Which country has the least successful military history

>one of
Is this bait?

Well they beat italy once and also somalia, there are ,a lot of other countries that have done much worse

Imo its England/Britain

English were always behind the French and the Germans, the Eternal Second

>English
>Behind the Germans
In a naziboo´s wet dreams maybe

Germans

the FrancoPrussian war is their only real victory.

>all these people posting meme answers of european powers who have multiple victories to their name

Come on, at least post something serious, bolivia has literally never won a war, not even their war of independence, the columbians and argentinians liberated their country for them

Also Poland '39, Norway/Denmark/BeNeLux/France '40, etc.

Germany won WW2

All wars against unprepared unmobilized nations, in poland they only won thanks to soviet help and had to resort to terror bombing to get the poles to surrendur, in norway some recruits with exactly one days training and led by a pensioner sank the pride of the german fleet, in the netherlands they again had to use war crimes and bombing or civilians to get the dutch to surrendur, france had no will to fight, the brits adn french also didnt work together properly and the germans got really lucky

Taking everyone around you by surprise is only a victory if you dont subsequently get fucked from all sides and cant hold the conquered territory

...

Likely Poland, albeit they had some minor victories their defeats were always crushing and resulted in the dissolution of the entire country.

who hurt you guys?

Paraguay?

Probably Ireland

panamas another cucked state

Obviously England. It's either against hopelessly backwards cultures or getting rekt and having to rely on France and the US

>rely on France

Ethiopia is actually pretty good by third world standards (low bar when Ukraine and Syria exist, but still). Not just any military could've performed that blitz on Mogadishu.

>samefagging this fucking hard

Who hurt you seamus?

>ITT: English/French hate thread
Stop trying to be contrarians, both were pretty damn nasty.
If you're unironically talking about shit militaries and military victories I'd say:
1. (Sh)Italy
2. Spain (literally lost their navy at the height of their power and never recovered).
3. Austria

Austria did pretty good against the Turks for centuries. Also, they were smart enough to only lose wars which they could afford to lose.

Italy didn't exist for more than 200 years.

>2. Spain (literally lost their navy at the height of their power and never recovered).
You are literally retarded.Spain swept the shit out of England in the first Anglo-Spanish war crushing the English navy and the English army at the end of the war.And later on 40 years later in the second Anglo-Spanish war the Spanish raped England so bad that they surrendered in 2 years while Spain was fighting half of Europe and the Ottomans on its own

what the hell happened in this battle

apparently some ants did fight some other ants. Ant total war if youw ant to put it like that.

English army at its finest.Anyone claiming that Spain is amongst the worst nations militarily is clinically retarded

>clinically retarded
>makes screenshots for ants

Get a shower,grow a chin and get some eyes you massive loser

they rekt somalia even while they were facing off against Eritrea and the Italians had to use poison gas to beat them in the second war which is also admirable

Italy is probably unironically the worst westen power, at least in modern history

When Italy entered WWII (almost a year late) they sent 32 fresh divisions to take on 5 hastily deployed French divisions, and this was while France was slowly collapsing. Outnumbering the exhausted French more than 6:1, with better supplies and better support, they still managed to lose.

Italy.

>pretty much the only country in WW1, not able to gain any considerable victories against Austria Hungary
>9 french soldiers hold off a couple italian divisions when Italy joins WW2, killing hundreds
>Lose against Ethiopia, even when using chemical weapons
>Can't even take Malta, can't even cut off supplies to Malta, even though it's right at their doorstep

and they haven't gotten better in more recent times either:
>Pay off Taliban, so they'll attack allied countries, because fighting them is hard
>Suck so hard at providing security, the Pope is relying on Swiss citizens, even though the Vatican is landlocked in Italy

>Country that existed more than 200 years.
>Italy get mentioned 7 times
Reading comprehension.

Probably Ireland or Estonia, both countries that got bullied and cucked for centuries

>not able to gain any considerable victories against Austria Hungary
Did you forget about the first and second fight of the Piave river or what?
>>Lose against Ethiopia, even when using chemical weapons
Italy didn't use chemical weapons during the first italo-ethiopian war and only sent 10.000 men against 200.000 ethiopians, half of which were given weapons by russians.
>>Suck so hard at providing security, the Pope is relying on Swiss citizens, even though the Vatican is landlocked in Italy
Except that there hasn't been a single terrorist attack in Italy yet and all the possible ones were found out before they could happen.

>led by the french
>french commanders

>destroying a great civilization and plunging Europe into a dark age is something Germans should be proud of

Assuming those are even the same people who live in Modern Germany, I wouldn't go around boasting about helping bring about the downfall of Rome bud. The Romans were shitposters just like all of us on here and I don't see no walls of German shitposting anywhere

>>destroying a great civilization and plunging Europe into a dark age is something Germans should be proud of
uhh.. yeah.. isnt that the point..??

France starting with Frankie Prussian war, before that they were pretty good