world

World military spending grows despite pandemic

28 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


28 Comments
Login to comment

This reflects growing concerns over perceived threats from strategic competitors such as China and Russia

Why should they? When Biden shows NO SIGN of reducing the military spending!

4 ( +9 / -5 )

That’s because there is a new cold war between China and its allies and America and its allies, which means a lot of spending on steel and other metal gear

hopefully it won’t change into a hot war any time soon as spending on steel and other metal gear would increase even more

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Humanity has no future.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Arms sales = $ (via tax payers' monies, kickbacks into politicians' pockets)

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Every free nation in this world needs to invest in military to remain free, while china and other nations have plans to postulate, intimidate and dominate, !

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

Perhaps they think all this military power will frighten Covd-19

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Looking at ants teaches us that a military must be strong.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

while china and other nations have plans to postulate

?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

China's military spending has risen in tandem with its growing economy and has seen an increase for 26 consecutive years, reaching an estimated $252 billion in 2020.

More significantly, sneaky China has spent more for military buildups under the name of "non-military" programmes.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

The US may spend the most in dollar terms but due to everything in China being so much cheaper they have an advantage on troop numbers and equipment purchasing. If China's military was calculated at US prices they would be spending double what the Americans spend.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Peter 14Today 03:52 pm JST

The US may spend the most in dollar terms but due to everything in China being so much cheaper they have an advantage on troop numbers and equipment purchasing. If China's military was calculated at US prices they would be spending double what the Americans spend.

Yes Peter you are right but Made in china is usually not quality and has large malfunction factor or it fails quickly as we all know.

Best not to use chinese made weapons for defense one would think.,

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

No point to invest in dangerous weapons anymore. Smart countries should invest in moon or Mars colonies. A nuclear war will cause the sun to be blocked for at least two decades, killing all food sources.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Made in china is usually not quality and has large malfunction factor or it fails quickly as we all know.

It only takes one bullet to kill a soldier. The quality is cheap and not up to European built standards but if they can safely get people into space and return safely they can build reasonably reliable simple guns and munitions. They managed to kill plenty of allied soldiers in Korea.

In WWII Germany went the high tech option because they could not out manufacture the allies. While they had the best tanks, machine guns, Submarines and first Jet fighters, it was the simple and reliable mass produced equipment used by the allies that won the war. Having ten or twenty times the amount of equipment beat the higher capability equipment and vehicles that the Axis used. Dont count out a nation known as the worlds factory with the highest population of people able to do military service from being able to hold its own. They need more experience but if they can last long enough to get that then anything is possible.

The allies have safety in numbers if they maintain solidarity. That is why China is always trying to handle nations one at a time and why they complain about alliances to "contain". They are smart enough to see the danger in many enemies as opposed to only the US whom they believe they can almost compete with on an even level.

Learn from history. Germany could not win alone against many. Japan could not win alone against many. even today no single nation can win alone against many which is one reason the US always maintains alliances and builds coalitions. Well everyone but the previous US leader. China understands this. China is weary of this. China will bide its time until it can see a way forward to get what it wants. Find a way to separate alliances and deal one on one.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The amount spent is calculated in US dollars. The article even says:

The US pay a private what China pays a major. How much does it cost China for one platoon of soldiers? Enough to cover maybe five US soldier's. The values received are totally different for the same amount spent in US dollars.

If the US cost for one division of Infantry is $1,000,000 a month in wages what China gets for that money is ten times more.

Cost of rifles is cheaper, bullets are cheaper, everything is cheaper to China.

One US scientist gets what $100,000 US a year while his Chinese counterpart gets $20,000 so they get five scientists for one in the US system. Seeing the picture yet? The actual value is skewed due to what they each get for the same US dollar spent. If their soldiers were paid the same and their bullets cost the same and everything else cost the same then you would find China paying double at least what the US pays.

Their (China's) armed forces are much larger and now they have a larger navy by number of ships.

Do you understand yet what I am pointing out?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

As General Eisenhower warned, the military industrial complex is a threat to mankind, yet even today too many refuse to acknowledge that its offensive and immoral offspring of government-sponsored armament sales bought with dirty dollars and the spilled blood of the innocent is nothing less than a metastasis of the cancer of global capitalism. Time is surely running out for foolish and selfish homo sapiens hell-bent on self-destruction.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Sad news for humanity. I wish China would spend all these billions on finding a cure for the Wuhan virus which has killed millions of people so far. However, I don't expect compassion from such a regime.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Global military spending increased by 2.6 percent to $1,981 billion (about 1,650 billion euros) in 2020, when global GDP shrank 4.4 percent, according to a report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

nearly 50% of that is spent by America. Defence budget $800 billion.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

"Shocking", said nobody who's been paying attention...

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Their (China's) armed forces are much larger and now they have a larger navy by number of ships.

Do you understand yet what I am pointing out?

You seem to be pointing out that China has cheaply created more targets for the US, if a war breaks out.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Adventurism by dictators and autocrats causes instability at the nation-state level. No one is rearming because of the junta in Myanmar or the fool in the Philippines, who are solely focused on internal challenges. The vast growth in worldwide military spending is because of tyrants with designs on other nations' territories and resources, and the need to deter them.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Peter14

Only takes one nutcase with the right button to sort it all out, hope that button isnt manufactured in China when the time comes to push it is all...................bullets guns what are you talking about lad.

Todays modern wars wont be fought like 1911 sunshine.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Don’t spend it for such an expensive and useless garbage. Spend it for me instead. In addition I am very much cheaper and also more peaceful. Think about my proposal. lol

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@us reamer: As General Eisenhower warned, the military industrial complex is a threat to mankind

Ike wasn’t saying mankind was threatened when he was using the US military industrial complex to put an end to the Axis powers during WWII. To say that General Eisenhower was against military spending is misinformation. He was warning that like all interest groups with claims on large amounts of government spending, say like the Democrats, their outsized influence can distort democracy and imperil its long term viability.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Bjorn Tomention

bullets guns what are you talking about lad.Todays modern wars wont be fought like 1911 sunshine.

Modern wars have more ways to kill people but guns and bullets are still the main infantry weapon of choice for every army in the world daisy.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

While they had the best tanks, machine guns, Submarines 

The German equipment was not always the best, or even that good but I don't want to spend several paragraphs writing an informed critique. But I will say the US had by far the best submarines in the world until the closing days of WWII. US torpedos were bad until 1943 but the boat themselves were the best. Armament, endurance, sensors, all superior to every other navy. The US had a completely different way of powering their subs than any other navy at the time (now all DE boats use this system) and that is part of the reason US subs had endurance superior to all but a few big Japanese subs. Other navies had the diesel engine and electric motor on the same shaft and the motor became a generator when the diesel was powering the props. To run on batteries the engine was de-clutched from the shaft. This forced the diesel engine and electric motor to run at inefficient speeds. The US let the diesel power a generator at the ideal speed for the diesel. Electric motors powered the shafts from either generator or battery power. The motor ran at high speed ( more efficient) and a gearbox reduced the output to shaft speed. US boats were air conditioned by 1939, which kept them dry inside. Not a small thing, they didn't suffer the problems experienced with other navies subs with mold, spoiled food, corroded malfunctioning electronics and in the tropics, problems with heat exhaustion of the crew. Non air conditioned subs could get up to 140 degrees inside in the tropics. US boats also had enough fresh water to allow daily showers and regular laundry service. Crews were fresh and alert and their stellar combat record in the Pacific is testament to overall excellence of US submarine design. German boats didn't have the endurance to make the same long range patrols US boats did as a matter of routine. It wasn't until the very last days of WWII when the first few Type XXI boats hit the water that the Germans had a clearly superior submarine.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Modern wars have more ways to kill people but guns and bullets are still the main infantry weapon of choice for every army in the world daisy.

A war between the west and China will be fought primarily with air and naval power. The NATO war for Kosovo was the prototype, a war won primarily by the massive application of air power. There was very little ground combat by NATO forces. In a war against China most of what the Army and Marine Corps would be doing is landing on uninhabited or friendly islands, setting up anti-ship and anti-aircraft missile batteries, engage Chinese ships and aircraft in a coordinated action with the Navy hammer and anvil style and once the battle is over, pack up and leave.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

 The NATO war for Kosovo was the prototype, a war won primarily by the massive application of air power. 

NATO didn’t actually win this war. The NATO air strikes accelerated Serbian atrocities, and Milosevic went home when he was finished.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

hope that button isnt manufactured in China when the time comes to push it is all

LOL at this dumb comment!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites