Should the US reduce its military spending as a percentage of tis GDP to reflect the norms in other developed countries, or should other developed countries increase their military spending to match US military spending?
Which way should military spending go?
- Thread starter Machjo
- Start date
It is my understanding that 80% of the US economy is based on military spending. If they stopped starting wars all over the world, their economy would collapse in a heart beat. Any country that followed the US in spending would hemorrhage their economy.
Military budget of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 2005 U.S. military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined [5] and is over eight times larger than the official military budget of China. (Note that this comparison is done in nominal value US dollars and thus is adjusted for purchasing power parity.) The United States and its close allies are responsible for about two-thirds of the world's military spending (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for the majority). In 2007, US military spending was above 1/4 of combined industrial and agricultural production in the USA.
Military discretionary spending accounts for more than half of the U.S. federal discretionary spending, which is all of the U.S. federal government budget that is not appropriated for mandatory spending.[6]
In 2003, the United States spent about 47% of the world's total military spending of US$910.6 billion, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
United States armed forces - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As of July 31, 2008 about 1,436,642 people are on active duty[2] in the military with an additional 848,056 people in the seven reserve components.[9] It is an all volunteer military, however, conscription can be enacted by the request of the President and the approval of Congress. The United States military is the second largest in the world, after the People’s Liberation Army of China, and has troops deployed around the globe.
The US doesn't need an alliance. It's maintainng a strong enough military force to invade Mars on its own for crying out loud!
I alwasy thought the purpose of an alliance was so that countries can share their military resources precisely so that they not need to bankrupt themselves. This is incradible. The US has 1,436,642 people on active duty alone. This is rediculous. And then they want other NATO countries to match it. We're not that mad.
The 2005 U.S. military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined [5] and is over eight times larger than the official military budget of China. (Note that this comparison is done in nominal value US dollars and thus is adjusted for purchasing power parity.) The United States and its close allies are responsible for about two-thirds of the world's military spending (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for the majority). In 2007, US military spending was above 1/4 of combined industrial and agricultural production in the USA.
Military discretionary spending accounts for more than half of the U.S. federal discretionary spending, which is all of the U.S. federal government budget that is not appropriated for mandatory spending.[6]
In 2003, the United States spent about 47% of the world's total military spending of US$910.6 billion, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
United States armed forces - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As of July 31, 2008 about 1,436,642 people are on active duty[2] in the military with an additional 848,056 people in the seven reserve components.[9] It is an all volunteer military, however, conscription can be enacted by the request of the President and the approval of Congress. The United States military is the second largest in the world, after the People’s Liberation Army of China, and has troops deployed around the globe.
The US doesn't need an alliance. It's maintainng a strong enough military force to invade Mars on its own for crying out loud!
I alwasy thought the purpose of an alliance was so that countries can share their military resources precisely so that they not need to bankrupt themselves. This is incradible. The US has 1,436,642 people on active duty alone. This is rediculous. And then they want other NATO countries to match it. We're not that mad.
Oh, but the US is not interested in world domination. They are just fighting for freedom and democracy! What a lode of crap. There is only one reason to maintain such a military and spend that kind of money.
If other countries increase their military spending then neighboring would get suspicious and increase their spending for defense.
A good example of this is if Canada increased their spending to GDP to the percentage that America does then America would get real nervous especially if Canada started use nuclear weapons in their arsenal.
America is a paranoid country when it comes to defense as long as they have the biggest arsenal they are happy.
Clinton tried to reduce the military when he was in power and eventually he almost got impeached.
If China and Russia started arming more vigorously the threat of war would be real.
The best thing to do is leave it status quo.
A good example of this is if Canada increased their spending to GDP to the percentage that America does then America would get real nervous especially if Canada started use nuclear weapons in their arsenal.
America is a paranoid country when it comes to defense as long as they have the biggest arsenal they are happy.
Clinton tried to reduce the military when he was in power and eventually he almost got impeached.
If China and Russia started arming more vigorously the threat of war would be real.
The best thing to do is leave it status quo.
The US spends 4.04% of its GDP on defence.
The country with the world's highest military expenditure as a percentage of GDP is Oman. It spends 11.4% of its GDP on defence.
Iraq is 4th, the US is 28th, Britain is 70th, Germany is 110th and Canada is 132nd.
But Blackleaf, it's not just percentage of GDP. Look at the number of personnel on active duty in the US military: 1,436,642! That's just ridiculous.The US has friendly relations with Canada to its north and Mexico to its south, and oeans on either side of it, for crying out loud. Add to that that the US is a member of a number of alliances, including NATO, NORAD, SEATO, and ANZUS. A maximum 100,000 well trained and equipped men would be more than enough for the US to defend its borders under such circumstances if it wasn't so involved in illegal wars all the time.
Sorry, Blackleaf. If you're quoting Cliffy, you're right. It's not a major percentage of the US budget, but still way too much.