Nb: this will include salaries, and, certainly in the UK's case, also pensions for retired service staff. It'll be a poor proxy for military might and scope, because of the huge differences in the amount of manpower & equipment each $ can purchase in various nations.
Bloomberg graphic for millitary spending * Sipri estimate. **Figures for Saudi Arabia are for the adopted budget, rather than actual expenditure. Note: Figures are in USD at 2017 prices and exchange rates. Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.pic.twitter.com/4mKvh8Odtr
-
-
-
Agree with your analysis ... under the assumption of 10 times lower salary the Chinese expenditure for military has a much higher output for each $ ... yet US will most likely dominate the world for the next 15-25 years due to technology lead but can US remain the hegemon?
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Thank goodness nuclear deterrence ensures that regional disputes do not escalate into WW3.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Graphically illustrates a point I keep making about the weirdness of climate warriors demanding 'everyone agree to fight emissions'. If 'everyone' could really agree on just one thing, would that be climate change? Surely war would be a higher priority.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.