Okay, if "an army is not judged as best only on what or how much it can conquer", then why not answer the original question: In what sense is the British Army the best in the world?
The natural thought I had about such a claim is that the best would be better at its basic function than any other, but as you have a different idea about this, I would like to know what you mean.
If you are taking as much into account as possible which would be history and also the present expenditure, man power, training and equipment, you also need to look at the ratio of each soldier being secure dby their history, the expenditure alloted to each man, how much each soldier gets trained and the quality of their equipment.
I am sorry but i still think even going through all this that Britain is the number one Army in the world.
Just because you are the biggest does not make the best, just because you spend more money on fire power doe snot mean you can always shoot straight.
It also has to do with the opportunities your army afords you once you leave, not just paying for an education once you leave but giving you one whilst you are a part of it.
---------- Post added 02-16-2010 at 08:49 PM ----------
Pepijn Sweep;129101 wrote:
First the Army has to find an enemy to attack
First the army has to find an ally to defend.