thunderhawk wrote:The reason I brought up Rome under Hadrian and France under Napoleon III was about their respective positions relative to other powers of their time, and how that compares to later periods. It strikes me that France under Napoleon III was further from the top spot then Rome during Hadrian, yet I think France would be considered more powerful than Rome (military hardware aside) due to France's direct political and trade power world wide, as well as it's soft power.



They went places Rome never heard of. But one's strength relative to other powers is the key criterion, there's no comparison. France was well behind britain in the 19th century.
#14373262
Groves wrote:The disparity between Britain and France in the 19th century is somewhat misleading, Starman. France was certainly the leading contender to challenge British economic and military power, not to mention cultural influence, especially in the period after 1856 and before 1871.


Sure but you still can't compare France's standing relative to contemporaries to Rome's, especially in the second century, the time of Hadrian. France wasn't even number 1, let alone completely dominant.
#14384826
I have to vote USA.

Most powerful military the world has ever seen. ( 50 % of world's budget or close to.) I don't think any other empire would come close to that.

Their GDP is 16 trillion while the next 10 countries combined are 27 trillion. Hundreds of military bases on every continent in the world.

It terms of power, I think they win.
#14474502
1st America - 1989 until 2008

2nd America - 1945 until 1989

3rd The USSR - 1945 until 1989

4th The Empire of Japan - Meji until 1945

5th Nazi Germany - Hitler becoming chancellor until 1945

6th Rome

7th The Mongols under Genghis Khan

8th The Macedonian empire under Alexander the Great

9th The Persian empire - Cyrus the great until the mongols invasion

10th The Han dynasty - Liu Bang's founding until the three kingdoms, yet its history is still felt in modern day China.
#14781611
The Roman Empire was one of the strongest and greatest military and kingdom that ever was. They had so many contributions to many inventions. My all time favorite weapon was the polybolos (which may be translated literally as ‘multiple thrower’) was a type of weapon used in the ancient world. The polybolos has been described as a sort of ballista / catapult that was capable of firing several projectiles before needing to be reloaded. That’s why it’s sometimes referred to as an ancient machine gun.

An Ancient Greek Machine Gun? The Innovative Catapult of Dionysius
#14781615
#1 The Soviet Union(USSR). Responsible for the deaths of around 60 million people.
#2 United States of America. Directly and indirectly responsible for the deaths of around 20 million people, worldwide.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-kil ... ii/5492051

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

@JohnRawls What if your assumption is wrong??? […]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]