Entire point is that if you only look at men under arms, the Indian Army should be superior to the Chinese Army. But it's not, so using total personnel is an unfair comparison.
Nowhere did I say that the number of personnel is the main determination of military strength.
You stated that the EU was only an economic power, and that the EU needed to embrace Russia to become a military power.
I gave you some metrics on active personnel and military spending.
This illustrates the point that the EU is already a bigger military power than Russia
For example, the EU has military spending some 4x larger than Russia.
That completely blows away your argument for the EU needing Russia, if the EU wants to be a military power.
I strongly suggest you read up on "EU-Russia alliance". It seems to have been Macron's big idea, and while it's obvious that there are many impediments to such a thing happening, it's not a wholly impossible notion, especially if you're talking in 30 year timescales as I am.
Please have a look at my posts in the Ukraine thread, where I looked at Russia-EU relations extensively.
And I am looking at 30 year timescales in the future when I say Russia will never give up its independence willingly.
Today's Russia is just the latest successor to the USSR and Imperial Russia before it.
That is over 400 years of history where the Russian sense of being a great and huge empire has been embedded into the psyche of its people and culture.
Anyway, back on topic.