从这里了解印度人对中国的看法

世界历史上战斗力最强大的10支军队

2012-09-29 17:42 68个评论 字号:

本文是国外网站有关“世界历史上战斗力最强大的10支军队”的讨论。网友列出了公元前4世纪至今最强大的十支军队:分别是公元前4世纪的亚历山大马其顿军团、公元前1世纪至3世纪的罗马军团、公元3世纪至公元4世纪冒顿单于时代的匈奴骑兵、公元7世纪至9世纪的阿拉伯帝国军队、公元13世纪至16世纪的蒙古骑兵、公元15世纪至16世纪的奥斯曼土耳其军队、公元17世纪至20世纪的俄罗斯哥萨克骑兵、公元19世纪的拿破仑法军、公元20世纪的大英帝国军队、现代美国军队。

版权所有:http://www.santaihu.com
原文标题:Top 10 armies in world history
原文链接:http://www.historum.com/general-history/47136-top-10-armies-world-history.html

亚历山大马其顿军团(公元前4世纪,亚历山大时代)

亚历山大马其顿军团(公元前4世纪,亚历山大时代)

罗马军团(公元前1世纪至3世纪)

罗马军团(公元前1世纪至3世纪)

匈奴骑兵(公元前3世纪至公元前2世纪,冒顿单于时代)

匈奴骑兵(公元3世纪至公元4世纪)

阿拉伯帝国军队(公元7世纪至9世纪)

阿拉伯帝国军队(公元7世纪至9世纪)

蒙古骑兵(公元13世纪至16世纪)

蒙古骑兵(公元13世纪至16世纪)

奥斯曼土耳其军队(公元15世纪至16世纪)

奥斯曼土耳其军队(公元15世纪至16世纪)

俄罗斯哥萨克骑兵(公元17世纪至20世纪)

俄罗斯哥萨克骑兵(公元17世纪至20世纪)

拿破仑法军(公元19世纪)

拿破仑的法军(公元19世纪)

大英帝国军队(公元20世纪)

大英帝国军队(公元20世纪)

美国军队(20世纪、21世纪)

美国军队(20世纪至21世纪)

从公元前4世纪至今最强大的十支军队:

– 亚历山大马其顿军团(公元前4世纪,亚历山大时代)

– 罗马军团(公元前1世纪至3世纪)

– 匈奴骑兵(公元3世纪至公元4世纪,冒顿单于时代)

– 阿拉伯帝国军队(公元7世纪至9世纪)

– 蒙古骑兵(公元13世纪至16世纪)

– 奥斯曼土耳其军队(公元15世纪至16世纪)

– 俄罗斯哥萨克骑兵(公元17世纪至20世纪)

– 拿破仑法军(公元19世纪)

– 大英帝国军队(公元20世纪)

– 美国军队(20世纪至21世纪)

以下是各国网友的评论:

Jake10(香港)
Nice list, but I suggest taking the Hun army out of there, and maybe replacing it with the Chinese armies of the Han and Tang dynasties.

不错的名单,不过我建议将匈奴军队从名单中移除,用汉朝军队或者唐朝军队取代之。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
to be honest,Chinese armies have nothing outstanding. Chinese Han dynasty pays tribute to the Hun Empire for over 60 years,emperor Gaozu almost captured by the Hun army…

the capital of Tang Dynasty was almost destroyed by Tibetans.
Kitans,Arabs,Turks,Uygur…everyone has kicked Tang’s ass

老实说,中国军队并不出色。汉朝向匈奴帝国进贡了60多年,汉高祖差点被匈奴军队俘获…

唐朝首都几乎被吐蕃摧毁。

契丹人、阿拉伯人、突厥人、回鹘人都击败过唐朝军队。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
the Hun army under Modu and Attila was the world top 1 army. but Chinese armies were never…

冒顿和阿提拉大汗统治下的匈奴军队是当时世界第一强大的军队,中国军队从来没有最强…

Jake10(香港)
Dude, they were raiders. The only thing that was hard was catching up to them, and, since they didn’t have cities they could play a great cat and mouse game. The Huns are overrated, probably because they harassed the Romans, but only when Rome was on her way down. When Rome fell, China was clearly the most powerful nation in the world. That does not happen without a top ranked army, despite how subjective the evaluation of an army is.

老兄,他们是突袭者。唯一不好办的是你很难追上他们,因为他们没有城市,可以大玩猫捉老鼠的游戏。匈奴军队被高估了,可能是他们骚扰过罗马帝国的原因,但也是趁罗马帝国走下坡路的时候才发起骚扰的。当罗马帝国奔溃后,中国明显是世界最强大的国家。不管如何主观评估军队,如果没有顶级军队,当时的中国不可能世界最强。

GalataTurk(土耳其)
You seem to forget why Great Wall of Chinese was built.It was built to prevent Turk and Mongol attacks from north.Huns were always superior to Chinese in military.

你似乎忘记了中国修建长城是为了防止突厥和蒙古从北面入侵。匈奴人在军事上一直优于中国人。

原创翻译:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com

purakjelia(加拿大)
Was the original Xiongnu related to Western Caucasian Huns or Turks? No one is able to prove this.

Did the Gokturks caused any real threats to ancient China? I remember that they got overrun by Tang armies and by other nomadic armies, that’s why they fled to the west.

Your opinion is entirely subjective. Ancient Chinese armies were also very powerful. The famous Han general Chen Tang once said that before the Xiongnu adopted Han technologies, one Han soldier could defeat five Xiongnu soldiers; after they adopted Han technologies, one Han soldier could only defeat three Xiongnu soldiers.

原来的匈奴是否与西高加索匈奴人有关?没人可以证明这个。

突厥是否给中国带来过真正的威胁?我记得突厥被唐军和其他游牧军队蹂躏,所以突厥逃到西方。

你的观点非常主观。古中国军队也非常强大。著名的汉朝将军陈汤曾经说,在匈奴采用汉人技术前,一名汉朝士兵可以击败5名匈奴士兵;采用汉人技术后,一名汉朝士兵只能击败3名匈奴士兵。

GalataTurk(土耳其)
Xiongnu related to both because Huns were not a different and single ethniticy.Turks were the largest tribe in Hun empire.

Gokturks defeated China few times and China paid taxes regularly during Tang dynasty after defeat of his army in 626.

Actually it was not only Chinese that caused Turks flee to west. Chinese hans were clever and they made Turks to fight each other. Karluks and Turgish attacked Oghuzs and that caused weakening and later disappear of Gokturk state.

First Gokturk state was defeated by Chinese and Mongols.Second Gokturk state was defeated by other Turks.

Difficult climate conditions and famine were another reason for Turks to flee to west.

匈奴与两者都有关系,并非是单一种族。突厥是匈奴帝国最大的部落。

突厥帝国数次打败中国。626年战败后,唐朝定期进贡。

实际上,并非仅仅是中国人导致突厥人西逃。汉人非常聪明,让突厥人内斗。葛逻禄和Turgish攻击乌古斯人,导致突厥帝国的衰微和随后的灭亡。

第一个突厥帝国被中国人和蒙古人打败,后突厥帝国被其他突厥部落(回鹘)打败。

恶劣的气候条件和饥荒是突厥西逃的另一个原因。

heavenlykaghan(美国)
Other than in the year 618, when the Tang was was still facing multple contenders on the throne, and in 626, right after Tang Taizong ursurped the throne after the Xuanwu gates incident, the Tang has never paid anything to the Gokturks. In fact after 630, the Eastern Gokturks were subjugated and relocated along the Tang frontiers, paying annual tribute and providing auxiliars for Tang campaigns, their state was divided into two prefectures and eventually came under the Chanyu Dudufu. The Xueyantuo Khanate likewise perished in 646 and the Tiele/Toquz Oghuz were zoned into 6 protecturates and 7 prefectures and it had to provide auxiliary forces whenever the Tang demanded, this led to numerous rebellions namely in the year 662 and 667. However final independence was not achieved until 686 when the Tang withdrew its protectorate of the pacified north to the south of the Gobi.

The Tang did make payments to the Uighurs on two occasions; one as a fee for Uighur support in crushing An Lushan’s rebellion, the other due to the arbitrary killing of an Uighur embassy, but that was well after the height of Tang power.

To imply that the Tang did not defeat the Turks directly in combat is preposterous. In 630, 3000 Tang soldiers was enough to capture Illig/Jieli Kaghan and tens of thousands of his men and in 657, 10,000 Tang soldiers under Su Dingfang routed 100,000 Western Turks. Likewise in 641, 50,000 Tang soldiers under Li Siqi with 10,000 Turkish auxiliar was able to defeat the entire alliance of the Toquz Oghuz numbering some 200,000. Taizong personally noted that 10,000 Han soldiers was enough to annihilate 100,000 “barbarian” army.

The first Gokturk state was weakened by the rebellion of the Toquz Oghuz, but it was put to an end by just 3000 Chinese cavalry with a 100,000 men support. The Western Turks were put to an end with 10,000 Chinese infantry, although the Toquz Oghuz supplied a significant auxiliary force in the mop up campaign. The destruction of the second Gokurk Empire was indeed mainly the deed of the Uighurs, but the Tang forces under Wang Zhongsi still played a role in the attack on the tribes south of the desert and possibly crossing the Gobi to meet up with the Uighurs in the follow ups.

I don’t believe the Turks ever fled west during the Tang, and I have no idea where this notion came from, the Seljuks that went west happened much later than the period under discussion.

除了唐朝仍处于王位争夺时期的618年,还有唐太宗篡夺皇位的宣武门事变后的626年,唐朝从来没有向突厥纳贡。事实上,公元630年后,东突厥被征服,随后被安置在唐朝边界沿线,每年向唐朝纳贡,并协助唐朝征战。东突厥被分成两个辖区,最终处于单于都护府的管理之下。薛延陀汗国在646年灭亡,铁勒和九姓乌古斯被分别划为6个辖区和7个辖区,每当唐朝提出要求,就必须派军支援,导致662年和667年出现许多叛乱,然而,只有唐朝在686年撤出后,才最终取得了独立。

唐朝两次赔偿回鹘人:一次是支付回鹘帮助平叛安禄山叛乱的费用,另一次是肆意杀戮回鹘大使人员而做出的赔偿,但这也是唐朝巅峰期过后好久的事情了。

要说唐朝没有在战斗中直接打败突厥,那是荒谬的。630年,3000名唐朝士兵足以打败拥有数以万计士兵的颉利可汗。苏定方率领下的1万名唐朝士兵把10万西突厥军队打得溃不成军。李司棋率领下的5万唐朝士兵和1万突厥援兵有能力打败达20万之众的九姓乌古斯联盟。唐太宗亲口说过1万名汉族士兵足以歼灭10万名“野蛮”军队。

首个突厥国家是被九姓乌古斯叛乱削弱的,随后被唐朝的3000名骑兵和1万名步兵终结。在九姓乌古斯的大力支持下,1万名唐朝步兵在清除运动中终结了西突厥。另一个突厥帝国确实主要是回鹘人打败的,但王忠嗣率领下的唐军在攻击荒漠南端的部落时发挥了作用,随后可能越过沙漠与回鹘人会合。

我并不认为突厥人是在唐朝时期西逃的,不知道此种说法出自何处。塞尔柱王朝子民西逃的时期要晚得多。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
Turk tribes always fight each others for thoudsands of years,not because of Chinese made them to fight

在数千年里,突厥部落经常彼此内斗,并非汉人从中离间。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
sorry dude,i didn’t notice that you are from China…

i can fully understand your thoughts but im just telling the truth

抱歉,老兄,我没注意到你来自中国…

我完全理解你的想法,不过我说的是事实。

Jake10(香港)
I live here, but I’m not Chinese. I assure you there is nothing personal about what I said. I just hope I didn’t turn this into another east vs west thread, that’s all.

我住在这里,但不是中国人。我向你保证自己所说的没有夹杂个人情感。我只是希望该贴不会转变成另一个东西方之争的帖子,就这样。

原创翻译:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
well,cat and mouse game is a great stratgy,Russia defeated Napoleon & Hitler by playing such game,but nobody can deny that Napoleon & Hitler got their asses kicked by Russians.

China has paid tributes and women to Huns, Turks, Tibetanz, Kitans, Jurchens, Mongols for few hundreds of years. 3 Chinese emperors were captured by Jurchens & Mongols. at the Peak of Tang Dynasty,the main force of Tang army was easily defeated by Kitans,Tibetans and Arabs…Han Dynasty didn’t defeat Xiongnu,Xiongnu was defeated by natural dizaster,politics and Xianbei attack…

i respect your opinion,but i disagree China was the world most powerful nation after Roma went down…

猫捉老鼠游戏是一个伟大的策略。俄罗斯人通过这个游戏打败了拿破仑的法军和希特勒的德军,没有人可以否认这个。

中国向匈奴、突厥、吐蕃、契丹、女真和蒙古等国家进贡与和亲了数百年。在唐朝巅峰时期,3位皇帝被女真人和蒙古人俘虏。唐朝军队主力被契丹人、吐蕃人和阿拉伯人轻易打败。匈奴没有被汉朝打败,而是被自然灾害、政治斗争和鲜卑人打败的…

我尊重你的看法,但我不同意中国是罗马帝国衰落之后的世界最强大国家…

Rocksteadyeddie(英国)
They used their heads the Russians of both occasions but it was the Russian winter that defeated these two brilliant armies not the Russian army. Let me explain, if it wasn’t for the Russian winter both Napoleon and Hitler would have conquered Russia. Though Hitler’s objective was the oilfields. Also if the Italians hadn’t made such a hash of it in North Africa and the Germans never went to their aid to keep up the myth of axies invinciblity then the Germans would have went a month earlier into Russia. More than enough time to capture their objective before the winter set in.

Also Hitler meddled in the plans too much so they went in with much less strength than originally planned.

俄罗斯人两次都用了头脑,不过真正打败两支杰出军队的不是俄罗斯军队,而是俄罗斯的冬天。让我来解释下,要不是俄罗斯的冬天,拿破仑的法军和希特勒的德军都会征服俄罗斯。不过,希特勒的目标是油田。此外,如果意大利人并不匆忙进入北非,以及德军随后没有为了保持轴心国的无敌神话而驰援意大利军队,那么德国人可能会早一个月进入俄罗斯,足以在冬天来临前完成任务。

此外,希特勒过度干预计划,进入苏联的德军比原先计划的要少得多。

Ruskhan(挪威)
If, this, if that… speculations… If Germany never attacked USSR they would have captured UK and whole of Europe and Africa. And am really sure that conditions for Red Army in winter were much more harsh then for the Germans. Also how many winters were there? I mean the war went for 4 years on Eastern Front… And last but not least am pretty sure that it was Red Army who was pushing Germans back for all those 4 years and not winter. So imo i think its safe to say that it was the Red Army who defeated the Nazis with help of allied forces and American Lend Lease. Saying that Russian Winter defeated the Germans is an outdated cold war propaganda.

But i do agree about Napoleon.

如果不是这样,如果不是那样…如果德国没有攻击苏联,那么可能占领了英国、整个欧洲和非洲。我非常肯定红军在冬天的处境比德军更困难。此外,有多少个冬天来着?我是说东线战场持续了4年,最后但同样重要的是,我确信不是冬天,而是红军把德国人赶了回去。所以我认为完全可以说是红军在盟军的帮助下打败了纳粹。要说俄罗斯的冬天打败了德国人,那可是过时的冷战宣传。

不过,我确实同意拿破仑的法军是被冬天打败的。

Krystian(保加利亚)
It is ridiculous to claim Hitler had any chance whatsoever of INVADING, even less so capturing Britain. Not even the biggest fans of the Third Reich that i’v argued with, and i’v had my share of debates with devout Nazis, claimed Hitler could conquer Britain. It was simply impossible – he never had even slightly close navy power as the British – the seas were theirs from the start to the very ending of the war and in no way did the Third Reich possess the capacity to build a bigger navy than the Royal Navy. That’s precisely why they chose the submarine instead. Second of all, the Luftwaffe was nowhere near as close to gaining air superiority over the Island as commonly believed. The British had plenty of Airfields completely untouched near the Channel, a capable and operating Royal Air force, a very innovative for its time and crucial in the defense of the Isle Radar System, as well as an airplane producing industry that was never truly crippled, even after Coventry. Since a sea invasion is the single most difficult military operation to achieve it requires not only a huge superiority in numbers, but also complete air and sea control – which the Germans were never going to get.

The allies outnumbered the Germans hugely, they controlled the seas and air completely, got the element of surprise, invested enormous amounts of goods and even had the support of the local population and guerrillas when invading Normandy AND STILL it was a hell of a fight with no certain outcome. The Germans were never even close to achieving the same level of preparation and superiority as this for a British invasion, so it is simply out of question. And that’s all just about the Invasion itself – the conquest of the Isles that would ensue is an entirely different matter, which once again shows odds against the Germans. As Churchill said, the Brits would not surrender like the French, they would fight to the bitter end, meaning even an impossible landing of Germans on the Isles would not really mean anything – there was still too much ahead. So generally, one can easily dismiss ANY and ALL doubts that Germany had a chance in Invading and even more so – Capturing Britain, regardless if it invaded the Soviet Union or not.

宣称希特勒有机会入侵英国是荒谬的,更不用说占领英国了,就连第三帝国的最铁杆粉丝也不会这样认为,我与这些虔诚的纳粹争论过。德军是不可能征服英国的,海军无法比肩英国海军。从战争开始到结束,海洋一直属于英国,第三帝国绝对没有能力打造比英国皇家海军更庞大的海军,所以德军选择了潜艇。其次,纳粹德国空军压根就无法夺取英伦列岛上空的制空权。英国在英吉利海峡边上有许多完好无损的空军基地,驻扎着强大的皇家空军,在保护雷达系统和从未真正被瘫痪的飞机制造业上发挥了至关重要的作用,不仅数量上有巨大优势,而且握有完全的制空权和制海权。

诺曼底登陆时,盟军数量上大大超过德军,完全控制了海洋和天空,还有突袭优势,投入了巨额的物资,甚至拥有当地人和游击队的支持。要想入侵英国,德国人无法准备如此充分,不具有优势,所以不可能入侵英国。这还只是说入侵本身,要想征服英伦列岛,那么可完全是另一回事,德军完全无胜算。正如丘吉尔所说的,英国人不会像法国人那样投降,会一直战斗到底。也就是说,即使不可能实现的德军登陆真的发生了,那也并不意味着德军可能会获胜,要想征服英国还有很长一段路要走。所以,一般来说,你可以轻易驳斥任何有关德国有机会入侵甚或征服英国的说法,不管德国是否入侵苏联都是如此。

Ruskhan(挪威)
Like 70% (at least) of all “energy” of the Reich was concentrated on the Eastern Front. If all that would be turn against UK you really think that Germans couldn’t invade?

And No, i cant see how some one could easily dismiss/agree with a subjective speculative scenario, both of them… If Germans never intended to invade Russia maybe they would concentrate more on their Navy, Airborne or what ever one need for invasion of UK.

第三帝国至少70%的力量投入东线战场。如果全部用于攻击英国,你真的认为德国人入侵不了英国吗?

不,我不觉得有人会轻易驳斥或赞成这样一个主观猜测…如果德国人不打算入侵苏联,那么他们会更多地发展海军、空军或者任何入侵英国所需要的力量。

Krystian(保加利亚)
Actually, more than 70% was concentrated on the Eastern front, but this has absolutely no meaning whatsoever in this debate, since most of these divisions were ground – infantry or panzer, thus have no effect on the possibility of an Invasion. They could’v just as well all sat on the French shores of the Channel and make no difference. The Luftwaffe was defeated by the British in 1940 – before Barbarossa. Therefore the argument of the concentration of forces to the East is simply irrelevant.

As i said, what you need to have to even begin thinking of a sea invasion is absolute control of both seas and air. The Germans had no capability to achieve either – the Kriegsmarine was so inferior to the Royal Navy the Germans soon restricted its actions to the Baltic only and instead sent submarines to the Atlantic. It could’v never reached the power of the Royal Navy, regardless of how many resources were delegated to it, since the British would simply not allow this. They would proportionally delegate resources to new ships as well, keeping the superiority (British ports were untouched and operating, getting resources from their vast colonial Empire and the US). This is not speculation but very simple logic that a powerful state with a capable military will always conclude. And even if we can imagine a wonder-world where the Germans are given a big navy by the gods of Asgard themselves – even then the invasion is still impossible due to the British control of the skies, which they won already in 1940, before the soviet invasion, when the Luftwaffe attacked them in full force.

Some speculative scenarios simply have a too obvious answer to be seriously debated. It’s like asking if the crusader army of Richard the Lionheart could invade and conquer China. Theoretically – yes, in reality – the answer is clear.

实际上,70%以上的力量集中在东线战场,但大多数是步兵或者装甲兵,因此对入侵英国起不了作用。如此一来,对本次讨论没有任何意义。德军不能把这些部队部署在法国海岸,那可起不了作用。纳粹德国空军在1940年被英国打败。所以,部队集中在东线战场的论点是不相关的。

正如我所说的,要想从海上入侵,你必须拥有完全的制海权和制空权。德国人两个都夺取不了。纳粹德国海军如此逊于英国皇家海军,以致于被局限在波罗的海活动,转而派潜艇进入大西洋。不管德国把多少资源投入海军,英国永远不会让德国海军达到英国皇家海军的水平。(英国港口毫发无损,正常运作,可以从庞大的殖民地和美国那里获取资源)。为了保持优势,英国也会成比例地投入资源建造新军舰。这不是猜测,而是相当简单的逻辑,拥有强大军队的强大国家总是会获胜。即使我们幻想这样一个奇幻世界,即德国人被阿斯加德神赋予了庞大的海军,那么英国还是控制了空域,所以德国还是入侵不了英国。在入侵苏联之前,纳粹德国空军1940年全力攻击英国,不过吃了败仗。

一些推测性问题的答案再明显不过了,不值得一辩。就像是在问英王理查一世的十字军是否有能力入侵并征服中国一样。理论上,答案显而易见。

Ruskhan(挪威)
I cant see what would stop Germans to concentrate their resources on ships and planes instead of ground forces if their never intended to invade SU?

And i cant see why argument is invalid only because Luftwaffe lost in 1940… Lets say the year is 1941 (or 42 or 43). UK is the last real opponent to Germany in Europe. Germans have almost all Western European resources to their disposal. Instead of building tanks their building planes, training marines instead of mechanized infantry etc…

And UK is right across the channel, while Lionheart and China got 8000km between them in the middle ages.

如果德国不计划入侵苏联,我看不出有什么能阻止德国人集中资源建造军舰和飞机。

我看不出纳粹德国空军1940年打败就能被盖棺定论的原因…1941年时(或者1942、1943年),英国是德国在欧洲的唯一真正对手。德国人几乎可以支配整个西欧的资源。可以从发展装甲步兵转而制造坦克和飞机,以及训练海军陆战队等…

英国就在英吉利海峡对面,而中世纪的英王理查一世的十字军和中国之间隔了8千公里。

Jake10(香港)
So, if it wasn’t China then which nation was the most powerful? Let’s look beyond military; let’s look at science, culture, literature, technology and law and order.

那么如果中国当时不是世界最强大国家,那么是哪个国家呢?别只看军队,看看科学、文化、文学、技术、法律和秩序。

原创翻译:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com

GalataTurk(土耳其)
But the thread is about military and Huns were powerful than Chinese in this case.

但这个帖子讲的是军事。匈奴人军事上比中国人更强大。

purakjelia(加拿大)
Even if we only look at military, ancient China would still be one of the strongest ancient civilizations. Some Westerners just refuse to accept the fact that ancient China was a powerful civilization.

即使只看军队,古中国仍然是最强大的古文明之一。一些西方人拒绝接受这样的事实,即古中国是一个强大的文明国家。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
i agree that China was powerful,however it was never “the most powerful”,if i list top 20 armies in world history,i would defenately put China in…

我同意中国是强大的,然而从来没有“最强大”。如果列出世界历史上最强大的20支军队,那么我肯定会把中国列进去…

purakjelia(加拿大)
I never said that China was the most powerful, I said that ancient Chinese armies deserve to be on the list of powerful ancient armies.

我从来没有说中国是最强大的,我说的是古中国军队该位列古代强大军队之列。

purakjelia(加拿大)
Famous Han Dynasty generals such as Wei Qing, Huo Qubing, Chen Tang, and Dou Xian all defeated the Xiongnu.

Several Tang and Song generals also defeated Tibetans, Khitans, and Jurchens.

许多著名的汉朝大将率军打败了匈奴,比如卫青、霍去病、陈汤和窦宪。

几位唐朝和宋朝大将也击败了吐蕃人、契丹人和女真人。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
after Xiongnu went down,Wei Qing & Huo Qubing killed 80000 Xiongnus,at the same time 30million Chinese were killed by Xiongnus,later Han Dynasty still had to pay Xiongnu tributes and women,do you call that “a voctory”?

匈奴走下坡路后,卫青和霍去病率军杀死了8万匈奴人。同时,3000万唐人被匈奴人杀害。随后的汉朝仍然不得不向匈奴人进贡与和亲,你认为这就是“胜利”?

purakjelia(加拿大)
Lol, 30 million, where did you get that number? Out of your pure imagination I suppose?

Han did suffer from the battles with Xiongnu, but not as severe as you described. At least, Xiongnu was significantly weakened by their wars with the Han Dynasty. Both the Han and the Xiongnu suffered losses during their wars.

笑,3000万?你从哪里得到的数据?纯粹是你的想象吧?

在与匈奴人的战斗中,汉朝确实遭受了损失,但没有你所形容的那么严重。至少匈奴在与汉朝交战中明显被削弱。汉朝和匈奴都在战争中遭受了损失。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
according to Chinese historical book “Zizhi Tongjian”,the population of Han Dynasty was 60million before Han-Xiongnu war,during the war over half of Chinese population were slaughtered by the Xiongnu army. By Wudi’s end, the entire empire went to waste, and households were halved”. So much so that the grandiose-seeking Wudi promulgated the unprecedented Fault-Me Decree, apologizing to the entire Chinese people for his actions. Han Dynasty was directly destroyed by Xiongnu

根据中国史书《资治通鉴》,与匈奴交战前,汉朝人口是6000万。与匈奴交战中,超过一半的人被匈奴屠殺。“武帝之末,海内虚耗,户口减半”。汉武帝后来颁布罪己诏,为自己的过错向全国人民道歉。汉朝是被匈奴直接摧毁的。

purakjelia(加拿大)
Well, Zizhi Tongjian was written in Song dynasty, almost 1000 years after Han Dynasty, so we aren’t sure whether the numbers in this book were accurate or not. Moreover, the writer Sima Guang probably had his own political agenda. He probably exaggerated the numbers in his historical record just to warn his Song emperor that it’s bad to start wars because the people would suffer.

And also, the Chinese text that you posted didn’t say 30 million, and it didn’t say all these people were slaughtered by Xiongnu. Stop reading what’s not written in there.

《资治通鉴》是在宋朝撰写的,几乎晚于汉朝1000年,所以我们不能确定该书的数据是否准确。更重要地是,作者司马光可能有自己的政治目的,为了警告宋朝皇帝若开战人民会受苦,可能夸大了数据。

此外,你所说的中国史籍没有说死了3000万,没有说都是被匈奴屠殺的。书上没有写的就不要乱说。

jegates(美国)
Nice list and agree.

名次排得好啊,同意。

purakjelia(加拿大)
Han armies under Emperor Han Wudi kicked Xiongnu’s ass.

Tang armies under Emperor Tang Taizong was also very powerful.

The Song army was probably the first army in the world to use gunpowder weapons. The ancient Chinese were the first people to discover gunpowder.

I would definitely put the ancient Chinese army on my list of top 10 armies in world history.

汉武帝领导下的汉朝军队打败了匈奴军队。

唐太宗领导下的唐朝军队也非常强大。

宋朝军队可能是世界上首个使用火器的军队。古代中国人首先发明了火药。

如果我来排世界历史上战斗力最强的十支军队,我肯定会把古代中国军队排进去。

版权所有:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
Xiongnu was already destroyed by natural disaster,politics and Xianbei attack during Han Wudi’s period

moreover,Han Wudi didn’t defeat Xiongnu,after the battle of Han and Xiongnu,Han dynasty continuing pay tributes and women to Xiongnu. 200 years later Xiongnu terminated Chinese Western Jin Dynasty…

汉武帝时期,匈奴已经被自然灾害、政治斗争和鲜卑人摧毁殆尽。

更重要地是,汉匈交战,汉武帝的军队并没有击败匈奴。汉朝继续向匈奴进贡与和亲。200年后,匈奴军队终结了中国的西晋王朝…

purakjelia(加拿大)
Well, whatever, I still think that ancient Chinese armies deserve to be in the list of most powerful armies in history, perhaps not in the list top 10, but definitely top 15 or top 20.

Ancient China dominated East Asia for centuries, and it was a technologically advanced civilization from the antiquity up until the 16th or the 17th centuries. Ancient Chinese armies were by far the largest ancient armies.

好吧,不管怎样,我仍然认为古代中国军队理应跻身历史上最强大军队之列,可能进不了前十名,但肯定能跻身前15或者前20名。

古中国统治了东亚数世纪,自古以来一直到16世纪或者17世纪均是技术先进的文明国家。古代中国军队是迄今为止最庞大的古代军队。

Guaporense(巴西)
The problem is that Chinese armies never engaged European and Middle Eastern armies in a systematic fashion.

Historically, the only wars that pitted Chinese forces against European and other Western Armed forces were the Opium Wars, WW2 (Japan was a third world country from a European perspective and was easily defeated by the US, and still Japan was easily able to overpower and conquer most of China in WW2) and the Korean War (first time a Chinese army held their ground against an Western Army).

China never dominated Asia. Historically, China dominated a territory of 4-5 million square kilometers in East Asia.

It’s true that Chinese armies held a civilization together for centuries on end that contained 20-30% of the world’s population, but this civilization was either not integrated into the Western World or when it was integrated they had a pathetic military performance.

There isn’t any actual evidence supporting such claims. Literary sources claim massive Chinese armies, but literary sources also claim massive Persian armies, in fact, dozens of times larger.

The largest invasion force ever, according to literary sources taken literally, was the Persian Army of Darius in 480 BC, with 5,200,000 men. The second largest was the German expeditionary force involved in the invasion of the Soviet Union, in 1941, with 3,200,000 men.

问题是中国军队从来没有与欧洲和中东国家的军队系统地交手过。

历史上,中国军队与欧洲军队之间爆发的战争有鸦片战争、二战(日本在欧洲人眼里是第三世界国家,被美国轻易打败,可日本仍然有能力在二战中征服大半个中国)和朝鲜战争。

中国从来没有主宰过亚洲。历史上,中国只统治了东亚四五百万平方公里的领土。

在数个世纪里,中国军队确实守住了世界20%至30%人口联合创造的文明,但这个文明既没有整合进西方世界,或者说整合的时候,中国军队表现可怜。

没有任何证据表明中国军队是最庞大的。有历史文献称有庞大的中国军队,但也有历史文献称有庞大的波斯军队,事实上,规模还大了几十倍。

根据历史文献的记载,历史上最庞大的侵略军是公元前480年的波斯军队,有520万之众。第二庞大的军队是德国1941年入侵苏联的远征军,有320万士兵。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
actually they did, the Chinese Tang army was beaten by the Arabs in 751 AD.

其实有交手过,公元751年,唐朝军队被阿拉伯人打败。

klomeka(加拿大)
yet after the battle the abbasids continued to pay tribute to the chinese tang dynasty, which by your logic means the chinese was obviously stronger than the abbasids

然而,此战后,(阿拉伯帝国的)阿拔斯王朝继续向唐朝纳贡。按照你的逻辑来看,唐朝明显比阿拔斯王朝强大。

Essa(巴林)
Why would Abbassids pay tribute to Tang after defeating them !!! Abbassids gained lands as well as technology, through Chinese experts in printing paper….after that, both powers never came to conflict and actually established diplomatic relations….

打败唐军后,阿拔斯王朝为什么还要纳贡!阿拔斯王朝获得了土地和技术,学会了造纸和印刷术…此后,两个帝国再也没有冲突,实际上建立了外交关系…

heavenlykaghan(美国)
I believe he said “in a systematic fashion”, and not a single skirmish which is precisely what Talas in 751 was. The Turgesh, a vassal turkic state of the Tang, however, did engage in systematic warfare with the Arabs, and often bested them on the battle field.

他说的是系统地交手,不是751年发生在恒罗斯的一场冲突。然而,唐朝的一个突厥附庸国突骑施与阿拉伯人有系统地交战,经常在战场上克敌制胜。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
i don’t know who discovered gunpower,but i know that Song Dynasty got it’s ass kicked by Kitans,Jurchens and Mongols for over 300 years…

我不知道谁发明了火药,但我知道宋朝被契丹人、女真人和蒙古人羞辱了300多年…

purakjelia(加拿大)
What’s your point? Romans also got their ass kicked by Huns and various Germanic tribes, and Mongols also conquered Central Asia, Middle-East, and Eastern Europe.

The Song Dynasty resisted the Khitans and Jurchens for hundreds of years, and they resisted the Mongols for more than 40 years before they were finally conquered. No one could resist the mighty Mongols for 40 years at that time, except the Chinese. The war between Song and Mongols started around 1235, and it ended in 1279. In comparison, Jurchens only resisted the Mongols for about 20 years, from 1211 to 1234, and other Central Asian, Middle-Eastern, and Eastern European kingdoms and empires only resisted the Mongols for a few months to a few years.

你说的是什么意思?罗马帝国也被匈奴人和日耳曼各部落击败过,蒙古人也征服了中亚、中东和东欧。

宋朝抵抗了契丹人和女真人数百年,在最终被蒙古人征服前抵抗了40多年。除了中国人,那个时候没有人能够抵抗强大的蒙古军队长达40年之久。宋朝和蒙古帝国的战争开始于1235年,结束于1279年。相比之下,女真人只抵抗了蒙古军队大约20年,也就是从1211年至1234年。中亚、中东和东欧各国只抵抗了蒙古军队几个月至几年。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
Song Dynasty resisted Kitans and Jurchens by paying tributes,not by army.

Mongols took 40 year to conquer Chinese because the landform of Song was full of rivers and mountains.Mongols defeated Jurchen army before they defeated Chinese army.does that mean Song army was even stronger than Jurchen army by your logic?Mongols didn’t conquer Japan at all,does that mean Japan was N x 100times stronger than Song Dynasty by your logic?

宋朝是通过进贡来“抵抗”契丹人和女真人,并非通过军队。

由于宋朝到处是河流和山脉,蒙古人花了40年才征服宋朝。在打败宋朝前,蒙古人先击败了女真军队。按照你的逻辑来看,这是否意味着宋朝军队比女真军队更强大?蒙古人压根就没征服日本。照你来看,这是否意味着日本比宋朝强大百倍?

purakjelia(加拿大)
Since Song Dynasty was a rich dynasty, so paying tribute was a good way to deter their enemies. I can’t see anything bad about this.

Rivers and mountains also existed in other kingdoms or empires that the Mongols conquered, not just in Song territory.

Jurchens were probably very strong in the early years of 12th century. However, they became weaker afterwards. In 13th century, to compensate for their losses to the Mongols at the northern frontier, the Jurchen emperor ordered his armies to attack the Southern Song Dynasty, yet most of their campaigns against the Song at this period resulted in failures.

The Mongol conquest of Japan was a different story. First of all, Mongols might be excellent horsemen, but they sucked on ships. Secondly, the Korean and Chinese soldiers whom they forcibly recruited didn’t really want to obey them and fight the Japanese. Thirdly, they chose the bad season, as they always encountered typhoons and sea storms on their way to Japan. Most of their armies were destroyed by those sea storms, not by the Japanese. Japan was rather lucky because it was an island nation, isolated from its continental neighbors. I would argue that Japan survived the Mongol conquests because of its geographical location. If Japan was a continental nation, then I’m sure the Mongols would be able to crush them.

宋朝很富,所以进贡不失为退敌的好方法,我并不觉得有任何不妥。

不仅仅是宋朝领土,蒙古人征服的其他王国和帝国也有河流和山脉。

女真人在12世纪早期可能是强大的。然而,随后变得虚弱了。13世纪,为了弥补在北部边界对蒙古人作战而遭受的损失,女真皇帝下令军队攻击南宋,然而大多数战役蒙受失败。

蒙古人对日征战是另一回事。首先,蒙古人或许是很棒的骑士,但水性不好。其次,被迫服役的朝鲜人和中国人并非真心舍命打日本人。第三,蒙古人出征季节选错了,前往日本的途中总是遭遇台风和风暴。大多数军队是被风暴摧毁,而不是被日本人摧毁。日本是一个岛国,隔离于大陆之外,所以非常幸运。我想要说的是日本因地理位置而免遭蒙古征服。如果日本是一个大陆国家,我敢肯定蒙古骑兵有能力粉碎他们。

Rocksteadyeddie(英国)
You missed out the Spartans. They were ( at their height like any army ) feared.
The German army of the 20th century. They were a formidable force.

PS. Not to put the Roman army as No.1 shows a lack of historical knowledge.
IMHO. Sorry, just look at the dates they were on top and they were the elite army of the ancient world bar NONE! The proof is is the pudding. They beat the Macedonia phalanx on numerous occasions and that was just the Republican Roman army.

So what are you asking? top 10 in historical order or 10 to 1 in order of prestige?

你遗漏了斯巴达人。巅峰时期的斯巴达军队是令人畏惧的。20世纪的德军是强大的军队。

PS:别把罗马帝国的军队排在第一,这会显示你的历史无知。抱歉,恕我直言,罗马帝国军队是按历史顺序排在第一吧。在多个场合击败马其顿军团的是罗马共和国军队。

所以是按什么来排的?按历史顺序来排的最强10支军队,还是按照声望的高低来倒着排?

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
the 10 armies were listed by period,there is no “No.1” on the list.

十支军队是按历史顺序来排列的,名单中没有所谓的“第一”。

nuclearguy165(美国)
The Huns over the Mongols …..What?!

匈奴骑兵排在蒙古骑兵之上…?!

Rocksteadyeddie(英国)
No he’s put the list in historical order.

不对,是按历史顺序来排名的。

Rocksteadyeddie(英国)
The chinese were always getting overrun by step armies who took over then became ‘civilised’ Chinese themselves. That was the historical pattern of Chinese history.
They were weak in that respect, weak and very vurnable against their Step neighbours.

That’s why they built a massive wall.

中国人经常被草原军队蹂躏,占领军随后转变成“文明”的中国人。中国历史的模式就是这样。中国人在游牧邻居面前非常脆弱,不堪一击。这就是他们修建长城的原因。

原创翻译:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com

purakjelia(加拿大)
Ancient Chinese army was not the only army which got overrun by nomadic tribes. Many Central Asian, Middle-Eastern, Eastern European, and even Roman armies got overrun by steppe armies.

Ancient Chinese fought the nomadic armies for thousands of years, and sometimes they even gained the upper hand.

Ancient Chinese were also good at military innovations. They invented repeating crossbows, multi-fired crossbows, triple-bow arcuballistas, primitive landmines, ceramic grenades, rocket arrows, fire lances, etc.

古代中国军队并非是唯一被游牧部落蹂躏的军队。中亚、中东、东欧等地区的军队也被草原军队蹂躏,甚至罗马帝国军队也是如此。

古代中国人与游牧军队打了几千年,有时甚至占上风。

古代中国人也擅长军事发明。他们发明了连射的连弩、数箭齐射的弩、原始地雷、陶瓷手榴弹、火器、火龙箭手等。

Rocksteadyeddie(英国)
Yes that’s true, look at the Huns in Europe!
But China was much more exposed to these peoples’ and for a much longer period of time. As I have written that is the reason we have the Great Wall. It was one of the GREAT human civilisations. There is no doubt about that.

If you are implying that us westeners think the Chinese civiliation was somehow ‘inferior’ then I think you are mistaking.

没错,看看欧洲的匈奴!

但中国与这些匈奴人交战的历史要长得多。正如我所说的,这就是会出现长城的原因。毋庸置疑,长城是人类伟大文明成就之一。

如果你是在暗示我们西方人认为中国文明是“劣等”的,那么你误会了。

Vezir(美国)
I loved your list but you should had add “German Army of 20th Century”. They fought with nearly all world and they two times tired to conquer world(ok first war was not aiming for world domination but victory would made Germany superpower).

我喜欢你的排名,但你应该把“20世纪的德国军队”加进去。德军几乎与全世界作战,两次试图征服世界(好吧,第一次世界大战并不是为了统治世界,但胜利会让德国成为超级大国)。

Rocksteadyeddie(英国)
I couldn’t agree more.

完全同意。

Frank81(西班牙)
lionmaster, you are being pointless in this discussion about Chinese armies.

1. You can’t take the entire history of the country and say “here you can see defeats”. I can do it with every other empire.

2. Chinese diplomacy worked in a different way than western one, mutual gifts were common to strengthen relations. In any case, other powers such as Rome had to pay tribute to enemies too.

Whatever the case, the Xioungnu were totally dominated after Wudi and again with Ban-Chao. These wasn’t the only success of Han Dynasty armies, which conquered Korea and extensive areas in Central Asia.

If you have doubts about Chinese performance, Tang armies of 7th century were simply the most powerful on Earth, one of the most successful armies in human history.

lionmaster,你在讨论中国军队时压根就不得要领。

1、你不能把中国的整个历史拿出来说事,然后说“你看被打败了吧”。这种情况可以在每个帝国身上找到。

2、中国外交有别于西方外交。互赠礼物以便加强关系是常见事情。不管怎样,罗马等大国也向敌人进贡过。

汉武帝后,匈奴被彻底征服,随后又被班超打败。汉朝军队的胜利并非仅限于此,还征服了朝鲜和中亚的广阔地区。

如果对中国的表现有质疑,7世纪的唐军可是地球上最强大的军队,是人类历史上最成功的军队之一。

lionmaster(澳大利亚)
could u give me a good reason to prove that Han or Tang army was the most powerful in the world wide?Han Wudi couldn’t even defeat decadent Xiongnu. Tang army was easily defeated by Arabs and Tibetans at it’s peak… if u really know Chinese history u wouldn’t say Chinese armies have ever been “the most powerful on earth”

你能给我证明汉朝军队或者唐朝军队是世界最强大的军队吗?汉武帝连衰微的匈奴都打败不了。巅峰时期的唐朝被阿拉伯人和吐蕃人轻易打败…如果你真的了解中国历史,你就不会说中国军队曾经是“地球上最强大的军队”。

Frank81(西班牙)
Han dynasty totally crashed Xioungnu, that’s fact. After, Wudi and his sucessors campaigns the nomads entered in a stage of division, becoming vassals of China.

Tang army experienced a decadence of quality after 700, due to a bad transition to mercenary armies. But during 7th century, it was a superb armed force. They destroyed Turkish empires in Central Asia, conquered many other central Asian peoples, destroyed Koguryo, defeated Japan and subjugated Tibet for a while after conquering Lhasa.

We are talking about an scenario that cover more than 8,000 kms in legth. Tang armed forces of the age had a capable navy, a superb heavy cavalry, infantry with unparalled ranged weapons and very good generals.

汉朝彻底打败了匈奴。这是事实。此后,汉武帝及其继任者让游牧部落陷入分裂状态,并臣属于汉朝。

700年后,由于转变成雇佣军,唐军开始衰落。但是在7世纪时,唐军是一支超强军队,摧毁了中亚的突厥众帝国,征服了许多中亚民族,摧毁了高句丽,击败了日本,打下拉萨后征服了吐蕃。

那个时代的唐军有能打的水兵、精湛的重骑兵、配备无与伦比的远程武器的步兵,还有非常优秀的将军。

heavenlykaghan(美国)
On the contrast, the transition to a mercenary army was precisely because the older fubing units declined in quality since the 660s. The new army improved in efficiency and saw a second wave of Tang expansion in the early 8th century. I believe the reason he believed that Tang army suffered constant losses against Tibet, was due to the capture of Changan in 763, but that is during the middle of the An Lushan rebellion and far from the height of Tang power, for by 755, the Tang army has scored numerous victories against Tibet and pushed the frontier from Xining several hundred KM west to Kokonor.

The Tang never conquered Lhasa in its history, the only time it attempted that was in 670 with its Luoxie dao expeditionary force and it was crushed in Da Feichuang. It did however, conquer the entire Gokturk Empire, subjugated the Tuyuhun of Amdo, so in the 660s, the Tang rulers became the first in history to rule both the entirety of the Inner Asian steppe and China and it reached a size that was only surpassed by the Mongol Empire of the 13th century.

与之相反,之所以转变成雇佣军,恰恰是因为660年以来府兵制军队战斗力的下降。新组建的军队提高了战斗力,见证了唐朝在8世纪初的第二波扩张。唐朝在对阵吐蕃中频频遭受损失,763年长安被吐蕃攻陷。长安沦陷发生在安禄山叛乱时期,远不是唐朝的巅峰时期。截止765年,唐军对吐蕃取得过许多胜利,把战线从西宁往西推了几百公里至青海湖。

历史上,唐朝从来没有攻下拉萨,唯一的尝试发生在670年,不过被粉碎。然而,唐军的确征服了整个突厥帝国,征服了安多的吐谷浑,所以在660年代,唐朝统治者历史上首次统治亚洲草原和中国,疆域面积仅次于13世纪的蒙古帝国。

Ruskhan(挪威)
Also i think German (1941) army and Red Army should be on the list.

Germans for obvious reason

and Red Army not because they were so great warriors, because they weren’t, i mean germans had like 1:4 ratio against the Soviets, but because despite having all the disadvantages like: Your own country is treating you like cattle, generals doesn’t care about losses, they facing a much superior and better trained army (Germans), not enough supplies and resources, not to mention the Stalins purges that weakened Red Army even more they still prevailed, and ended up in Berlin. I view Red Army as a huge underdog that became a champion. They got champions heart for sure…

此外,我认为德军(1941)和苏联红军应该位列榜单。

德军入榜的理由很明显。

苏联红军入榜的理由不是因为他们是伟大的战士,而是恰恰相反。我的意思是德国人对苏联人的比例是1:4,尽管苏联有以下不利因素:国家不把你当人看待,将军不介意损失,面对一个更优越和更强大得多的训练有素军队(德军),没有足够的供应和资源,更不用提斯大林的迫害削弱了红军。即使是这样,苏联红军还是占了上风,并在柏林收尾。我把苏联红军看做是得胜的劣势一方

Tuthmosis III(美国)
“Masters” of the art in their respective times/places:

Assyrians (imperial period, c700s BC)
Macedonians (Philip II and Alexander III)
Qin (the armies of the Warring States era (to 221BC), not too surprisingly, were very formidable and sophisticated)
Romans (from the time of Hannibal on)
Mongols (under Genghis Khan and immediate successors)
Spanish (sixteenth and seventeenth centuries)
Prussians (Frederick William I and Frederick II)
Grande Armee (1805-1809 especially)
Germans (1870 – 1945)
United States (especially after post-Vietnam adjustments)

各自时代的“主宰”:

亚述人(帝国时期)

马其顿王国军队(菲利普二世和亚历山大三世)

秦朝军队(不意外,战国时期的军队非常强大和先进,公元前221年)

罗马人(从汉尼拔时代开始)

蒙古人(成吉思汗时代和直接继承者的领导时期)

西班牙人(16世纪和17世纪)

普鲁士人(弗雷德里克·威廉一世和弗雷德里克二世)

拿破仑军队(特别是1805至1809年)

德国人(1870-1945)

美国(特别是越战后经过调整的美军)

原创翻译:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com

Krystian(保加利亚)
There’s a pretty big gap between the Romans and the Mongols there. I believe the Chinese were at their best during the Dark Ages in Europe and also the Muslims of the Abbasid and Fatimid Caliphates were quite developed both as a civilization and a military force. The Ottomans would have to take the 16th century in my opinion, sharing the second half of it with the Spanish Tercios, which continued on to only the first half of the 17th century. They didn’t really play the dominant role after Rocroi in the middle of the century and rather the Swedish of Gustav Adolfus were then the best. The Germans would in my opinion have to share the 1930s and 1940s with the Imperial Japanese army, just as the US would have to share the 1950s and 1960s with the USSR.

罗马人和蒙古人的差距极大。我认为,欧洲正处于中世纪时,中国人是最棒的。此外,msl建立的阿巴斯王朝和法蒂玛王朝在文化和军队方面都非常发达。在我看来,奥斯曼人和西班牙征服者应该是16世纪的主宰,一直延续至17世纪前半个世纪。随后,罗克鲁瓦人和瑞典的古斯塔夫是当时的最强。德军和日军是1930年代和1940年代的世界最强军队。类似地,美国和苏联是1950年代和1960年代的世界最强。

Lazyman(巴基斯坦)
1. Saladin’s Dynasty was Ayyubid.

2. You cannot call strictly feudal states “armies”.

3. Saladin’s Army was definitely not the best of it’s time , it was very similiar or exactly the same as the ones around it, a core elite of Mamluks, with Iqta Holders supplying heavy cavalry, Turkoman nomads and nomad Arabs with City Militias providing infantry , the force that directly belonged to Saladin was his Mamluks.

1、萨拉丁所处朝代是阿尤布王朝。

2、严格说来,你不能把封建国家称为“军队”。

3、萨拉丁的军队肯定不是所处时代最强的,战斗力大体接近周边军队,核心是马穆鲁克骑兵。伊克塔提供重装骑兵,土库曼游牧部落和阿拉伯游牧部落提供步兵。直接归属萨拉丁领导的是马穆鲁克骑兵。

(三泰虎注:马穆鲁克是中世纪埃及的奴隶骑兵)

Krystian(保加利亚)
So would you then consider the Mamluks themselves as pretenders for the best armies of their time? After all, they defeated both Crusaders and Mongols – two other pretenders for the best fighters of their time.

所以你会认为马穆鲁克骑兵冒充所处时代最强的军队?毕竟,他们击败了十字军和蒙古骑兵——另外两个所处时代最强军队的冒充者。

Gmann101(美国)
The German army of both the First and Second World War was far superior to the Allies. The reason why they lost the wars was because they had the whole world against them but when it came down to actual battles they would consistently defeat the Allies even though they were outnumbered.

We beat them by strength in numbers and by isolating and blockading them, not by having better soldiers or equipment.

一战和二战时期的德军远超过盟军。他们输掉战争的原因是全世界联合起来反对他们。就实际战斗而言,即使人数处于劣势,他们仍然能打败盟军。

我们是靠人数优势、隔离和封锁来打败他们的,而不是靠更能打的士兵或者更好的装备。

Theguy8882(美国)
I think the mongols should be first. they may have had good generals, and often superior numbers, but they were still pretty great.

The Cossacks? I don’t know about that. I think the Assyrians or Persians would be better.

我认为蒙古骑兵应该排第一,他们有优秀将军,经常优势兵力作战,非常棒。

俄罗斯哥萨克骑兵?我不了解。我认为亚述人和波斯人还更强大。

Lazyman(巴基斯坦)
It is nonsensical to compare militaries which developed centuries apart.

把相隔几世纪的军队作比较是荒谬的。

klomeka(加拿大)
hmm this list is pretty biased toward which country had the most military influence in europe

榜单明显偏向欧洲军事影响力最大的国家。

hanian(美国)
why Roman is there
It should be replaced by Han
Han only being kicked by Hun when it just finished civil war
but later break Hun into two parts and controlled southern Hun for 300 years
northern Hun flee to Europe and kicked Roman damn hard

为什么罗马军团会入榜,应该由汉朝取代之。

汉朝只有在刚刚结束内战时被匈奴打败,但汉朝随后把匈奴分裂成两半,并控制了南匈奴长达300年之久。北匈奴逃到了欧洲,并打得罗马够呛。

Krystian(保加利亚)
The Hun didn’t “kick Roman damn hard” for any military reason – the Roman legions were more than capable of handling the Huns just as they handled barbarians for centuries. The reason the Romans had problems with Atilla was because the Empire was in decline at that time and had major problems of all nature. It’s like saying the Ottomans had never good armies because they were loosing wars in the 18th and 19th centuries.

When Rome was operating properly in the late Republic and early Empire its legions were almost unstoppable and the reason they are better than the Han is because they faced much more diverse enemies than the Han ever did – and overcame them all. From the chariots of the celts to the phalanxes of Greece and from the diverse armies of Carthage to the Cataphracts of Parthia and the horse-archers of the Scythians – the Romans gathered much more experience in warfare than the Han ever had. Plus that, one only needs to compare the basic organization of the two armies – from equipment and training to logistics and field engineering to see the Romans were superior .

匈奴人没有把罗马打得够呛。就像数百年来对付野蛮人一样,罗马军团对付匈奴人绰绰有余。罗马军团对付匈奴王阿提拉受阻的原因是罗马帝国当时处在下坡路,面临各种重大问题。正比如奥斯曼人在18世纪和19世纪输掉了战争,你不能说奥斯曼帝国军队从来不是优秀军队。

强盛时期的罗马军团是不可阻挡的,之所以优于汉朝军队,那是因为罗马军团征服更多不同敌人。从凯尔特人的战车到希腊的密集队形,从迦太基的混编军队到帕提亚的重甲骑兵,再到西塞亚人的弓骑兵,罗马军团在战场中比汉朝军队积累了更多经验。此外,你只要比较下两支军队的基本结构——从装备、训练、后勤到外部工程,你会发现罗马军团更先进。

klomeka(加拿大)
so did the qin dynasty,which had better weapons; evident through the qin bronze sword being both longer and harder than that roman gladius used about 300 years later.(on avg, 296hv and 80-90cm vs 180hv 60-65cm) and had an larger army.

of course there is no real way to compare them since they fought very different enemy but my point is this list is very biased toward which country had the most power in europe.

拥有先进武器的秦朝也是如此,秦朝军队的青铜剑比300年后罗马军团使用的短剑更长更坚硬,秦朝军队也更庞大。

当然,没有真正可比较的途径,他们的敌人迥异。但我认为这个榜单明显偏向欧洲最强大的国家。

原创翻译:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com

Mangekyou(英国)
Im surprised Assyrian armies are not on lists.

令我吃惊地是亚述人的军队没有入榜。

Gallienus(英国)
– the Macedonian army of Alexander
– the Spartan armies (4th century BC)
– the Roman army (the 1st Punic War to the 3rd Century)
– the Qin army
– the Mongol armies (when they were a conquering and a rampaging)
– the French army under Napoleon (never thought would put the French army in there )
– the German army in the Third Reich (an unfortunate admission)
-the modern day American army (in terms of equipment and intelligence has there ever been a better rant)

– 亚历山大时期的马其顿军队

– 斯巴达军队(公元前4世纪)

– 罗马军团(第一次布匿战争至公元3世纪)

– 秦朝军队

– 蒙古骑兵(成吉思汗时代)

– 拿破仑的法军

– 第三帝国的德军

– 现代美军

Machintosh(罗马尼亚)
Wehrmacht for me is the greatest army of all time.

在我看来,纳粹德国的国防军是有史以来最强大的军队。

editrobot(中国)
i think The real China has been destroyed after the Jin dynasty。

Orther dynasty was not china。

China`s race like mud,mixed together。

After several confounding,So I think The real Chinese has been destroyed。

我认为真正的中国在晋朝后就被摧毁了,其他朝代并非中国。

中国的种族就像和泥一样杂。

在经过几次混杂后,我认为真正的汉人已经被消灭。

jeroenrottgering(荷兰)
Top ten I am not shure but I can give you among the finest armies ever existed:

– The Macedonian Army under Alexander
(managed to conquer the known world)
– The Roman Army under the Republic and first half of the Empire
(managed to take every country around the Mediterranean and hold it for centuries)
– The Carthaginian army under Hannibal
(managed to defeat the superior Roman Army several times and stood at the gates of Rome)
– The Mongolian Army under Genghis Khan
(managed to conquer the largest empire that ever existed)
– The French Army under Napoleon
(managed to take on coalition after coalition and win in the end almost always facing superior numbers)
– The Prussian Army under Frederick
(managed to double the size of Prussia and inflicted enormous casualties on the enemy)
– The German Army in both World Wars
(managed to fight of several armies and took the most of Europe for half a decade)
– The French Army during the reign of Louis XIV
(managed to fence of the half of civilized Europe and took the advantage even though standing alone)
– The British Army at times of the American Revolution
(managed to win the majority of battles in the American Revolutionary wars eventhough 1000’s of miles from home)
– The Japanese Army during World War II
(took the whole pacific and out shined the European colonial empires)

以下是我列出的历史上最强大的军队:

– 亚历山大时期的马其顿军队(征服了已知世界)

– 罗马共和国和罗马帝国前期的军团(成功征服了地中海沿岸国家,并统治了几个世纪)

– 汉尼拔统治下的迦太基军队(数次击败罗马军团,前进至罗马帝国大门口)

– 成吉思汗时代的蒙古军队(成功征服了历史上最大的帝国)

– 拿破仑的法军

– 弗雷德里克领导下的普鲁斯军队(成功将普鲁斯面积扩大一倍,给敌人造成了巨大伤害)

– 两次世界大战时期的德军

– 路易十四统治下的法军

– 美国革命时期的英军

二战时期的日军(占领整个太平洋,让欧洲殖民帝国黯然失色)

Panthera tigris altaica(美国)
Not wishing to belittle what they achieved. It was after all still quite extraordinary. However, i feel that if the treaties in the Pacific of the time had allowed the allied powers to militarily strengthen their positions to a much greater extent, then the Japanese would have had a much harder slog in than what had proved otherwise, perhaps even failing in capturing some of their objectives.

(三泰虎注:本条评论回复前一条评论的红色部分)不是想贬低日本人所取得的成就,毕竟非同寻常。然而我认为,如果太平洋条约能够让盟军大大加强军事合作,那么日本人可能会步履维艰,甚至会丢失一些目标。

以下是唐朝疆域图

唐朝地图

唐朝疆域图

友荐云推荐
  1. 这片文章我看过,听说那个使劲扁中国古时候战力的澳大利亚佬是个蒙古人,于是我就释然了,现实的不如意总会让自己向往祖先的荣光,最要命的是我所见到的蒙古人不仅YY中世纪蒙古的战斗力,还攀亲戚攀到匈奴和突厥!实在是可悲!

  2. lionmaster(澳大利亚)这就是一搅屎棍子,典型的西方中心论。我没看到你的时候,你是不存在的。
    看看欧洲多大中国多大吧

  3. 最重要的是一些人不愿意承认古中国的强大,唐帝国是当时世界上最强大的帝国,虽然二十一世纪不该去谈历史,但是西方世界容不得东方的强大,即使是曾经的强大,在西方的世界观里,只有他们自己是高尚的,别的国家都是低贱的,所以在高档的西方人眼里是见不得低贱的亚洲民族称霸世界的,即使是曾经的历史也不行,那些人只愿意活在自己的小世界观里,可悲的是历史将再一次上演,世界权利中心自然会转向东方,不管西方人喜欢不喜欢,乐意不乐意,这都是大势所趋,西方在中国周边不停制造摩擦,不仅仅遏制中国崛起,而是想遏制整个亚洲的崛起,抛开主权纷争不谈,中国若能联合日本印度,从经济军事各个方面深入交流,将会加速美帝国的衰落,现在只不过是二十一世纪的初期,二十一世纪必将属于亚洲,即使不是中国,也会有另一个国家去取代美国,中国万岁,亚洲万岁!

  4. 光比军队就是傻× 打仗不仅仅是军队的问题 还是国力的较量 甚至是文化比如战法战术以及装备 在中国比较鼎盛的一些朝代世界上有几个文明能抗衡的 只能被秒杀之

  5. 刚看完文章还想争辩几句,接下来看了评论,我就笑了,一群对中国历史一知半解的家伙发出振振有词的说教——

  6. 中国古代史某种程度上说就是汉族和草原游牧民族的争夺史。匈奴、蒙古、女真等都曾多次打败过汉族,汉族在强势时期也多次反击游牧民族。
    我并不太赞同古代中国是军事强国,中国是农耕文明,这就象是种田的和打猎的区别,打猎的经常饱一顿的饿一顿,那有种田的年年有余粮日子过的小康,汉族不断的和游牧民族融合这才成就了现在的中华民族。与其说汉唐的强大是建立在军事上的,不如说是汉唐的文明水平、经济水平等综合实力的强大造成了周边国家前来依附的盛世。
    某种程度上说,中国近代的落后也正是因为农耕与游牧的冲突是古代的对外主要矛盾,从而忽略了海洋发展。

  7. 为什么排行上没有大明帝国的军队呢?虽然大明败于清军,但是在鼎盛时期,无论陆军还是海军的作战能力在世界前沿。

    • 游民民族赖皮.老不打正面.老偷袭我们的百姓.不敢打我们的军队.鄙视.就像草原上的鬣狗一样.恶心死了

    • 因来他们根本不敢提明朝,明朝的海军当时是天下第一的,只是中国人一直都没有殖民的想法。要不只靠郑和带领的舰队轻轻松松就可以拿下整个欧洲,欧洲人在一百年后建造的战舰还不到明朝战舰的十分之一大。这个排行榜有点无聊,他们只是按打下对方地盘来计算,中国人如果不是别人惹我们,我们很少主动去打别人。如果中国人当年就有争夺地盘的想法,保守的估计整个亚洲都是中国人的。中国人一般是把惹到自己的敌人打跑就可以,如果得罪中国太深那就是灭族亡种。匈奴人和突厥人当年的确是强大,但是他们现在还有传承吗?如果说土耳其和匈牙利是他们的传承,那么他们为什么跑到不西亚和东欧?他们的领土原来不是中国的北方吗?既然他们承认匈奴人和突厥人强大,那打败他们别把他们赶到遥远西方的人不是更强大嘛。蒙古人在别的地方统治几百年,但是在中国只统治了几十年,就把打回草原深处,连他们的领土都丢掉了很大一部分,连还不能证明明朝的强大,西方人脑袋不知道怎么长的。

  8. 很多人的评论,很无聊.拿一方强和一方弱比较有何意义?或者拿欧洲的文化作为评价亚洲的标准,多可笑?
    一个真正的军事大国,不是打了几次胜仗这么简单.因为打仗的因素很多,甚至胜负只是将领的高低,而非军队本身.
    我觉得,由于历史时代不同,要互相评价,其实非常简单.那就是,哪个帝国的军队征服过更多的土地,这才是可以衡量的一个标准.起码,我们可以有一个标准.
    从本文我能看出,西方是多么不愿意承认亚洲的成就.哪怕,他们不得不承认,亚洲曾经有过什么什么,之后都会加个但是……
    这样的傲慢,正是我们追赶的好机会.

  9. 我就知道10年后我们最强大,他爱说什么说什么,反正我就是那么认为的。认不认同那是他的事情。

    至于农耕与游牧,应该还是农耕强。游牧经济太不未定,农耕每年都有收成,而且还有城郭可依托防守。中国历史上应该是为了降低战争损失以及对农民的损失,所以通常无为之治30年,然后憋出一波骑兵和大队步兵,把主力派出去一举和敌人决战,通常能赢。不过,上面有些人说的也对,就是等了30年,到那时候游牧部落的锐气也过了。

    不过,反正我就知道匈奴和突厥今天都滚到欧洲那头去了,而且土耳其和匈牙利,还有那个没滚也没被吞并的蒙古,都跟垃圾国家没多大区别。

    活在历史里不健康,什么时候,匈牙利,土耳其特别是蒙古,能够实现现代化呢?我的大汗? 哈哈,你们等死吧。

  10. 始终,已知世界是以西方观点来确立的。唐朝输给阿拉伯世界一次,就变成弱旅了。那美军败在越南,算什么?美军就不是世界第一了?

    • 没事,西方狗与西方人都喜欢这样。拿自己最强的地方,对比亚洲最弱小的地方。上面的是拿西方最强盛的军队与中国最弱小的时候比的。中国历史上每一个朝代最强盛的时候都是世界最强的。包括中华人民共和国,君不见朝鲜战争美国加上其它16个国家联合大军,还不是被新生中国的军队打个平手。如果这都不算最强大的话,我想一下,看来最强大的还没产生。西方狗与西方人就喜欢YY自己最强,总是选择性地把别人最强的忘记了。太好了,终于不是我们威胁论了、

    • 冷兵器时代最强大的就是那些北方的草原民族,整个欧亚大陆几乎所有的国家都有被蹂躏欺负的历史,这一点必须要承认。但是中国与他们交战时间最长,且有不少时候还占上峰。文明从来没有被他们摧毁过,不像有些国家,只有通过基因科学来寻找自己的祖先。蒙古帝国是强大,但是第二代可汗在进攻中原的时候被毙掉了,第三代忽必烈以能够统治中原为荣,武力虽强,但也只维持了一百年就被赶老家了。满人用武力征服了汉人,汉人用文化征服满人。

  11. 以免大家自尊心受挫.我来开导一下大家吧.

    中国古代的基本国策基本是扩张.但是教科书上不能说自己侵略别人.加上为了加强爱国教育.中国的教育很注重讲防守.讲屈辱.也从来不讲古中国做的坏事.其实据我所知汉隋唐都对朝鲜人屠过城.其实古中国对周边很多民族都大量屠杀过.就像这个帖子里的蒙古人对于中国的污蔑.实际上是很普通的蒙古人仇视汉人的思维.汉人的明朝举国之力对蒙古不停进行战争和屠杀.胜多输少.满人的清朝对蒙古人实行减丁政策.所以曾经强大的蒙古人现在这个样子.

    为什么中国这么强大为什么不侵略别人?我想这是很多人的疑问.其实中国侵略了太多人…汉人几乎打下了已知世界的所有土地.东边和南边打到了海边.北边打到了所有能够种植的地区.汉人对草原没有兴趣.因为是农耕民族.比较特别的是西边.西边和中原交通不方便.而且离首都太远.又荒凉.汉人也没兴趣.唐朝打到了西边也没迁移汉人过去.直接用当地人管理当地人.再加强对中亚其他国家的影响.

    • 关于这贴的中国人说中国人的血统问题.这是无知.他说的大概是晋朝后的五胡乱华.实际上真正融入汉人的只有少量的鲜卑人.他们进入中原后.对手还有其他胡人.很多胡人都在这个时候被其他的胡人灭族了.当然汉人也做了一些.这个时候被改变得最多的是合餐制和服装.这也是文明走向落后的一个典型例子.强烈建议大家别合餐制了.吃别人口水不卫生.同样也有好多的.桌子 凳子等传入中国.

    • 很赞同。
      古代中国真的是把视野之内所有的好地方都占光了。剩下的地方根本入不了眼,根本不想去占领侵略。

      西方穷强盗们的眼中到处都是富得流油,自然要去抢劫侵略。

  12. 几点看法
    一、真正的关公战秦琼——这个排行榜很无聊。
    二、上述老外们的评论,显得对中国古代历史比较熟悉,很好奇他们是否生活在国外的华人或华裔。
    三、不管怎样,从评论可以看出,一旦涉及自己认为正确的时候,各人也都很激动。立场比较坚定啊。这点和我们,及印度人没有太大差别。但是很奇怪我们为什么就要发明“愤青”等名词来羞辱人呢?完全没有必要。

  13. 我不认同这个排名,欧洲面积有多大?人口多少?即使巅峰时期的罗马也不济汉唐时期的中国面积、人口多!中国随便一个统一王朝的军队都应该是同时期最强大的!

  14. 我和各位的角度有点不一样。
    时间已经到了2012年,历史,有时候,真的无法证实。
    但是,我惊诧于,那么些外国人,竟然比我懂的更多的中国历史。
    这样,足以。

  15. 各个时期都会有相对比较强的军队,这个贴子相对比较客观的总结了世界上的十支军队,只是少了一支中国的军队哈,如果没有强大的中国军队,中国还处在中原之国,国土不会那么大,而且还稳定了几千年啊—-。

  16. 典型的西方中心论!
    匈奴和突厥列入最强大为何被汉朝和唐朝赶到欧洲和西亚?这是什么逻辑!
    德国和美国也列入最强大,为何德国战败,美国对中国朝鲜战争(对中苏)都平手?二战前后是群雄角力,并没有哪个国家有对世界各国拥有绝对优势,德国和美国对其他国家是没有压倒性优势的,如果有他们现在就统治全球了。
    要说世界性影响而且是对全球压倒性优势,也就蒙古帝国和大英帝国算得上。其他远古一点的诸如罗马和汉朝之类的,是很强大,但是是没有接触的并行世界,根本就没有可比性。难道你能说阿拉伯那个时代比唐朝强大吗?要怎么比较?
    这篇文章基本归为yy文章,评论也都是渣,一点客观性也没有。

  17. 连俄罗斯哥萨克和奥斯曼以及拿破仑都入选了。把世界偏安一偶发生的时期夸张成世界性的。这些势力统治的区域太多大?
    只有到13世纪蒙古时代和15世纪西欧航海时代世界主要地区接触才产生交汇,在此之前,世界主要文明的历史是平行发展的,不同地区之间由于地理较远,没有深入接触,很难做深入比较。什么罗马第一,阿拉伯第二,要怎么比较呢?在中国境内类似他们一样庞大的帝国还不止一个两个,又没直接大规模交战。除了yy外,还真看不出有什么可靠的依据做客观比较。

  18. 他们的理论就是一和亲军队就弱了,看来西方人是没有体恤百姓的想法,一打仗就要把别人打趴下。

  19. 很奇特的是pla居然没被算进去,要说二战时德国对抗世界军队时,起码还有三大轴心国,而且最后还是败了。pla呢,那可是带着个半残的北棒子对抗整个联合国军团啊,如果放在西方人眼里,这场将已经深入北棒子核心地带就快到达鸭绿江的联合国军赶回三八线的战役,就算不成功,那也起码是个平手吗,这么说来,pla上榜应该是理所当然啊。

  20. 猫捉老鼠游戏是一个伟大的策略。俄罗斯人通过这个游戏打败了拿破仑的法军和希特勒的德军,没有人可以否认这个。

    中国向匈奴、突厥、吐蕃、契丹、女真和蒙古等国家进贡与和亲了数百年。在唐朝巅峰时期,3位皇帝被女真人和蒙古人俘虏。唐朝军队主力被契丹人、吐蕃人和阿拉伯人轻易打败。匈奴没有被汉朝打败,而是被自然灾害、政治斗争和鲜卑人打败的…

    我尊重你的看法,但我不同意中国是罗马帝国衰落之后的世界最强大国家…

    ________________________________________________

    这个评论雄辩的证明了某些国家出于一己私利,胡编乱造各色历史已经成为顽疾、痼疾。是欧亚大陆最主要的不稳定因素。

    这除了使用大炮和来纠正以外,我看不出有其他解决方案

  21. 可笑呵,唐朝皇帝被俘?我怎么不知道?被阿拉伯打败,是事实,但唐军虽败犹荣。。可笑的外国人,请你多看看中国历史,别弯扭了历史

  22. 可笑的外国人,我国巅峰时的领土达到1100万多。。这是唐朝的领土面积,哼,外国人,别忘了你们的国家曾被属于中华帝国的大元帝国征服过,不熟悉我国历史就别乱说话。

  23. 这些人都是书呆子!他们忘记我们中国有限的士兵防御广大面积的土地!兵力分散,环境恶劣!老是给移动高速的骑兵打游击战!不是没有能力去征服其他国家,而是征服了这些国家没有多少价值可以得到,而且要天天镇压这些生性刚烈的游牧民族,这样耗损是没有必要去征服他们的!古代中国不是单单和一个地方战斗的!南下越南缅甸那些野蛮人,东北的俄罗斯人还有沿海小日本倭寇!分散了历代军队的主力。估计在所有最鼎盛的军队没有一只军队能击败鼎盛中国军!装备和战术战略运用士兵的受训程度唐军都是名列前茅!

      • 话说回来只要我们中国周才聚集这最多的国家和陆地防线~这些国家全部都是比较强悍的!现在更是俄罗斯日本美国中国世界军力前四名都在第一海岸岛链对峙着!再看看印度多么幸福的天然屏障保护着他们啊!没有喜马拉雅的话印度早给我们虐成渣渣了!就像古代韩国俄罗斯欺负她~~~中国欺负她,日本欺负她,连路过的美军也打了朝韩战争欺负她。

  24. 你错了!就是那些人想过稳定的生活才天天想着攻打中国!同时也历练着中国军队!放眼过去他们打了几千年的战争还是骑马和那冷兵器!中国军队就装备的研发就甩他们N条街!打这些平原回来耕田?几千万人霸占上千万平方公里!接近几个人每平方公里~~~换士兵的话更少!中国军一般都是城池阵地战摆阵迂回包抄等战略~~部像游牧军队~~·打了冲输了调头跑~~两条直线进攻撤退!他们没有城池阵地~~可以高速移动部队~~我们不行啊丢了百姓自己去打?

  25. 中国人骨子里的侵略性很低。不是万不得已一般不会去可以的侵略扩张,儒家思想中国人心理的代表。再有版图大管理难,内斗。导致西方人总觉得古中国不如他们。这里尤其是汉人,受到当时很好的教育思想是不同的。 少数名族的几个时期侵略性是最大的。汉人统治时期不是迫不得已防患于未然一般是不会侵略

  26. 完全不是同等级的,大家这样想~如果加入华夏这个排名西方可以占几个位子?连纸都没有老百姓连读书都没有资格,这种国家军队很强我也不相信。经济、文化、科技本来都是一体的,它们偏偏要分开来讲,这就是中国5千年不倒的原因。

  27. 我认为冷兵器时代,中国人最强!第一啊,中国从秦统一之后,应该说地盘一直就很大,人口众多,自从秦朝之后,哪个朝代不是随随便便能拿出个百万大军,前提是补给中国人能跟上,能超越这个规模的国家有,但是很少,而且只出现在某个君王时期,而中国起码持续了千年以上,这是最大的一个优势,从秦开始,不轮拿那个国家的同时期的部队来,一般也就几十万,全国兵力也就50万最多,都是妇女小孩种田,一路上胜利了还好,失败了,连翻本的机会都没了,从此衰落,中国的部队赔的起!第二,中国的军队强在,兵众多,阵法多,名将多,器械多!中国人吃糠和菜为主,农耕的社会,注定了体制上没有吃肉的游牧民族强,这点我承认,单这并不表示中国的军队弱,这是优点也是缺点,优点是你来什么样的军队,我都可以和你打,不利的是机动性差,这也是修长城的原因,2条腿的哪跑的过4条腿的。游牧民族骑着马就能走,中国人不能抗着庄家走啊!如果有想卫青,霍去病这样的名将出来,中国军队就厉害了,但是遇到弱智将领就完了,不过我想,那个时期的任何国家军队都一样,军队的指挥官的能力,也是部队厉害不厉害的标准,就想蒙古铁骑也不是一直强大的一样,没有成吉思汗,北元不照样给徐达赶出了大都,跑回老家。

  28. 我看政府还是不要拆墙了,不然中国喷子会让别人对我们的看法更加的差劲,一直说汉族不是纯种有什么意义么?纯种就一定比杂交有优势么?现在世界上纯种的名族还存在么?就是要把现在“***”称为汉族你管的着么?我看就是混血基因突变产生的喷子这种“劣等名族”

  29. 秦人军功授爵,比蛮族打起来还凶残。
    汉人有专门的大规模轻骑部队,可不是半牧民半战士的游牧可比。
    唐人近战有陌刀,远战有各种弩,近乎无敌。
    宋人靠步兵和骑兵打了四百年,而且海军无敌。
    明人早期把蒙元打成游牧,五征草原,海军数量世界第一。