GarryowenAg said:
Waffledynamics said:
100,000 troops doesn't mean trigger pullers, though, right? They'd need a lot more personnel, if I understand correctly. Layman, here. Feel free to provide feedback.
Correct. They'll have anywhere from 50-60% of that as actually combat troops. Still significant to perform a defense in depth along their border with Belarus/Kaliningrad.
I would be shocked if any NATO army had numbers that high.
The US tooth to tail ratio is the lowest in the world. It was close to 5% in the Cold War. It has risen in recent years partially on the definition of what constitutes combat troops during wars of insurgencies and the fact we now outsource many of our engineering, logistics, maintenance, and service jobs to contractors.
I'm not in the military but I would be shocked if payroll services aren't performed by ADP or Paycor and all the clerks do little more than enter your data into contractor systems. The Marines still have an MOS for bakers but I can't imagine there are very many people enrolled in the cookie and cakes school each year.
The chart below is for the US Army. The Air Force would be far lower, with around 3% being pilots and many of those flying transports.