4 ms·
$800 billion is high for defense, it's nowhere close to outrageous given the responsibilities the US has as the world's only superpower (see: helping Ukraine de
by adventured 4y ago
$800 billion is high for defense, it's nowhere close to outrageous given the responsibilities the US has as the world's only superpower (see: helping Ukraine defend itself with an inevitable $100+ billion in funding), along with having the world's largest economy and the economic interests that go with that.
3% of GDP is not unreasonable for US military spending. US GDP is estimated to be around $25-$26 trillion for 2022.
What's outrageous are countries in Europe spending sub 2% of GDP on defense and relying on the US to defend Europe from Russia.
- ROTMetro 4y agoHence, the Euro is now worth less than the Dollar because there is no Euro without the Dollar.
- smallstepforman 4y agoIf the Western European neighbours were a bit more politically neutral and as compassionate as their eastern neighbour, there wouldn’t be politically induced tension in the region. Every sane person would rather spend 2% of GDP on health, infrastructure, research etc, but when you observe year after year western abuse and provocations, you kind of start divesting into defense budgets. Where was the outcry for the last 8 years of bombings, civil rights abuse, threats etc?
- josephcsible 4y ago> the responsibilities the US has as the world's only superpower Nitpick: the world's only good superpower. China is a superpower too, but an evil one.
- croes 4y ago>Nitpick: the world's only good superpower. The Middle East begs to differ.
- ptruesdell 4y agoSounds like your comment was written by a literal child.
- croes 4y agoSince when is the amount spend a could indicator for the defensibility of a country. You could spend 5% of your GDP in scrap and consultancy contracts and would be worse than a country spending 1% in good weapons. By your logic Russia should have won already.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]