|
Kasz216 said: Yeah.... no. The United States isn't planning to conquer Russia and China. That's just silly. |
Speaking about the stupidiest way of twisting this :D Are you denying the fact that military presence in certain regions does matter?
If so, you just in denial.
|
Kasz216 said: That's just because USA GDP is so high. Our military budget is fairly equal with GDP... Actual spending as a percentage of GDP is actually less then you would expect for a "Super Power". Plus weapons make a great export. One of few things the US government makes money on. Plus, having the used outdated weapons of the USA is a pretty strong incentive not to oppose the USA military wise. Could do a lot without the global policing and slim down the amount of equipment a bit, but constant developing of new tech/selling the best old weapons is worth it. |
How exactly % of GDP is a good equivalent of military spending? This's like saying my head is bigger, therefore I'm smarter than you're :D
US weapons export yearly is in range of a few to 10 billions yearly, 20 if counting future deliveries. This's comparable to other major exporters. US military budget is like in order of magnitude bigger, this is where all real money are. But as you'd probably understand no one is allowed there except for domestic manufacturers outside of few minor things.
Main contributors to US military spendings are:
1) The burden of being engaged in two wars silmutaneously plus supporting roles in other conflicts, imagine logistics for all these.
2) The burden of supporting 11 (or is this 10 now?) "90,000 tons of diplomacy" CBGs sailing in the seas (well, there're other maintance costs, but I'd imagine in terms importance and costs it's the biggest contributor).
3) R&Ds and actual product that cost an arm and a leg.
4) Lobbying spendings (in other countries it called corruption), the biggest lobby in the US only behind the finance & banking and oil & energy industries.
