World military problems

Regardless of the Air Force, Navy, or missiles, South Korea will not work, and needless to say, the Army will be able to sweep away the stick with India's AK!! If they really fight, they don't have a land border, India will directly destroy a few nuclear warheads, and then send aircraft carriers to take a look, of course, China, Japan, and North Korea are not afraid that their missiles will miss...

These two countries are so far apart, how do you want them to fight? Fight on our turf?!

In terms of strength, although India's equipment is poor, it is a large country and has a large population, and South Korea is not at the same level at all. What's more, you can still use nuclear **, South Korea does not have it.

Although the landlord's question is very strange, I'm still it!

South Korea is enough to fight even North Korea, let alone fight India, whose military strength is above it!

Although India is a developing country, it attaches great importance to military development and buys relatively advanced equipment. Besides, how to fight a country with a population of more than a billion and a country with a population of about 5,000 to play! It is several times more difficult than Japan to destroy China!

Restore the bullet! Does South Korea have an atomic bomb?

1 All 1First of all, I also said that India has a better chance of winning. But I personally built it on the premise that India destroyed all the surface ships of the Dutch Navy and took control of the North Sea, on the premise of a blockade of the Netherlands.

In this case, India has a good chance of winning, because as long as half of the Dutch navy is destroyed, as soon as the first line against Norway, the energy cow, is lost, the Netherlands will lose. ）

Moreover, since the number of third-generation fighters in service in the Dutch Air Force is actually more than that of India's third-generation fighters, if the air battle between the two countries takes place over the North Sea (the North Sea is the high sea between Britain, the Netherlands, Germany, and Norway, and the meteorological conditions are more suitable for the air forces of the northwestern European countries), the Netherlands has a better chance of winning in terms of air combat, and it will be difficult for India to succeed in bombing the Netherlands mainland through the North Sea.

As for strategic missiles, the situation is that the Netherlands is in fact the producer of European space rockets, which basically represents the highest level of EU launch vehicle production (the current situation in Northwest Europe is that Britain and Germany have deployed a large number of US troops, and no country in Northwest Europe dares to use its own technology to manufacture those things on a large scale under the nose of the US military, but what Britain and Germany can make, the Netherlands can definitely make, and India is supported by Russia in every possible way, For example, the guidance technology of the Agni missile series relies on the supply of Russia). It is not difficult to build an ICBM that can hit the Indian mainland. But it must be ensured:

Its Navy is not destroyed by the Indian Navy for half a year - 1 year. The ** of raw materials and grains is not interrupted. The main point of India's development of longer-range missiles is that it needs Russian technical support.

The second assumption, which is also unrealistic, is that the Army, needless to say, is that because the two countries are far apart, a Pyrrhusian victory like the Goa War against Portugal in 1961 will not happen to India, and the Indian Navy is also at a disadvantage in the face of the Dutch Navy, which has a relatively strong air power concentrated in the North Sea for defense in the North Sea region (the Dutch air anti-submarine force is second only to Britain and France, and stronger than Germany, Italy, etc.) in Western Europe. (Your second assumption is that for Belgium or Denmark, or even Canada, which I said in the past without submarines, such a country would work very well, because these countries are not strong enough to face the Netherlands, not good).

Of course, in reality, India will never play like that, if India wants to win absolutely victory, there is a good way, I can personally introduce it to you, that is, Iceland, if other countries can sit back and watch Iceland be occupied by other countries, India should find Iceland to attack first, Iceland does not have a regular army, it is very easy to take it. And it is quite far from the European continent, even if it is Britain or the Netherlands, which have a certain ocean-going naval strength, it is very difficult to ensure that Iceland is not occupied by non-European countries (of course, the reality is that Britain and the Netherlands and other countries are stationed in Iceland), take Iceland, and then the Indian Navy will send a huge fleet to protect it, carry strategic ** and nuclear warheads deployed in Iceland, in that case, the Netherlands will definitely die.

The following is a comparison of the military strength of the Dutch army and the Indian army, without any explanation, the landlord can draw conclusions by looking at it himself.

The Netherlands has an active force of 57.18 million (all services combined).

The army strength is 270,000.

330 main battle tanks.

More than 400 infantry chariots.

There are more than 600 artillery pieces of various types.

More than 130 anti-aircraft guns.

The Dutch navy has a strength of 1,380,000 men.

Submarines: 4 ships of the "Walrus" class.

Missile destroyers: 2 ships of the "Tromp" class and 2 ships of the "Van Hermske" class.

Frigates: 8 ships of the "Cary Dolman" class and 4 ships of the "Cotton Air" class.

Minesweepers: 17 ships.

Amphibious ships: 1 unit.

The Dutch Air Force has 11.98 million troops.

Attack fighters: 171 F-16A B.

Maritime reconnaissance aircraft: 2 F-27 aircraft.

Transport aircraft: 11 DC-10-30 and so on.

Trainer aircraft: 10 pc-7 types.

: 73 in total, of which 12 are armed***.

Surface-to-air missiles: 48 "Hawk", 5 "Patriot", 100 "Stinger".

Anti-aircraft guns: 40 mm 100 guns.

Air-to-air missiles: several "Sidewinders".

There are no Strategic Missile Forces.

India's active military strength is 114,500.

The strength of the army is 980,000.

3414 main battle tanks.

1,300 infantry chariots.

More than 8,000 artillery pieces of various types.

More than 2,400 anti-aircraft guns.

More than 1,800 surface-to-air missiles.

The navy has 10,000 troops.

It is equipped with 151 ships of various types.

Among them, 1 aircraft carrier.

19 submarines.

6 destroyers.

18 frigates.

49 ships patrolled with the coast.

20 minesweepers.

10 amphibious landing ships.

28 support ships of various kinds.

The strength of the Air Force is 140,000.

It is equipped with 772 combat aircraft and 170 aircraft (including 32 armed aircraft).

There are 17 attack fighter squadrons (equipped with 53 MiG-23bn, 88 "Jaguar" MiG-21MF combat aircraft), 20 fighter squadrons (equipped with 66 MiG-21FL, 169 MiG-21BIS, 26 MiG-23MF, 64 MiG "Mirage" 2000H TH and 8 Su-30MKI combat aircraft), 3 attack squadrons (equipped with 32 Mi-24***), 2 reconnaissance aircraft squadrons (equipped with 8 aircraft" Zpera MiG-25 and 2 MiG-25U reconnaissance aircraft), 12 squadrons of transport aircraft (equipped with 105 installed DO 228, 28 BAE 748, 25 Il-76 transport aircraft), 11 transport squadrons (equipped with 73 Mi-8, 36 Mi-17, 10 Mi-26).

Strategic Missile Forces: Equipped with the "Agni family" missiles from Agni-1 - Agni-4 (range 8000 km, can hit Beijing, Shanghai).

War is not a formula, and the outcome is not certain. Even if the population, the number of equipment and the level of combat effectiveness are very strong, they do not necessarily win the war, and the war is a comparison of comprehensive national strength. Just like Israel in the Middle East war, although it is at a disadvantage, it can still win the war.

But if you really want to compare the equipment and the size of the army, India must be strong. Not much to say, India has nuclear **, it has ballistic missiles, it has a huge air force, among which there is a Su-30MKK, and there is a fleet of tankers. The army has a huge T-90 tank complex.

The Navy, with three aircraft carriers, is second only to the United States in power in the Indian Ocean.

Although the quality of equipment and personnel in the Netherlands is very high, the quantity cannot be compared with India...

The problem is that the Netherlands is NATO, and with the support of the United States behind it, who will the Netherlands be afraid of?

In addition, Europe has a dirty secret, that is, in addition to Britain and France, which have their own nuclear forces, there are four countries with nuclear capabilities: Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, and Belgium. There are nuclear ** stored at the air bases of these four countries, and the aircraft of each country have the ability to deliver these nuclear **. About 200 B61 thermonuclear gravity bombs are scattered and stored in the four countries.

Under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) agreement signed during the Cold War, these nuclear weapons are technically owned by the United States, but in the event of war, they can be transferred to the control of the air force of the host country. At that time, the Netherlands will have the strength to contend with it.

But if it's in your ideal state, I think India is stronger.

If you look at the military comparison, India is stronger than the Netherlands, and the military-industrial system and comprehensive strength of India are stronger than the Netherlands.

I'm curious why the landlord let the Netherlands pass by with India.。。。

The Netherlands' national defense is completely self-defensive, and India, with Pakistan and China as imaginary enemies, cannot reach the Netherlands at all, and the two sides cannot fight at all. Moreover, if India dares to attack the Netherlands, NATO will not be able to sit idly by.

Can't beat it! The third brother is like coming to do the backstage!

At most there is a Zorro in the Netherlands

Your question can only be established with assumptions, and in the real world, these two countries will basically never fight each other, and there is no intersection at all.

From my personal point of view, North Korea will win, and the hardships of their people are well known. But what else is so famous? Military**Ah!! The DPRK's military development is very impressive.

In contrast, the Netherlands was a very stable country, and there was no war to prepare for. Although it is believed that they can also have very superior equipment, but fighting a war requires state, a country that is preparing for war and a country that is stable and peaceful, it is already obvious who wins and who loses.

It is difficult to say, mainly depending on the economic strength of the two countries.

The question is simple and can be analyzed by analogy

In the first step, does the landlord think that if the four families of Britain, France, Germany, and Italy are tied together, can they do it over the United States? In the second step, can the United States outdo Russia? If the United States had been able to do it over Russia, would it have done it a long time ago?

Third, if the United States is not even sure that it will fight Russia, and Britain, France, Germany, and Italy together cannot defeat the United States, then can they beat Russia? Hehe! ~~

In the sixties and seventies of the last century, if there was no American umbrella, I am afraid that Europe would have been pushed by the Soviet Union long ago. In particular, Europe's air force, army, missile and other conventional forces are at an absolute disadvantage, and the United States may not be able to defeat the former Soviet Union if it fights conventionally on the road. The United States often considers in the war against Russia whether it should use tactical nuclear ** to neutralize the superiority of the conventional forces of the former Soviet Union.

But with the collapse of the Soviet Union, a lot of changes have taken place, the United States electronic information technology is widely used in modern equipment, of course, it also benefits Europe, the balance of power should be said to have undergone a fundamental reversal, and now Russia has to import ** from France, to absorb advanced military technology in Europe, but Russia's nuclear ** still occupies an overwhelming advantage, so European countries still have more respect for Russia, to be honest, now at sea, Russia may not be able to beat Japan.