Now vs then comparison edit (British army)

[lavamc]

Well of course it's going to be much higher. We had an empire to maintain back then and its ww2 so we were mobilised and producing much more military equipment than normal

[MrpurpleA]

Imagine if the British Army had all that stuff and it was Modern

[General_MacArthur]

"We Shall Never Surrender."

-Winston Churchill

[Byson]

by far, in the 40's the british controlled the sea, air and land. They were unstoppable. Even without vehicles to transport them, they made the largest empire known to man of a quarter of the globe.

[normalpeople]

Bro just make the whole of British army lagging

[gkammy]

our military spending has decreased pretty much by a LOT since ww2

Because of our size and our population, Britain could mobilise pretty quickly but as of now, our army is mainly more of an “intervention/defence” army rather than an army used to go invade other countries

[NEXY_Lau]

Wtf our army was massive back then !!!

[RyanLovesHK]

Other countries: Money debt
UK: Im in Military debt💀

[RomanTorchwickRWBY]

It’s crazy how fast things can escalate. In WW1, iirc, the British Army was less than 300, 000 active personnel, and then went on to grow into roughly 4 million. And that was just the army.

In WW2, it’s roughly the same, with a couple hundred thousand Territorials, and then a peak British Army size of 2.9 million. Once again, that is just the army, not counting the Navy, RM by extension, or the Royal Airforce.

Nowadays, the entire British Armed Forces in general has about 170, 000 active personnel. Some would see this as a massive downgrade from how how it used to be, but if total war production had to be put back into effect, the GDP was funnelled into the Ministry of Defence, and policies changed…

I couldn’t even image how enormous it would be. Wouldn’t be impossible for it to reach just under 10 million, if times were really desperate.

[savagesauce]

Still got the best quality soldiers and best special forces

[ThePalaeontologist]

Those numbers are inaccurate in all regards. The British Imperial military numbers were even bigger than that. There were 1, 000, 000 men in the Royal Navy alone. The Royal Navy had more Destroyers than the figure given implies. There were genuinely thousands of hulls of many types and classes of warships.

Many were small but often had important duties. Britain had more 8 times more Destroyers patrolling the Thames Estuary alone than Germany had Destroyers full-stop. That disparity got considerably more serious after the Second Battle of Narvik, when the British basically wiped out the German Destroyer fleet. HMS _Warspite_ was on the prowl.

Britain out-built Nazi Germany 11 to 1 on shipbuilding, 5 to 1 on tanks and 3 to 1 on advanced fighter and bomber aircraft. They were out-building Germany on munitions by a drastic level as well. The UK is probably the most underrated faction in WWII because of pervasive Anglophobia which has continued for nearly a century. The perception of Britain in WWII is, for questionable reasons, often limited to Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain and D-Day. It was vastly more complicated than that.

Britain had a very large army and expeditionary capability. The Royal Marines back then were 60, 000 strong. Now, there are more like 7, 750-8, 000. There were entire units that basically don't exist anymore, like the more expansive branches of the paratroopers. The UK still has an elite fighting force and vanguard assault unit called the Paras (aka the Royal Parachute Regiment) and of course we still have the SAS.

However, the UK used to have a dedicated glider force for a large number of paratrooper infantry, that became obsolete with the growing role of helicopters and the changing tactics. This meant that you'd never again see the vast scale of paratrooper drops seen in WWII and the immediate decade or so after it, but the UK could still deploy a lot of very skilled and incredibly well-trained SAS and Paras.

The Paras are the first into battle and are an elite fighting force, causing mayhem behind enemy lines and being a complete nightmare to anyone unlucky enough to go up against them. And the SAS is even more deadly. The British had a massive number of soldiers, Home Guard militia and other units, but with the UK's aerial and naval capabilities, were already going to be a tall order to get past.

The UK military now has never been more technologically advanced, with the state of the art kinds of things you'd expect from a modern military. But now we no longer have a Tier 1 Blue Water Navy (we have a Tier 2 Blue Water Navy, like France) In WWII, the Allies counted two united Tier 1 BWN's (Britain and the USA) There had never been, and likely never will be, a greater united show of naval might. Little wonder the Axis lost. Combined, over 7 (maybe even over 8) million tonnes of ships between them. Thousands of warships. Still, the RN suffered through 1939-1945, not joining in 1941.

The Royal Navy went into WWII as still the largest in the world, as it had been, since the 1730's. Of course, by 1943/1944 the USA had begun to overtake the RN but it is still impressive how massive the RN was by 1945. Absolutely enormous. These figures do not do it justice. Britain had a massive military industry. We were spending over 50% GDP on Defence. It left a lasting legacy of war debts, but it shows how far Britain was willing to go for victory.

The British Army today hasn't been the size it has become now, since the 1770's. It is a very different world now, of course. Any 1, 000 British soldiers would probably be able to defeat any 1, 000 soldiers from basically anywhere. I'd feel safer guarded by 1, 000 British soldiers than basically anyone else. Imagine 1, 000 Royal Marines guarding an installation or defence sector, and you in the middle of it. I'd feel pretty safe.

British soldiers are absolutely not the same by training as they were in WWII. It's gone to a completely different level. British Army unit regulars are at a baseline, superbly well-trained and usually very well-equipped. It's just a shame successive governments have constantly let them down with certain types of equipment in more modern conflicts. These have been controversial blunders, politically.

However, what is clear, is that given proper logistical support and ample equipment, the British will be a complete nightmare to go up against in modern combat. This isn't a Hollywood film where British troops behave like Imperial Stormtroopers in Star Wars. They are going to cut entire enemy formations to pieces in head on clashes. 1, 000 British soldiers would probably send 1, 000 other soldiers from most countries/if not all running. Of course, the problem is, some countries have a lot more than a 1:1 numerical advantage over Britain, But I still think 21st century British military formations could put up one hell of a fight against steep numerical odds.

For example, imagine a British armoured regiment digging into an Eastern European forest in the Winter, or on a Pacific Island in the jungle and on the sands. They'd use their Challenger II's/Challenger III's in future to dramatic effect, causing massive losses to any opponent they may face. Imagine a battalion or two of Royal Marines fighting like mad from fortified positions. As long as they were in a viable defensive position, it'd be one hell of an ordeal for anyone to dislodge them from those fortifications. They'd be ratio'ing all kinds of opponents able to be compared to them, really hard.

[jacksie_edits]

As a Brit it’s nice to know who strong we were

[MRMorerandom]

It just shows you how fast they can mobilise and go to war. In that perspective the UK is the most organised country. In 1939 they only had 120, 000 personnel and they ended up with 3 million. If this were to happen today it would be crazy.

[Imperialbricksstudios]

During World War I, the British Royal Navy was the largest and most powerful navy in the world. It played a critical role in controlling the seas and ensuring the flow of supplies and troops to the British Isles and its allies. The Royal Navy had a vast fleet of ships, including battleships, cruisers, destroyers, submarines, and other vessels.

At the outbreak of World War I, the Royal Navy had around 450 warships, including:

- Dreadnought battleships
- Battlecruisers
- Cruisers
- Destroyers
- Submarines
- Other support vessels

Throughout the war, the Royal Navy continued to expand its fleet, building new ships and converting civilian vessels for military use. The naval arms race between Britain and Germany had led to significant advancements in naval technology, and the Royal Navy utilized these advancements to maintain its dominance at sea.

The British Grand Fleet, based at Scapa Flow in Scotland, played a pivotal role in crucial naval engagements such as the Battle of Jutland in 1916. The Royal Navy's control of the seas was vital for securing maritime trade routes, blockading enemy ports, and supporting allied operations around the world.

[slappinharderthanwillsmith]

For anyone wondering the song is Smoke - cowbell cult

[keonecapan]

3 million wow the real legend of British army in WW2❤

[hellhound]

More people in UK are joining the army everyday, quality over quantity

[kw]

The tanks, aircrafts and ships back then were different than modern era. A single F-35 now is worth more than a million spitfires.

[milanmilansoloconte]

In WWI they had 8, 000, 000 active troops

[zachsavage]

Bro dropped the coldest British Army edit ever made and thought I’d scroll right past it.