What is Digg?108 Comments
- Dradis, on 11/28/2007, -2/+36And the least intimidating military photo award goes to: INDIA
- keeling0ver, on 11/28/2007, -0/+18It does not say where India is purchasing weapons from, it just says they are the second largest importer in the world.
- bankhead, on 11/28/2007, -3/+17read up, Chinese military spending isn't a CLEAR figure...
nobody but their govt. knows how much they REALLY spend!!! - moskaudancer, on 11/28/2007, -0/+10Nuclear weapons are meant to be used as last-ditch weapons, if they are ever used at all. Most of our nukes are leftovers from the Cold War, when they were part of the MAD doctrine. They're not meant to be used in any old armed conflict; that said, the most important thing to the US now is the lives of its soldiers and civilians. Most of our advanced military technology being researched now has the goal of fewer deaths in mind; those technologies are very expensive, and many have years to go before they come into common use.
- elnerdo, on 11/28/2007, -6/+15The war is not worth it, but military research spending is ALWAYS worth it. Most of our modern conveniences are the result of military research.
- inactive, on 11/28/2007, -5/+14oh and we will
- FluffyWolf, on 11/28/2007, -1/+9How does South Africa or Venezuela qualify on that list? They spend a lot less than most smaller European countries.
- GuacamoleSan, on 11/28/2007, -6/+14This is useless, the Chinese have poured way more money into their military since 2005 when the data was taken
- NineVotesNow, on 11/28/2007, -0/+8Eh, not really. Well if it was a straight war ignoring the economic leverage they have on us, not really. China does not have a blue water navy, they would never be able to cross the pacific in force. Then again we have no chance in hell of taking the Chinese mainland. Its basically offense looses in the current situation.
- andy3109, on 11/28/2007, -3/+10So they are comparing 2005 to the US in 2008? What a joke. Inflation alone represents 50 billion.
- systemghost, on 11/28/2007, -2/+9Taiwan is not Iraq -- you can not remotely compare the two as an argument.
- MageLordy, on 11/28/2007, -1/+7yeah, it just says that they are #2 importer, after china implying china is #1.
also, why would you import weapons from someone who is a threat to you? - walugi, on 11/28/2007, -5/+11They don't invade on a whim like America does, thank god. I'm quite sure they have artillery on the mainland that could take out major parts of Taiwan in days
- Christbait, on 11/28/2007, -1/+7I don't think anyone is insane enough to use them.. well except.. oh forget it. They're just political muscles really, the more you have, the "bigger" you are and more political influence you have, for some presidents they're just penile compensatory devices.
- OisinT, on 11/28/2007, -0/+6I'm wondering where the data that 60% of the South African military has AIDS is coming from also.
- Ziqing, on 11/28/2007, -2/+8-LOL at the India picture, looks like Tarzan,
PLA spending is inaccurate, it is estimated by some as high as 160 Billion while as low as 60 Billion,
480 Billion the US spends surely can be put to some good use in other fields, - mclumber1, on 11/28/2007, -1/+6One of the biggest parts of America's military budget is the payrolls. It takes money to pay the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen every month. With pay about equal to their civilian counterparts, 1.5 million paychecks add up real quick.
- skyfire1, on 11/28/2007, -2/+7Seriously, was that guy measuring the circumference of his ribcage? That's just too weird.
- ISIfunded911, on 11/28/2007, -0/+4That is a way to please the all powerful military-industrial complex, and a covert way to fund the US economy's R&D.
- captbbq, on 11/28/2007, -0/+4keyword in the title: "build-up". This isn't a list of overall spending, but increase of spending. Otherwise the US would be number 1
- Y0tsuya, on 11/28/2007, -0/+4Except for the inconvenient fact that Japan is no pushover. They have one of the most advanced navy and air forces in the world. Although defensive in nature, it won't take them long to gear up for force projection if they feel threatened. One only had to look back at WWII to see what they're capable of.
- rz8472, on 11/28/2007, -0/+4It might be a percentage, not a raw amount.
- Adamande, on 11/28/2007, -1/+5Considering you already have enough firepower to blow up the entire planet, what more do you need to be preparing for? Blowing up the moon?
- jsffive, on 11/28/2007, -3/+6I have a question.
In the past fifty years, how many major wars have the Chinese been in?
For that matter, how many wars have WE been in?
It's interesting how the list puts China at the top of the list, with 103 billion, and the US right UNDER that listing, at FOUR HUNDRED AND EIGHTY BILLION DOLLARS!!!
Someone's trying to scare you. Grab your wallets everyone.
What worries me, and should worry you also, even more so than any imaginary arms race with China, is the fact that the Chinese own a great deal of our national debt. - ZiggityZhang, on 11/28/2007, -0/+3buried before more people read it
- cyberdork, on 11/28/2007, -0/+3And still they are nowhere near the US defense budget.
- Lynxpro, on 11/28/2007, -5/+8China can't even take the island of Taiwan, let alone challenge the U.S.
- Zain123, on 11/28/2007, -0/+3http://www.foreignpolicy.com.nyud.net:8080/story/c ...
- systemghost, on 11/28/2007, -3/+6I was expecting accurate and up-to-date information about all the other countries. You can't possibly compare 2003/4/5 spendings of all others to those in 2007/2008 of *one* country. Japan is the only other country that has recent spendings listed, but as they are only a defensive military (also the biggest police force in the world btw) it makes sense that their spending is low.
You read what you wanted to read: "America is bad" and disregarded all logic in your assessment. Just because you drop the name Cheney in your comment, it doesn't make your half-assed opinion carry more weight. In fact, it makes you look like a blithering idiot. If that was your aim, good job! - Winston84, on 11/28/2007, -4/+7"The United States should be the least of your worries "
Yeah, if you ignore the fact that the only country MAD enough to ever USE nukes is ... the US of ***** A..
and the fact that the winner in the category : Most invasions of small foreign countries is ... the US of ***** A ..
Any americans who understand why you can't afford decent public health-care ? - ibookfast, on 11/28/2007, -4/+7check this site out.. shows all the countries and how much they spend.. the US spends more than ALL other countries combined, much to Cheney's delight of course .. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spend ...
- Adamande, on 11/28/2007, -1/+4So what's the reason?
- MadOgre, on 11/28/2007, -0/+360%? really? Where on earth did you get that figure?
South Africa has a very effective military. I went to SA and trained with them learning combined arms tactics that we eventually meshed into the US military. Those guys are hard core soldiers and deserve some respect. I wasn't impressed until I went there and worked with those guys.
Of course, the SA military isn't quite as impressive as the DeBeer's Security Forces. Those fuqqers know where all the bodies are buried. - JohnFrum, on 11/28/2007, -1/+4I like festive face paint as much as the next guy but someone needs to explain to the chaps from Venezuela that it kind of ruins the whole camouflage thing they have going.
- coviecarbine, on 11/28/2007, -1/+4Russia's population is declining, isn't that why they had that national sex day a while back?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6990802.st ... - FluffyWolf, on 11/28/2007, -0/+3The war budget is not included in the 480 billions, with the war budget the US spends $680 billion per year. (Which is more than the rest of the world combined spends on military matters)
- Adamande, on 11/28/2007, -3/+6"It is also silly for you to insinuate that the United States just goes about killing for no reason whatsoever."
Why? You're doing it in Iraq as we speak.
I don't loath America at all. I loath military buildups. Can you explain to me what a budget that in 2005 was bigger than the military budgets of the next fourteen biggest spenders combined is necessary for? It's just disproportionally big. And why you think it's a good idea when the US is in a world of debt, can't provide adequate health care even for soldiers, the kids are falling behind in school and the bridges are falling down? I think this oversized military budget is just plain irresponsible. I'm amazed you don't.
Now go ahead, digg me down (again) for not loving military buildups. - FluffyWolf, on 11/28/2007, -0/+2Probably from WHO...according to the statistics from WHO the life expectancy has shrunk from 63 years in 1992 to 45 years in 2004 (the statistics is illustrated by gapminder in the link below), this reduction is mostly due to AIDS. So unfortunately, the 60% is not that unlikely.
http://www.gapminder.org/world/#$majorMode=chart$i ...
- commernie, on 11/28/2007, -2/+4Most? That's a hell of a statement. Even if it were true, investing that much money in other research sources might be just as efficient, if not more.
- MadOgre, on 11/28/2007, -4/+6Er... no. Military research has improved damn near every aspect of your cake eating civilian life.
- systemghost, on 11/28/2007, -1/+3I thought the same as well -- but also about the other countries. I was hoping to see up-to-date information about all of the world's powers, not just some veiled stabs at American spending by putting phrases in quotation marks.
- rz8472, on 11/28/2007, -0/+2Sorry, I meant ECONOMIES, not populations. Didn't know why I typed that.
- systemghost, on 11/28/2007, -1/+3lol, what? i never said i liked him. i just said he had absolutely *****-all to do with anything and didn't make his argument stronger. are you one of those people who doesn't pay attention? wow, congratulations, you're mediocre.
- Fizban140, on 11/28/2007, -0/+2Funny how you think of blackwater when he says civilians, but there are civilians in the air force as instructors and other jobs (that far outnumber blackwater most likely). The civilian pay is more, but they don't get nearly as many benefits and the military doesn't have to provide food, housing and uniforms/equipment. So the military might pay civilians more but in the end they cost a lot less.
- TheDHC, on 11/28/2007, -0/+2thank you sir
- aman78, on 11/28/2007, -0/+2Even as an Indian myself, I have to agree with you. and laugh out loud :)
- piesforyou, on 11/28/2007, -2/+4.... so they have less weapons to fight you with ?
- Pinkertinkle, on 11/28/2007, -0/+2Its in the article that is the subject of this particular digg.
- ISIfunded911, on 11/28/2007, -0/+2You are entirely right walugi: on Sept. 10, 2001, Rumsfeld announced that 2 trillion dollars were unaccounted for at the Pentagon. On Sept. 11, 2001, an airplane supposedly piloted by a guy who could not fly a small plane crashed, after a long curve, exactly where the computers containing all the accountacy files of the Pentagon were located. Now noone can ever find out where those 2000 billion dollars ended.
- Hauk2004, on 11/28/2007, -0/+1Did anyone else think the Indian soldier looked more like a tailor than..well..a soldier!
:P -
Show 51 - 100 of 104 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is