• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Countries Ranked by Largest Active Military

bongsaway said:
Popular narrative of the nazis were not good people? Or do all of us have that wrong? There's another thing called a dog whistle or in your case as far as I'm concerned, a bullhorn. To me your avatar says to all the other nazi symbol loving folks, hey, I'm one of you.
Click to expand...

Of course the Nazi's were one of the greatest evils ever on this planet. The "popular narrative" I'm referring to is that my avatar image is a Nazi symbol and even worse that it means that I'm in some way supportive or an admirer of the Nazis which is utterly untrue.

I have my own reasons for liking the image which I've explained repeatedly
 
Dayton3 said:
I agree with your second paragraph. Not your first of course as I refuse to call something I found at random online a nazi symbol.

But to me America is not just its territory. That is narrow minded provincial thinking. It is also its citizens and its values and ideals. All four of those deserve to be protected no matter where they are.
Click to expand...

I pointed out exactly what the symbol meant. Someone equating the GOP with the Nazis.

Rather bizarre that you returned to that symbol.
 
Dayton3 said:
Of course the Nazi's were one of the greatest evils ever on this planet. The "popular narrative" I'm referring to is that my avatar image is a Nazi symbol and even worse that it means that I'm in some way supportive or an admirer of the Nazis which is utterly untrue.

I have my own reasons for liking the image which I've explained repeatedly
Click to expand...

You equate the GOP to Nazis?
 
bongsaway said:
You mean like W's interacting with iraq? That kind of international community or our presence in afghanistan like we're doing any good at all there? Helping allied countries? Our current president is crapping all over our allies while cozying up to dictators. Anything else you care to lol about?
Click to expand...

His overthrowing the brutal Iraqi dictator? Yeah, that was a good thing, unless you think Arabs don’t deserve democracy. Likewise, overthrowing the Taliban certainly was and is a good thing. And yes, helping allies in the Third World via counter terrorism missions is important and ongoing. What else should I “lol” about?
 
Tigerace117 said:
His overthrowing the brutal Iraqi dictator? Yeah, that was a good thing, unless you think Arabs don’t deserve democracy. Likewise, overthrowing the Taliban certainly was and is a good thing. And yes, helping allies in the Third World via counter terrorism missions is important and ongoing. What else should I “lol” about?
Click to expand...

World's police. Iraq was and is a fiasco and removing saddam only made things worse. Democracy? You're kidding right? You obviously know nothing of the irag blunder that cost america a lot of lives and a ton of money. We destroyed their country. People that used to have running water and electricity no longer did after we helped them. Maybe you should look into these things before you mouth off. We can fight terrorism with special forces, we don't need huge armies for that sort of thing.
 
bongsaway said:
World's police. Iraq was and is a fiasco and removing saddam only made things worse. Democracy? You're kidding right? You obviously know nothing of the irag blunder that cost america a lot of lives and a ton of money. We destroyed their country. People that used to have running water and electricity no longer did after we helped them. Maybe you should look into these things before you mouth off. We can fight terrorism with special forces, we don't need huge armies for that sort of thing.
Click to expand...

We know, you think folks who weren’t born here don’t matter. That’s all “world police” really means after all.

Iraq was going to be a “fiasco” no matter what. The idea that Saddam was a “stabilizing force” is idiotic. Iraq certainly is a democracy, and while times have been tough they are massively better off than they were under Saddam. Berlin in 1945 was pretty beat up as well, but there’s very few people who’d argue that they were better off under the Nazis because they struggled to make ends meet for a while.
 
Tigerace117 said:
We know, you think folks who weren’t born here don’t matter. That’s all “world police” really means after all.

Iraq was going to be a “fiasco” no matter what. The idea that Saddam was a “stabilizing force” is idiotic. Iraq certainly is a democracy, and while times have been tough they are massively better off than they were under Saddam. Berlin in 1945 was pretty beat up as well, but there’s very few people who’d argue that they were better off under the Nazis because they struggled to make ends meet for a while.
Click to expand...

Because World War Two had a spectacular, obvious beginning for both the world in general and the U.S. in particular and an equally obvious well defined ending, people forget (or even never knew) what a mess the aftermath of World War Two was. For example something like 2 to 2.5 MILLION Germans were murdered by the neighbors of Germany as they expelled communities of Germans that had lived there for decades if not centuries. This was because Nazi Germany had used the excuse of protecting German minorities in neighboring countries to justify invasion in World War Two.

Likewise, literally hundreds of American soldiers were killed in post war West Germany in the years immediately after the war ended.
 
swing_voter said:
960x0.jpg




We're rich.


Germany is supposed to spend 2% by agreement.

They have the best tanks in the world, but they only bought like 300 of them, and usually half of those aren't fit for combat.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU, the budget is based off of GDP
 
saddam was the stablizer for sectarian conflict
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Budget and numbers themselves are not good qualifies for how good a military force is.

The Saudis spend more than the Russians, but the Saudi military is of terrible quality. You cannot buy your way into military competency.
Click to expand...

The PLA is a very good example once you realize there are so few warriors in their ranks. This is a direct result of the one child law. The men have no siblings and were raised with god-child enamor. This dos not make for good team-play soldiers as India recently (and for the fourth time) proved. Many in the higher ranks of their army have noticed this... as have we an Taiwan.
 
Slavister said:
This is what's really concerning

View attachment 67288238
Click to expand...

Which matters much less when you consider how much of that is pay. Just a hair under 40% of the military budget just goes to pay and benefits.

Of course, a lot of nations can field much larger militaries simply because they pay their people crap. And even forbid them from things like getting married unless they reach a certain rank.

Starting pay for somebody in the US military is just over $23k per year. In comparison, a Chinese soldier makes just over $1,700 per year. Quite literally a US soldier makes more in a month than a CHinese soldier will in an entire year.

Of course, we can slash the military budget by doing the same thing. Pay them almost nothing, and kick out all of those with families under Sergeant, and forbid those bekow the rank of Sergeant from getting married in the first place. Things like that will go a long way towards reducing the cost.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Which matters much less when you consider how much of that is pay. Just a hair under 40% of the military budget just goes to pay and benefits.
Click to expand...

Even if we reduced our spending by 40% (actually less than 40% since others don't really spend $0 on pay), we'd still be spending way more than anyone else.
 
Slavister said:
Even if we reduced our spending by 40% (actually less than 40% since others don't really spend $0 on pay), we'd still be spending way more than anyone else.
Click to expand...

Actually, it would be a lot more than that. No more base schools, no more family housing, no more costs associated with dependent healthcare, all that is removed also. And the biggest chunk is also around 45%, that falls under "Operations and Maintenance". So what, we just no longer do any training, and let the equipment and buildings fall apart again?
 
Oozlefinch said:
Actually, it would be a lot more than that. No more base schools, no more family housing, no more costs associated with dependent healthcare, all that is removed also. And the biggest chunk is also around 45%, that falls under "Operations and Maintenance". So what, we just no longer do any training, and let the equipment and buildings fall apart again?
Click to expand...

Cut 40% of troops/equipment. Use a quarter of those huge savings to beef up what matters within military - cyber warfare, etc. Rest 30% is easy savings for the country.
 
Slavister said:
Cut 40% of troops/equipment. Use a quarter of those huge savings to beef up what matters within military - cyber warfare, etc. Rest 30% is easy savings for the country.
Click to expand...

*laugh*

We can just rename all that remain to iTroops, and give them power armor while we are at it.
 
Slavister said:
Even if we reduced our spending by 40% (actually less than 40% since others don't really spend $0 on pay), we'd still be spending way more than anyone else.
Click to expand...

You want to spend less on your military?

Spend more, way more. America is the only defence against the next global conflict, be it in the Middle East or China, and Europe can't help us Canadians, we'll have to rely on you.
 
The real question is how effective the military is. More men mean more cannon fodder unless it is used effectively

Our military expenditures are rediculus. Right minded individuals have an overactive fear gene. Works great for politicians, right wing media and the military/industrial complex

Personally i really don't see any military threat in the world for us to be concerned about. Fact is since WWII every conflict we have involved ourselves in turned into a disaster. Maybe a smaller more mobile army would preclude us getting involved in other people's business.

Of course the military/industrial complex needs us to use up those war materials where they can get paid to replace them. They have one hell of a lobby in Washington.
 
Oozlefinch said:
*laugh*

We can just rename all that remain to iTroops, and give them power armor while we are at it.
Click to expand...

You can laugh all you want but there is absolutely no reason we should be throwing so much more money on military than rest of the world and no, WE CANNOT AFFORD IT. We keep getting more and more into debt in case you have not noticed. After decades of over spending, I'd like to see us spend LESS on military than top 5 countries for a few years. And no, this won't make us less vulnerable - or if you think it does, we have been wasting all that money in prior decades anyway.
 
Slavister said:
You can laugh all you want but there is absolutely no reason we should be throwing so much more money on military than rest of the world and no, WE CANNOT AFFORD IT. We keep getting more and more into debt in case you have not noticed. After decades of over spending, I'd like to see us spend LESS on military than top 5 countries for a few years. And no, this won't make us less vulnerable - or if you think it does, we have been wasting all that money in prior decades anyway.
Click to expand...

The U.S. does NOT spend more money on its military than the "top 5 countries combined".

No, we are not spending “as much on our military as all other countries combined” – and other facts about the defense budget you should know – Lawfire

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Considering the commitments the U.S. has overseas and the possible threats (Russia, China, Iran, various others) then the U.S. defense budget should probably be a baseline of at lease 1 trillion dollars a year and increasing by 50 billion each year
 
Last edited:
Dayton3 said:
The U.S. does NOT spend more money on its military than the "top 5 countries combined".

No, we are not spending “as much on our military as all other countries combined” – and other facts about the defense budget you should know – Lawfire

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Considering the commitments the U.S. has overseas and the possible threats (Russia, China, Iran, various others) then the U.S. defense budget should probably be a baseline of at lease 1 trillion dollars a year and increasing by 50 billion each year
Click to expand...

We spend an insane amount annually on our military. We could cut it in half and still have the most.powerful .military in the world. What are you afraid of. China is invested heavily in America. They want access to our markets. Economics is most.important to them. Russia is just a barking dog with no teeth. Best thing we can do is butt out of everyone's business and let the rest of the world step up and defend themselves.

Military_Expenditures_2018_SIPRI.jpg
 
America could save a yuge amount on military spending by shutting down all foreign bases and bringing everyone home. There's 34 US Army facilities in Germany alone. One country, one service. All those Army bases, Air Force facilities, all those Navy bases, that's an enormous expense.
Shut 'em all down. Bring everyone home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom