Americans like Romans

[helian]

You are talking government spending, not GDP.

Like most on the left you do not believe the economy is the economy, only government spending matters.

Then party on. Double the defense spending next year.

10% of GDP, not a bad idea given the nature of the world.

It's already nearly 12%, so let's make it an even 25%

[JW Frogen]

It's already nearly 12%, so let's make it an even 25%

That would be the Chinese.

[helian]

If the actual US defense spending is hard to ascertain, then China's would be impossible.

It's a bit hard to find any report on US defense spending that includes DoD spending, the extra funding for the "war on terror", defense related funding dispersed throughout the budgets of other federal departments and ad hoc outlays. Most appear to take the DoD figure (of near $500 billion) as the sole defense outlay.

The war on terror itself consumes close to $200 billion in extra funding with hundreds of billions more vested in other departments.

[JW Frogen]

If the actual US defense spending is hard to ascertain, then China's would be impossible.

It's a bit hard to find any report on US defense spending that includes DoD spending, the extra funding for the "war on terror", defense related funding dispersed throughout the budgets of other federal departments and ad hoc outlays. Most appear to take the DoD figure (of near $500 billion) as the sole defense outlay.

The war on terror itself consumes close to $200 billion in extra funding with hundreds of billions more vested in other departments.

In relation to US GDP and given US commitments throughout the world and what the world would be like without those US commitments (see Sudan) it is money well spent.

But I agree with you Helian, the US people are generous and willing to fund your freedom, even if you are not.

[JW Frogen]

If you want Helian, I will meet you in the Roman coliseum for a date with death and destiny.

Or we could just go to a mid Easter nights dream with the Pope?

It is up to you.

Strength and honor or crosses and walks.

[helian]

But I agree with you Helian, the US people are generous and willing to fund your freedom, even if you are not.

I don't think its innate altruism that drives defense spending, do you? I don't believe even a President or a congress would attempt to reverse it. The health of the US economy relies on defense spending. Just imagine a President trying to halve the defense budget by shutting down bases or industries on a large scale within the US... You'd have every preacher, mayor, senior regional official and congressman in the area screaming about job losses and the ruination of the local economy.

[JW Frogen]

But I agree with you Helian, the US people are generous and willing to fund your freedom, even if you are not.

I don't think its innate altruism that drives defense spending, do you? I don't believe even a President or a congress would attempt to reverse it. The health of the US economy relies on defense spending. Just imagine a President trying to halve the defense budget by shutting down bases or industries on a large scale within the US... You'd have every preacher, mayor, senior regional official and congressman in the area screaming about job losses and the ruination of the local economy.

Job losses are not about the military, but about the addiction to free trade with countries like China who are spending more of their GDP on military growth than the US.


I do not believe the US military comitment is primarily based on altruism, (though a great deal of it is, unlike every other world power that has ever existed), most of it is based on realism.

Only the US can keep most of the democratic world stable enough to keep it peaceful.

Most Americans are realists, most of the time.

Let us hope they are on the first Tuesday on November 2008.

[helian]

Job losses are not about the military, but about the addiction to free trade with countries like China who are spending more of their GDP on military growth than the US.

I do not believe the US military comitment is primarily based on altruism, (though a great deal of it is, unlike every other world power that has ever existed), most of it is based on realism.

It's impossible to quantify what China spends on its military and where it is estimated in relation to US spending, the US figure is almost invariably only the DoD budget. I would bet that China spends much more than it admits but I don’t believe it would be more than the US… yet.

I don’t believe US military commitment is based on altruism at all… it's based on US interests. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Why should Americans sacrifice their children in the military for any reason other than American interests being served?

[JW Frogen]

As China is a closed society it is impossible but most analysts agree China is spending way more than their publicly offered figures and the Chinese leadership themselves admit they want to become a dominant military power, given their economic growth one would be safe betting that in order to play catch up with the US they are spending more per % of GDP than the US.

Altruism is seen by many in the American foreign policy establishment as in their interests, hence America is the largest aid donor to Africa, even states that are not overtly pro America, ever.

America believes democracy and free are in her long term interests, that it provides a stable globe and will actually in the long run diminish her need for such large military spending and provide economic opportunities tyrannies simply can not.

Take Iraq for instance, the easiest thing to do if the US just wanted to control the country and her oil was to remove Saddam (which was startlingly easy) decapitate the political leadership but leave the Baithist bureaucracy in army in place and ask for a compliant general to run it as a puppet.

Ironically it was the democratic idealism of Bush that caused many of the early occupational problems and fueled the insurgency, such as the belief the entire Baithist bueacracy and army should be immediately disbanded to show the Iraqi people that the old days of tyranny were over and a new completely elected replacement would follow.

They chose the much harder course of democracy for Iraq because they believed this idealistic policy will not only transform Iraq but also perhaps the region long term and that such a democratic transformation is in US interests.

[freediver]

Helian if what you say is true then defence spending is a burden on the US economy, not propping it up. It's like subsidies. People think they keep people in job,s keep the economy ticking over, but they don't. The benefiots of removing that burden are far greater than any economic benefit they generate.