Defense budgets: USA - ahead of the rest

According to the rating of the Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) for 2012 a year, the rest of the world’s leader in the global arms race, the number of armed forces is less than 10000 people (the condition of being ranked), is noticeably lagging behind. Nevertheless, quite large defense budgets can boast of such states as China, Russia, Great Britain, Japan, France, Saudi Arabia, India, Germany, and Italy. All these countries are in the top ten.

Rating illustrated in the magazine Kommersant Money. The material also states that world military spending in 2012 was estimated at 1,756 trillion. dollars, or 2,5% of global GDP. The largest increase in military spending in 2003-2012. demonstrated Saudi Arabia and the BRIC countries.

It is noted that the most expensive military campaigns of the XXI century were operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In total, they cost the US $ 4-6 trillion. dollars, if we consider the costs of social security of servicemen.

The United States occupy a “star” position in the rating, far ahead of all other countries in spending: 682 billion dollars in 2012 and 39% of the global share of defense spending (an increase of 2003% compared to 32).

In the second position - China: 166 billion dollars, 9,5%, an increase of 175%.

Russia ranks third: 90,7 billion, 5,2%, an increase of 113%.

Next come the UK (60,8 billion, 3,5%, an increase of 4,9%); Japan (59,3 billion, 3,4%, an increase of 3,6%); France (58,9 billion, 3,4%, an increase of 3,3%); Saudi Arabia (56,7 billion, 3,2%, an increase of 111%); India (46,1 billion, 2,6%, an increase of 65%); Germany (45,8 billion, 2,6%, an increase of 1,5%); Italy (34,0 billion, 1,9%, an increase of 19%).

Thus, it is clear that the undisputed leaders in the growth of military spending from 2003 to 2012. are China, Russia and Saudi Arabia.

There is in the ranking and indicator of the share of military spending in relation to the GDP of the state. The largest military expenses are in 2012 for Saudi Arabia (8,26%), Oman (6,42%), Israel (5,99%), Yemen, (5,50%), USA (4,91%), Jordan (4,82%), Algeria (4,47%) , Iraq (4,46%), Myanmar (4,42%), Armenia (3,77%). The Saudis are the clear leader in this indicator.

As for the number of armies in the world, the PRC is surely rushing ahead: 2285 thousand people. The second largest country in the Armed Forces is the United States (1580 thousand). In third place - India (1325 thousand people). The top five are closed by the DPRK (1106 thousand people) and Russia (1026 thousand people).

Among the most militarized countries in terms of the ratio of military personnel to the economically active population are: DPRK (7,47% of military personnel), Eritrea (7,30%), Iraq (7,17%), Jordan (5,85%), Syria (5,60%), Israel (5,53% ), Lebanon (3,93%), Oman (3,28%), Armenia (3,18%), Djibouti (3,13%).

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal is sounding the alarm. The United States is currently cutting back on military spending, and “growing world powers” ​​are becoming more aggressive. According to the magazine, which leads Газета.руFirst of all, we are talking about Russia, China and Iran. These countries more often and more often arrange for American allies in the South China Sea, Georgia and the Strait of Hormuz. They violate air and sea space, and at the same time exert diplomatic pressure to evaluate the response of American partners, the article notes. Therefore, according to the publication, the United States should develop a new global strategy.

From media reports it is known that on the 2013 fiscal year, the US military budget was approved in the amount of 633 billion, which is almost 50 billion less than on 2012.

In the 2013 fiscal year, the United States will cut its military budget by 87 billion. Before 2017, the American defense industry will cut 259 billion dollars, and in ten years 487 billion dollars.

As Lyubov Lyulko notes (To Pravda.Ru), referring to the forecast of the National Intelligence Council of the United States from 2008, the largest in the world by 2025 will be the Chinese defense complex. This is part of the "Chinese dream". The military budget of China, according to IHS Global Insight, will double over the period from 2011 to 2015 a year and exceed the total defense spending of all the other APR countries.

The United States is far from the US, but the ratio between them has decreased from 7 to 1 in 2003 to 4 to 1 in 2012, SIPRI report author Sam Perlo-Freeman told the Associated Press. He stressed the fact that the qualitative gap is incredibly high: the USA has 11 aircraft carriers, and China has 1. “It takes time for quantitative indicators to develop into qualitative changes,” said Perlo-Freeman.

It should be noted that when implementing the long-term budget cuts by the United States for defense, China and Russia will emerge as the leaders of the SIPRI list.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru

Comments

[SPIRITofFREEDOM]

You must somehow fight off "crap"

[Deniska999]

In the DPRK, such an army is as numerous as in Russia. To go nuts.

[Cat]

More precisely, the army in Russia is the same in number as in the DPRK. Really, go nuts.
In general, only the sun was counted? And the "vovans", the police, the police, all sorts of different military formations?

[Avenger711]

The DPRK army is anomalously large and at times exceeds the typical percentage of the country's population for adequate states, not Latvia.

[aksakal]

Quote: Avenger711

The DPRK army is anomalously large and at times exceeds the typical percentage of the country's population for adequate states, not Latvia.

- not abnormally, but normal for such conditions of existence. There is no complete sovereignty in this world, we can only talk about the degree of sovereignty. Countries with a very low degree of confidence even state their chosen prime ministers in the State Department (cite examples?). Countries with a small degree of sovereignty can pursue their own policies, including domestic politics, but at the same time engage in mimicry. An example is my Kazakhstan. What are all these performances with the election of the President of the country for? Yes, mimicry for the State Department. Russia is a country with an average degree of sovereignty. It can defend its interests, which sometimes run counter to the interests of the sovereign, but again, elections, conditions of internal financial policy ... And there are countries with a high degree of sovereignty. DPRK is the same country. She does not care about democracy, she has her own regime - the regime of Juche's ideas. She can afford not to mimic. Of course, a high degree of sovereignty does not mean full sovereignty. The DPRK has some dependence on China. Cuba - from Venezuela.
Do you want to be called a sovereign country? Be prepared to maintain a very strong army. This is the price to pay for a high degree of sovereignty. Don't want to maintain such an army? Surrender at the mercy of the United States, hold elections and approve the selected person in the State Department. If it is not approved there, repeat the elections, and so on until you choose such a "leader" who would suit the State Department. Be also ready to always yap at whoever is pointed out from the State Department. Then you do not need to maintain a large army, but you will hardly be richer from this - with such a "leader" all the interesting assets of your country will belong not to the citizens of your country, but coincidentally to the same persons who sit in the State Department. Instead of mastering rifles, your male population will have to learn how to cook masterly and serve coffee masterly, and girls will have to study the Kama Sutra, a hundred pounds will come in handy I don’t know, Avenger, who gave you advantages here, I don’t put anything, but here I am with you for the DPRK and I disagree with the "anomaly". While condemning the United States in most of their posts, nevertheless, many members of the forum talk about the DPRK precisely from the position of the United States. Share how you do it? I don’t have it - if there is a rejection of the USA and those ideas that the States are imposing, then I look at everything from this bell tower. And uvs somehow it turns out to change the bell tower Share the secret.

[Basileus]

Well, the strength of the DPRK army is not a secret for me. But he did not know that in Iraq such a quantity was put under arms by the people.

[Pimply]

In Russia, less. The actual number at the moment is about 680-700 thousand. Million - payroll.

[Apologet.Ru]

I recommend to look and everything will immediately become clear, for what and how much -

[Apologet.Ru]

Quote
The United States occupy a “star” position in the rating, far ahead of all other countries in spending: 682 billion dollars in 2012 and 39% of the global share of defense spending (an increase of 2003% compared to 32).
In the second position - China: 166 billion dollars, 9,5%, an increase of 175%.
Russia ranks third: 90,7 billion, 5,2%, an increase of 113%.

I’ll add from myself -
while external public debt is
- America - 16, 893 trillion dollars, which is 108% to GDP
- China - 765 billion dollars, which is 14% of the runway
- Russia - 684 billion dollars, which amounted to 27% of GDP

This is what it means to print the world currency ourselves and in my mind (I have American rubles) ...

[omsbon]

It seems to me that the main problem of increasing the military budget in Russia is that it would grow not quantity, but quality!

[LaGlobal]

omsbon

- I absolutely agree with you! But here more questions are not about quality, but about the negligence of some personalities ...

[Standard Oil]

We have already gotten the aircraft carriers to measure as much as possible. Let's rivet about 40 pieces, and everyone will be afraid of us. Of course they look cool, but we must not forget, for example, the pride of the British Navy and the Bismarck drowner, the Ark Royal aircraft carrier was easily torpedoed by a simple German submarine By the way, I'm glad for the growth of the budget of the PLA and Russia, but we had a "secret weapon for assimilating funds for defense" called Serdyukov, how much he stole there in reality no one knows and probably will never know.

[knyazDmitriy]

Of course, we must be happy for the growth of our budget, I join the aforementioned, we must certainly monitor the quality, but the fact that it is growing very rapidly in the PRC is cause for concern. The Chinese are very cunning - do not forget about it.

[LaGlobal]

Quote: Standard Oil

everyone will be afraid of us

- Duc and so are afraid!

Let's rivet 40 pieces

- so let's go. Call all RUSSIANS and there will be one aircraft carrier per year!

[Nayhas]

In the USA, they made the right decision to stifle the military-industrial complex, which has recently ceased to know the measure especially under the Republicans ... This will only benefit him.
PS: how is the RF Armed Forces counted 1026 thousand people? With an annual draft of 144 thousand people? Already this alone casts doubt on all statistics ... It’s impossible to calculate China’s military expenditures at all, one can only speculate, and then multiply the estimated by X.

[Mart]

Quote: Nayhas

PS: Is this how in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation counted 1026 thousand people?

SIPRI in the Russian Federation and China gives evaluation of.

[Airman]

[quote = Mart] [quote = Nayhas] P.S .: how is it that 1026 thousand people counted in the RF Armed Forces? [/ quote]
Official statistics.

[igor36]

Quote: Nayhas

how is the RF Armed Forces counted 1026 thousand people?

This data is in open sources:
Number structure:
Army Officers 220
Private and sergeants
Under the contract 186
At the call of 291
Other Categories
University cadets ~ 40
Cadets of military training centers ~ 30 000
Officers and warrant officers in sergeant posts 70
Total
Total headcount 920
Behind the state and at the disposal of ~ 70
Total established number 1

So the mistake is not so great.

[saturn.mmm]

Quote: Nayhas

In the USA, they made the right decision to stifle the military-industrial complex, which has recently ceased to know the measure especially under the Republicans ... This will only benefit him.

A huge number of Americans work there and to stifle this production means to increase the number of unemployed people, so I strongly doubt that they will stumble it, most likely they will curtail their operations in the East and save on that.

[evgenii67]

Hello everyone! "Based on the 2012 Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) Ranking" - we know why these ratings are: money, money, more money, the world is in danger, China and Russia are catching up with us, ay-yy-yay! "The third place is occupied by Russia: $ 90,7 billion, 5,2%, an increase of 113%." - But how could it be otherwise, because before that one could say nothing came into service at all, everyone plundered and collapsed, now it’s restored, and building is harder than destroying. "In fiscal 2013, the United States will cut its military budget by 87 billion. By 2017, the US defense industry will be cut $ 259 billion, and in ten years - $ 487 billion." At this rate, perhaps the world will see a bipolar world — it would be nice to have such a bipolar world: Russia and China, and the United States in the camp of the Third Countries. "He also stressed that the quality gap is incredibly high: the United States has 11 aircraft carriers, and China has 1." Haha, what is the strength of the brother, obviously not in the aircraft carriers or even in their quantity, in the case of a more or less serious mess, aircraft carriers can become a weakness and a headache for the country in which these giants are listed.

[cumastra1]

You can immediately see who is preparing for war.

[Rubik]

Russia, China and Saudi Arabia? They show the largest increase in spending, while leaders are cutting.

[aksakal]

Quote: Rubik

Russia, China and Saudi Arabia? They show the largest increase in spending, while leaders are cutting.

- Well, the Saudis can be safely deleted, not in the horse feed. We consider the growth of military spending only for those who have a significant share of their R&D in the defense industry. There is no doubt about China and Russia, but Saudi Arabia has somehow got into the lead? Only on the basis of high costs for the purchase of military hardware, for the management of which they even have no one to plant? How do you imagine this? - all such a well-groomed and pampered Arab in snow-white, on a combat alert, jumps into a tank and goes to fight? One such wanted to fight in Syria, so since then FSA militants have been asking such soldiers to stay at home, for the salvation of such a would-be warrior ("saving ordinary Ryan" in the Eastern interpretation, change the name a little - "saving the great vonya sheikh ... ibn Saud " ) militants cost a good bunch of corpses So I ask the Saudis from this list convincingly

[Airman]

The rating is made from official sources, and nobody knows the real spending of states on defense and attack, even the Senate and the State Duma. Therefore, simply take note of such ratings.

[Dimy4]

Whoever has a larger budget has more and "cut" into pockets. Well, except for China, I guess.

[Rubik]

China ranks 78th in terms of corruption. This is certainly better than Russia (154th place) but much worse than the United States (22nd place)

[Alekseir162]

Quote: saturn.mmm

most likely they will curtail their operations in the east and save on that.

Most likely, it will be so, the export of democracy is too expensive, even for "amers". Despite the fact that the Pentagon spends candy wrappers for this (I think no one doubts that "amers" live at the expense of the rest of the world).

[a52333]

I would like to draw the attention of members of the forum that the military budget in the absolute should not be measured. An aircraft carrier made in the United States costs many times more than a one made in Russia, and even more so in China. (overhead, salary and maintenance)

[Cat]

Quote: a52333

I would like to draw the attention of members of the forum that the military budget in the absolute should not be measured.

In addition, if it is "spent" inside the country, on its own military-industrial complex, this is one thing, but when it goes to foreign purchases, it is quite another. Hey, Mistrals!

[Corneli]

Quote: Gato

In addition, if it is "spent" inside the country, on its own military-industrial complex, this is one thing, but when it goes to foreign purchases, it is quite another. Hey, Mistrals!

Forgive me, but in terms of price / quality / speed of construction - I disagree! If the ships ala mistral were built / designed only at Russian shipyards / design bureaus, the costs would be 2 times more mines! (and maybe even more) and the ships themselves would have done ... when that, like by 2020. (the magic number for the Russian military industrial complex, apparently)
P.S. Obviously, this is my exclusively subjective opinion! (Based on how they saw the loot in Russia ... on "know-how projects"). And do not forget that the shipyards are loaded with other urgent work (new ships, submarines, "upgrade" of old ships, debugging for sale ...)

[Rubik]

Right. Therefore, I would divide the US budget into two parts.

[FC SKIF]

Hooray, long live the imperial overheating in the empire of good, comrades, cheers! With every homing bomb fired on an Afghan donkey, one American family is sent around the world, is evicted on the street, starving, and begging. This is very conducive to rethinking the country's role in the world among the population. More bombs, more missiles, more aircraft carriers. Hooray military spending amers, the entire progressive population with you.

[Orty]

You don’t have to get so hung up on the budget, firstly, using the position of the US emission center, they can print as much money as they want, secondly, their cuts and kickbacks simply turn pale compared to ours. Moreover, they are still quite modest on technology, but on consumables, light bulbs, or toilet paper or paint in general, things like this that do not attract close attention are simply going through the roof! So the wedge did not converge on the digital light.

[Rubik]

If they could print as much as they wanted, there would be no public debt, and generally no problems, they would print immediately 100 trillion in budget. Do not write nonsense if you do not understand the issue.

[Orty]

My dear, first figure out the question yourself, find out what the Fed is from, how and to whom the dollar is being sold, and then come on OK? A national debt is the debt of the United States to its debtors in the role of which acts as the Fed and everyone who buys the state. US bonds. Bonds that are long ago unsecured and if tomorrow, for example, the United States show their repayment, this will lead to the collapse of the dollar so there will be nothing to repay it. This situation arose from the fact that the Fed had been printing and printing unsecured currency since the 70s of the last century, however, this process reached its peak in the 90s, because then these grandmas could be absorbed by purchasing assets in the former eastern bloc. As a result, a lot of debts and essentially an unsecured dollar, so when or do you seriously think that the US GDP is 14 trillion. dollars?

[Grishka100watt]

I would not take the US public debt so seriously, because they did not give it, they will not give it and they will not give it to anyone and never will. ETOGES system. What nafig duty, do not tell)))
This amount simply symbolizes the tribute collected from around the world, that's all)
Those states that buy bonds know that no one will present them for redemption, but can only wipe their ass. For it is a tribute, framed in a beautiful way so that unnecessary questions do not arise among citizens of states with colonial status.

[Evgeniy46]

a beautiful statement, but ... Russia has reduced investment in their paper. That is, presented for payment. And according to your words, this is impossible. So think what is wrong in your speech

[Grishka100watt]

reduced investment That's what it is presented for payment?

[Beck]

Quote: Orty

A national debt is the debt of the United States to its debtors in the role of which acts as the Fed and everyone who buys the state. US bonds

As far as I understand, the US public debt is not a debt to debtors.

It seems it all started with Nixon, or with Reagan. Some of them did not have enough budget money to fulfill the campaign promises. So the US government asked for a loan from its own bank, the Fed. Fed and printed the right amount. And subsequently money was printed for other programs, other presidents. In general, this public debt looks like a debt from the left pocket to the right when the owner transfers money. And all countries have taken this path.

Currently, US government debt is 62% of GDP. The public debt of Russia is 84%. Japan 164%. Germany 83%. France 82%. China 34%. Etc. And nothing the world lives and does not think to fall into the abyss. And it so happened that the era when money must have been provided with gold has passed. Now there are some other economic provisions. Money lives on its own.

Yes, the US military budget is huge and we should be happy to reduce it, and not be malicious. After all, its decrease speaks only about one thing, the general tension and confrontation with the WORLD decreases.

By the way, in the US budget, health care spending has always exceeded defense spending. I foresee the laughter of Uroshniks.

US budget for 2012. Expenses.

For healthcare 891,2 billion dollars, 24,7%

For social needs 784,2 billion, 21,8%

For defense, 678,1 billion, 18,8%

Now I hear the grinding of teeth.

[Ducksar]

You probably wanted to say our "saws and kickbacks pale" in comparison with theirs ?!

[Orty]

Yeah wrong sorry

[Yeraz]

Hah, they say Azerbaijan is a militarized country and thankless. And in relation to GDP, Baku spends less and in relation to the population of the military less than in Armenia.

[Basileus]

Armenia is smaller in itself, but somehow it needs to maintain a balance of power.

[pinecone]

By itself, the volume of military spending by any country without taking into account its structure cannot be considered a full-fledged indicator. In particular, it is enough to compare the size of the monetary allowance for the personnel of the US Armed Forces with the armies of other countries that are in the "five" states with the most numerous armed forces.

[Russ69]

The most "free", "crap" and "peaceful" country, without a powerful army simply will not exist. The whole policy is based on the colonization of other countries, it's just now called democratization, but the essence has not changed.

By the way, the United States, urging Russia to reduce nuclear weapons, they themselves do with an accuracy of a turn:
US increases funding for nuclear weapons. In particular, spending on B61 bomb programs will rise. They are the main thermonuclear weapon of the strategic forces of the United States and are located in Europe.
A total of $ 537 million was initially allocated to the nuclear bomb financing program. But the Appropriations Committee, where most of the seats belong to the Republicans, allocated $ 23,7 million more than the department requested.
http://www.dni.ru/polit/2013/7/11/255965.html

[cool.ya-nikola]

Quote: Mart

SIPRI for the Russian Federation and China gives an assessment

Good day to you, Oleg! Excuse me, the figure is 1026 thousand people, is this taking into account the Internal Troops?

[PValery53]

Quote: Alekseir162

Despite the fact that the Pentagon spends candy wrappers for this (I think no one doubts that "amers" live at the expense of the rest of the world).

The fact that amers parasitize the world community is an eyesore, probably for everyone. By refusing to use their currency, we will "throw them off the tail". Oh yes, the world economy is too tied to this green dollar. Well, d-k, we must gradually get out of this shit. Together, and with the whole world ... drop this tick!

[pensioner]

Oleg! Thanks - tremendous !! But sorry:is less than 10000 people - not right: not less than 10000 people Sorry again! Here I am ... I’m the last bastard !!

[super.ufu2013]

a good budget is good but far from even half the battle