Are we about to repeat WWI?

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Prior to WWI, the nations of Europe, expecting war, had begun to accumulate arms. The militarization continued unabated until the deadly conflict finally erupted,sparked by a simple assassination, unleashing all the power thus far accumulated.

I found this on the internet today:



(1991 figures are unavailable.)

If this chart is correct, world military spending today is again experiencing an increase. The purpose of militarization is to prepare for war. Once a region, or the planet, is fuly militarized, there can only be three possibilities:

1. Continued militarization, economic stagnaion, growing fear, paranoia and distrust further fed by rising taxes, debt, or inflation, and possibly an unstable cold war maintained by proxy wars.

2. Controlled and gradual demilitarization through international treaties, alliances, and negotiations.

3. All-out war.

If this chart is indeed correct, then it would seem that we're soon going to find ourselves in one of the positions above. Personally, I'd hope we can start demilitarizing before WWI repeats itself.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Canada's military spending is USD 16,061,762,400 (1.1% of GDP) in 2005, according to this:

List of countries by military expenditures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In comparison, the UK's is USD 63,479,100,000 (2.4% of GDP) (2009), France's is USD 68,135,700,000 (2.6% of GDP)(2005) (though France includes the national police budget in its calculation), and the USA USD 651,163,000,000 (4.06% of GDP) (2005).

To compare with a famous neutral country, Sweden spent USD 6,309,137,714 (2007), or 1.5% of GDP. Switzerland, USD 2,548,000,000, or 1% of GDP (2005).

As a percentage of GDP, it would seem Canada's spending is quite reasonable. How do we convince other countries to reduce their military spending though?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
One possibility I could think of would be to propose the formation of an international force. This way, all nations could contribute to it, and knowing that that force would defend any country whose rights are violated, they may not feel as much of a need to spend so much on their militaries anymore.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Perhaps to be fair, we could adopt the 'Japan' standard. In Japan, they're only allowed to spend 1% of their GDP on the military, and they're a member of SEATO, the South East Asian equivalent of NATO. So why not us.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
In Japan, in 2007, the defence budget was USD 43,600,000,000, or 0,8% of GDP in 2006.

How is it that one member of NATO/SEATO can spend so little while another must spend so much. Should we not have a common standard for all, and reduce Canada's to the same % GDP?
 

wulfie68

Council Member
Mar 29, 2009
2,014
24
38
Calgary, AB
Well considering your first figure shows the global figure at about 1988 levels, I don't think you need to hit the panic button just yet. I'll agree that the 50% increase in global military spending in the last 10 years is a little worrying but when you put into perspective I don't see it as quite so alarming. NATO and other developed nations have been engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the actual deployment of troops and expenditure of resources in a deployment is a lot more expensive than "garrison" duty and training at home. We can argue about but the "legitimacy" of both of those actions but it really doesn't affect the fact that it costs more to have troops out of country than at home. The other thing is that with all the numbers on the first figure being in 2005 dollars, it doesn't account for inflation: $1 in 2005 bought less than $1 in 1988.

Japan may not be the best example to use either as some of their restrictions were put in place after WW2 because of their aggression prior to and during the war.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Or we coud look at it in terms of active troops:

File:Map of countries by number of active troops.PNG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If, let's say, we should consider any number up to 100,000 active troops to be reasonable, then Canada would be well within that limit, at 65,000 troops. The US in comparison would go way too far, at 1,252,000,000 troops. UK, 195,000, and France 225,000.

What would be a way to encourage these other states to reduce their number of troops at least somewhat?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Well considering your first figure shows the global figure at about 1988 levels, I don't think you need to hit the panic button just yet. I'll agree that the 50% increase in global military spending in the last 10 years is a little worrying but when you put into perspective I don't see it as quite so alarming. NATO and other developed nations have been engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the actual deployment of troops and expenditure of resources in a deployment is a lot more expensive than "garrison" duty and training at home. We can argue about but the "legitimacy" of both of those actions but it really doesn't affect the fact that it costs more to have troops out of country than at home. The other thing is that with all the numbers on the first figure being in 2005 dollars, it doesn't account for inflation: $1 in 2005 bought less than $1 in 1988.

Japan may not be the best example to use either as some of their restrictions were put in place after WW2 because of their aggression prior to and during the war.

But can we be sure that the spending willdecline after the war? You may be right. With the US debt growing exponentially, the military budget might shrink substantially.

When we look at it in terms of number of troops, however, I think we'd need at least 100,000 troops before other countries would really start panicking about us. Canada has only about 65,000 troops, well within 'provocative' limits. So I sppose we needn't worry about Canada unduly provoking an arms race abroad. I guess the main concern is with other countries that do have enough active troops to provoke such an arms race, such as the US, the UK, France, etc.
 

Nuggler

kind and gentle
Feb 27, 2006
11,596
140
63
Backwater, Ontario.

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Canada's military spending is USD 16,061,762,400 (1.1% of GDP) in 2005, according to this:

List of countries by military expenditures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In comparison, the UK's is USD 63,479,100,000 (2.4% of GDP) (2009), France's is USD 68,135,700,000 (2.6% of GDP)(2005) (though France includes the national police budget in its calculation), and the USA USD 651,163,000,000 (4.06% of GDP) (2005).

To compare with a famous neutral country, Sweden spent USD 6,309,137,714 (2007), or 1.5% of GDP. Switzerland, USD 2,548,000,000, or 1% of GDP (2005).

As a percentage of GDP, it would seem Canada's spending is quite reasonable. How do we convince other countries to reduce their military spending though?
Not sure, but if they'd keep their beaks out of everyone else's business it might help.
 

MrRight

Nominee Member
Jun 23, 2009
53
1
8
Canada yes is spending more, but when you are below on the military rating list, you have no where but up to go, plus i have buddies in the army, and we are the best trained.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
War is the new global economy, here are some of the players just from the USA everyone of them wants the wars they've paid for.

I pulled up all of the reports for first quarter 2009 but over 20,000 items came up (and the report only shows the first 3000). OK, try again - all reports for over $1 million for first quarter 2009. This time a little over 100 came up (including AIG, who spent $1,250,000 on lobbying during that period).

By Jill Richardson


June 23, 2009 "
La Vida Locavore"Health Care, Health Insurance, & Pharma
3. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America: $6,910,000
6. Pfizer, Inc: $6,140,000
12. American Medical Association: $4,240,000
18. American Hospital Association: $3,580,000
19. Eli Lilly and Company: $3,440,000
37. America's Health Insurance Plans, Inc: $2,030,000
39. CVS Caremark Inc: $2,005,000
47. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association: $1,800,000
49. GlaxoSmithKline: $1,780,000
63. Merck & Co: $1,500,000
65. United Health Group, Inc: $1,500,000
69. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. Inc: $1,460,000
76. Novartis: $1,347,134
87. Abbott Laboratories: $1,260,000
89. Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP: $1,250,000
92. Medtronic, Inc: $1,238,000

Oil
2. Exxon Mobil: $9,320,000
4. Chevron U.S.A. Inc: $6,800,000
7. Conoco Phillips: $5,980,935
16. BP America, Inc: $3,610,000
20. Marathon Oil Corporation: $3,380,000
45. American Petroleum Institute: $1,810,000

Defense
5. Lockheed Martin Corporation: $6,380,000
11. General Electric Company: $4,540,000
28. Northrop Grumman Corporation: $2,570,000
30. Boeing Company: $2,410,00
51. Honeywell International: $1,760,000
73. Raytheon Company: $1,360,000

Telecoms
10. AT&T Services, Inc: $5,134,873
14. Verizon (excluding Verizon Wireless): $3,760,000
21. National Cable and Telecommunications Association: $3,370,000
23. Comcast Corporation: $2,760,000
68. Motorola, Inc: $1,470,000

Automotive
22. General Motors: $2,800,000
27. United Services Automobile Association: $2,590,244
52. Ford Motor Company: $1,750,000
84. Toyota Motor North America: $1,290,000
86. Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers: $1,264,400

Financial
32. Financial Services Roundtable: $2,260,000
33. Prudential Financial, Inc: $2,180,000
41. American Bankers Association: $1,890,000
61. Visa, Inc: $1,540,000
74. Investment Company Institute: $1,359,917
75. Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: $1,350,000
82. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.: $1,310,000
90. Citigroup Management Corp: $1,250,000
90. Credit Union National Association: $1,250,000

Biotech
36. Monsanto: $2,094,000
40. Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO): $1,920,000
44. Bayer Corporation: $1,843,672

Railroads
24. Association of American Railroads: $2,759,545
54. Union Pacific Corporation: $1,717,108
71. BNSF Railway: $1,400,000

Life Insurance
42. American Council of Life Insurers: $1,867,075
44. New York Life Insurance Company: $1,840,000
64. State Farm Insurance: $1,500,000
93. The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company: $1,237,000

Other
1. Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A.: $9,996,000
8. National Association of Realtors: $5,727,000
9. U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform: $5,480,000
13. AARP: $4,090,000
15. Southern Company: $3,650,000
17. Altria Client Services Inc: $3,580,000
25. Amgen, Inc: $2,750,000
26. National Association of Broadcasters: $2,600,000
29. Edison Electric Institute: $2,550,000
31. Fedex Corporation: $2,370,000
34. Textron, Inc.: $2,140,000
35. General Dynamics Corp: $2,101,945
38. International Business Machines (IBM): $2,030,000
43. United Technologies Corporation: $1,860,000
46. Recording Industry Association of America: $1,810,000
48. CTIA-The Wireless Association: $1,790,000
50. Time Warner Inc. $1,780,000
53. The Dow Chemical Company: $1,735,000
55. American Electric Power Company: $1,716,913
56. Microsoft Corporation: $1,650,000
57. Qualcomm, Incorporated: $1,620,000
58. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc: $1,600,000
59. L-3 Communications: $1,580,000
60. Exelon Business Services, LLC: $1,540,000
62. Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc: $1,530,000
66. Norfolk Southern Corporation: $1,485,026
67. Koch Companies Public Sector LLC: $1,480,000
70. American Airlines: $1,450,000
72. Oracle Corporation: $1,390,000
77. Air Transport Association of America, Inc.: $1,340,000
78. Disney Worldwide Services, Inc.: $1,330,000
79. Sepracor, Inc: $1,324,157
80. National Association of Home Builders: $1,320,000
81. UPS: $1,316,426
83. Siemens Corporation: $1,300,000
85. Duke Energy Corporation: $1,282,770
94. Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S., Inc: $1,230,000
95. Business Roundtable: $1,220,000
96. Wellpoint, Inc: $1,220,000
97. American Wind Energy Association: $1,212,504
98. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: $1,206,427
99. National Rural Electric Cooperative Association: $1,200,000
99. CBS Corporation: $1,200,000
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Prior to WWI, the nations of Europe, expecting war, had begun to accumulate arms. The militarization continued unabated until the deadly conflict finally erupted,sparked by a simple assassination, unleashing all the power thus far accumulated.

I found this on the internet today:



(1991 figures are unavailable.)

If this chart is correct, world military spending today is again experiencing an increase. The purpose of militarization is to prepare for war. Once a region, or the planet, is fuly militarized, there can only be three possibilities:

1. Continued militarization, economic stagnaion, growing fear, paranoia and distrust further fed by rising taxes, debt, or inflation, and possibly an unstable cold war maintained by proxy wars.

2. Controlled and gradual demilitarization through international treaties, alliances, and negotiations.

3. All-out war.

If this chart is indeed correct, then it would seem that we're soon going to find ourselves in one of the positions above. Personally, I'd hope we can start demilitarizing before WWI repeats itself.

Logic dictates #3, without global war to the end, the present ruling hierarchy cannot sustain it's privilage. I hope we can start disarming too, but that is impossible without the political will of the people who have none. Would you support a war to end all wars?
It's not correct to think of War as a series of separated events in the modern age, it can easily be shown to be a continuation of unbroken preparations and executions all designed to consolodate the power and position of that hierarchy. It's main function is to burn and bleed off the power of labour in the most counterproductive manner possible.
 
Last edited:

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
35
48
Toronto
Canada has to build up their military by upgrading their out of date hardware.

If Canada were invaded from the north or the south it would be over in days.

The Conservative party promised that it will modernize this county's military and we find out that this is another broken promise.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
We don't need a military. Nobody will invade with the US next door and they won't invade because they already own us.