You Must Be Kidding Me? What's Up The The Butt Of The U.s.?

[raybia]

WASHINGTON, May 23 — China's leadership has not satisfactorily explained its military expansion and long-term goals, even as it modernizes and expands its forces to be able to challenge foreign military forces operating in the region, according to a new Pentagon report.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/23/w...&en=437b1492f6e9c433&ei=5094&partner=homepage


Budget for 2004
The military expenditure of the Department of Defense for 2004 was:

Total $437.111 Billion
Operations and maintenance $175.081 Bil.
Military Personnel $113.576 Bil.
Procurement $76.217 Bil.
Research & Development $60.756 Bil.
Military Construction $6.310 Bil.

This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance and production (which is in the Department of Energy budget), or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which are largely funded through extra-budgetary supplements).

The current (2005) United States military budget is larger than the military budgets of the next twenty biggest spenders combined, and six times larger than China's, which places second. The United States and its close allies are responsible for approximately two-thirds of all military spending on Earth (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for two-thirds), and spend 57 times more than the seven so-called "rogue" nations combined (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria). Military spending accounts for more than half of the United States' federal discretionary spending, which is all of the U.S. government's money not spoken for by pre-existing obligations. [1]

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in 2003 the United States spent approximately 47% of the world's total military spending of US$956,000,000,000.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._military_budget




Am I missing something?

 

[TheSumOfGod]

They're spending as if there was no tomorrow. Maybe they know there isn't one.

 

[Addendum]

So much for balancing the budget, but then that line of thought ended in the 90s

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

I don't even care. All I know is that this is the best thread title ever.

 

[blind_fury]

Dude dont question Darth Cheney and Emporer Rove. The Death Star is needed to protect us AND YOU KNOW IT!!!

 

[raybia]

I don't even care. All I know is that this is the best thread title ever.

Sorry about the extra "the". I have a speech impediment.

 

[raybia]

Dude dont question Darth Cheney and Emporer Rove. The Death Star is needed to protect us AND YOU KNOW IT!!!

Well, who is Bush then?

 

[blind_fury]

Well, who is Bush then?

A useless hologram?

 

[raybia]

A useless hologram?

Oh how I wish.

 

[TheSumOfGod]

Bush is Palpatine, pretending to be a dumb puppet (until Order 66 is declared).

 

[blind_fury]

People don't support Bush, they support his supposed ideology.

 

[Ronny Shade]

You said "the" twice in the title.

That's all I have to offer on this topic

 

[War Lord]

WASHINGTON, May 23 — China's leadership has not satisfactorily explained its military expansion and long-term goals, even as it modernizes and expands its forces to be able to challenge foreign military forces operating in the region, according to a new Pentagon report.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/23/w...&en=437b1492f6e9c433&ei=5094&partner=homepage


Budget for 2004
The military expenditure of the Department of Defense for 2004 was:

Total $437.111 Billion
Operations and maintenance $175.081 Bil.
Military Personnel $113.576 Bil.
Procurement $76.217 Bil.
Research & Development $60.756 Bil.
Military Construction $6.310 Bil.

This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance and production (which is in the Department of Energy budget), or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which are largely funded through extra-budgetary supplements).

The current (2005) United States military budget is larger than the military budgets of the next twenty biggest spenders combined, and six times larger than China's, which places second. The United States and its close allies are responsible for approximately two-thirds of all military spending on Earth (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for two-thirds), and spend 57 times more than the seven so-called "rogue" nations combined (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria). Military spending accounts for more than half of the United States' federal discretionary spending, which is all of the U.S. government's money not spoken for by pre-existing obligations. [1]

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in 2003 the United States spent approximately 47% of the world's total military spending of US$956,000,000,000.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._military_budget




Am I missing something?

A couple of points.

1. You never know when a threat will arise and you must be ready at the time to meet it, not six months after.
2. The reason why the rest of the world spends so little in comparison is because the rest of the world hasn't taken it upon itself to try and create stability in the world, which has been beneficial for everybody around, even those who are creating the instability.

 

[blind_fury]

Bush is Palpatine, pretending to be a dumb puppet (until Order 66 is declared).

Remember the first time order 66 was declared and Martin Luther King, JFK, and Robert Kennnedy were all assasinated?

 

[Addendum]

But hey, it's no problem. Just keep printing up the money to fund these endeavors and you'll have all the funds you need.

I mean, it worked before WW2...wait...

 

[raybia]

A couple of points.

1. You never know when a threat will arise and you must be ready at the time to meet it, not six months after.
2. The reason why the rest of the world spends so little in comparison is because the rest of the world hasn't taken it upon itself to try and create stability in the world, which has been beneficial for everybody around, even those who are creating the instability.

Here is another point. Why is the U.S. questioning China about their increase in military spending?

Talk about calling the kettle black.

 

[War Lord]

Here is another point. Why is the U.S. questioning China about their increase in military spending?

Talk about calling the kettle black.

What you're ultimately suggesting here is to let China forcibly take back Taiwan against the wishes of the Taiwanese.

 

[blind_fury]

What you're ultimately suggesting here is to let China forcibly take back Taiwan against the wishes of the Taiwanese.

Newsflash! China isn't always wrong and the US isn't always right!

God forbid there be a balance of power in the world.

 

[The Question]

2. The reason why the rest of the world spends so little in comparison is because the rest of the world hasn't taken it upon itself to try and create stability in the world, which has been beneficial for everybody around, even those who are creating the instability.

So the over 100 thousand people who died since the Iraq war has started because of the Iraq war are better off?

 

[War Lord]

Newsflash! China isn't always wrong and the US isn't always right!

God forbid there be a balance of power in the world.

The Taiwanese want to be an independent people.

If China was just building up her defenses so she could be better defended, I wouldn't really care. You don't see me being concerned about India, do you?

China is doing it to be regionally aggressive and that could cause a problem with Korea and Japan.

 

[The Question]

The Taiwanese want to be an independent people.

If China was just building up her defenses so she could be better defended, I wouldn't really care. You don't see me being concerned about India, do you?

China is doing it to be regionally aggressive and that could cause a problem with Korea and Japan.

China wouldn't dare atack Japan. They know that Japan is our ally. Weather they think they could win it or not, they know that a war with the U.S. could ultimately result in the deaths of millions.

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

do you know the Chinese could march one person into the ocean every 3 seconds and never run out of people?

 

[TheSumOfGod]

The Taiwanese want to be an independent people.

If China was just building up her defenses so she could be better defended, I wouldn't really care. You don't see me being concerned about India, do you?

China is doing it to be regionally aggressive and that could cause a problem with Korea and Japan.

By your reasoning, Abraham Lincoln should have let the South become an independent country as well.

 

[blind_fury]

The Taiwanese want to be an independent people.

If China was just building up her defenses so she could be better defended, I wouldn't really care. You don't see me being concerned about India, do you?

China is doing it to be regionally aggressive and that could cause a problem with Korea and Japan.

So just because China wants to keep soveriegnty over Taiwan they can't have a decent military? That's like saying the US can't have a large military because we have questionable motivations in the middle east(oil in Iraq ).

 

[War Lord]

So the over 100 thousand people who died since the Iraq war has started because of the Iraq war are better off?

Actually it isn't 100,000 people. www.iraqibodycount.org has it at around 40,000 tops and most of them were because of the terrorists there, not the US and the allies. Considering it's been 3 years, since the start of the war, it's still a far cry short of how many probably would have been killed under Saddaam, who killed at least a million during his reign of terror.

and the Iraqi economy has been growing since the war.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110008212