Military Spending. Is it out of control?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Here is a chart depicting the military spending of the top 25 countries on this planet.




Does the United States spend too much money on defense? We spend roughly 4 times as much as are biggest potential enemies Russia and China combined. The administration plans to spend $2.2 TRILLION on the military over the next five years - and this as the Congressional Budget Office project a federal deficit of $477 billion this year. The proposed 420 billion for 2005 does not include the 80 billion requested for Iraq bringing the total to around 500 bilion.

Tell me what you think about the amount of money spent on defense. Is it too much, just right or not enough.




posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Yes, is over the roof but you have to understand that the budget also includes the cost of managing two countries that we are supporting right now, Afghanistan and Iraq.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Is Military Spending Too High?

EdSinger Says No



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 11:19 AM
link   
It aint cheap to be the worlds sole military super power. You also have to remember alot of things we use everyday had their origins with DOD dollars.

The Internet we are all on right now is thanks to the work of Darpa when they created the Arpanet back when they were Arpa. They is a long list of military tech making its way to civilian life.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Ask Halliburton and the Carlyle Group et al and I bet they'd say NO WAY, keep it comin'




posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Here's a little joke for you all you conservative Bush supports out there.



Apparently you're the biggest free spending liberals we know!



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 11:57 AM
link   
That's what we get for using million dollar cruise missiles to take out tents and 16,000 dollar suv's.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by astral_ice
That's what we get for using million dollar cruise missiles to take out tents and 16,000 dollar suv's.



Yeah, the 10 or 15 PEOPLE that would have died to accomplish the same objective would have been MUCH cheaper!!



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
It aint cheap to be the worlds sole military super power. You also have to remember alot of things we use everyday had their origins with DOD dollars.


And NASA!

Billions in research for...


Just think, we'd still be squeezing oranges for orange flavored drinks without 'em. What are we? Cavemen?



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Also take into account that the US has a much larger GDP than any other individual nation in the world. But i think we don't have the largest spending per size of GDP. Here is a link that shows North Korea as a leader in that field. I hope my link works. If not, then you can go to
nationmaster.com

www.nationmaster.com...&int=50



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Tang
Though I doubt it cost billions to develop was not military money money but NASA money, If NASA had Military sized budgets we would have bases on Mars already.

The Military gaves us Spam which might be a curse rather then a blessing. Really all canned food is thanks to French military money under Napoleon



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   
The reason america has to spend so much money is because it wants to rule the world, or "be the world police" as the creators of south park say.


It will topple the US, just like it did the Soviets, the british and all the way back to the romans.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by tovenar

The reason america has to spend so much money is because it wants to rule the world, or "be the world police" as the creators of south park say.



Really? If they wanted to rule the World they gave up the best chance in History after WW2. Most countries lay in ruin the US was pretty much untouched and the sole owner of the Atomic bomb at the time.

If the US wanted to rule the world it would have happened after WW2.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Actually I think the UK expenditure looks incorrect.


It should be around $55 Billion US dollars (£29.7 Billion Sterling)

Spacemunkey



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Haven't you learned anything? Everything is out of control!



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 06:26 PM
link   
The Division BelL, Thanks for your intuitive post.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by cryptorsa1001
The Division BelL, Thanks for your intuitive post.


Your welcome. I appreciate your kindness and the courage you have to thank me, so, instead, thank you. The 'thank you's in this modern world are becoming rare.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   
The US spends money on the military like a drunken sailor at a massage parlour after a 3 month tour in a nuclear submarine.


But it's the price you gotta pay to satisfy the American ego.

Oh and Edsinger on military spending, we all know this guy is a bit out of it, he's a neocon, speaks conservative and spends like a liberal.

thanks,
drfunk

[edit on 28-1-2005 by drfunk]

[edit on 28-1-2005 by drfunk]



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
on military spending, we all know this guy is a bit out of it, he's a neocon, speaks conservative and spends like a liberal.


Don't you just love transparency in American politics? Is it the same way in Australia?



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Not really, we've had a bad run in the 80s with government in debt etc and now it is generally a MUST for any government at the moment to keep the government budget in surplus and the Labor Party (opposition at the moment) reflected this in the 2004 election campaign, where they tried as hard as possible to build economic credentials (promising to keep the surplus, not raise income taxes or GST etc) but they failed because of a liberal party scare campaign on interest rates.

Anyways what i'm trying to say is that due to the strong economy and also good management of the budget which the liberal party has trumped as a major selling point for themselves in the election economics is very, very scrutinized by both parties and keeping spending in check is a must as they may lose the election if the numbers don't add up.

But that's just one facet where I think politically Australia is pretty good, other issues I suppose it's just like everywhere else in the West.



thanks,
drfunk





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join