4 ms·
That depends on your model of international relations. Most states have recognized that international relationships are far from zero sum, and that wars between
by pasabagi 5y ago
That depends on your model of international relations. Most states have recognized that international relationships are far from zero sum, and that wars between peer competitors are almost never worth it. Indeed, the success stories since WW2 have been those countries that have spent very little on weapons, and engaged in few wars (with the US being the exception).
Even if you take WW2 and WW1 into account, the biggest winner of those conflicts (the US) spent the least on armaments prior, and had probably the least aggressive foreign policy of any major power.
- boppo1 5y ago> have been those countries that have spent very little on weapons, and engaged in few wars (with the US being the exception). Perhaps, because the US is an exception.
- pasabagi 5y agoMaybe? China has historically spent very little on its military, and it's not like they benefited from US protection. Quite the opposite, in fact.
- nradov 5y agoChina's military spending is now effectively near parity with the USA and rising rapidly. https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/chinas-defense-spending-larger-it-looks https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/chinas-defense-s...