Why Do We Have Such A Big Military?

[BrianH]

As far as our military is concerned. As of May of 2007, approx. 1 1/2 million Americans were active duty military and approx. 1/ 1/2 million in the reserves. That makes up about 3 million in the military.

Military of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiAnswers - How many Americans fought in World War 2

In comparison, between 16 and 20 million were in the military during WWII. Drastic difference. I only say between 16 and 20 because this wiki link says 16 mil., but I've seen other links that say 19 mil. Know your numbers before you post a bogus argument. 3 million protecting 300,000,000 is really not that big.

 

[Charles_Main]

As far as our military is concerned. As of May of 2007, approx. 1 1/2 million Americans were active duty military and approx. 1/ 1/2 million in the reserves. That makes up about 3 million in the military.

Military of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiAnswers - How many Americans fought in World War 2

In comparison, between 16 and 20 million were in the military during WWII. Drastic difference. I only say between 16 and 20 because this wiki link says 16 mil., but I've seen other links that say 19 mil. Know your numbers before you post a bogus argument. 3 million protecting 300,000,000 is really not that big.

Very well said.

Look at it this way, The US has the third largest population of any nation in the world, and the second largest standing army.

Many nations around the world have much bigger militarizes when compared to their populations.(per capita)

Examples:

The us has a population of 304,695,000
with a standing army of 1,450,000 and reserves totaling 1,463,000
for a total of 2,913,000
so about 0.9% of it's population in the military or reserves.


North Korea has a population of 23,790,000
with a standing army 1,106,000 and reserves totaling 4,700,000
for a total of 5,806,000
Or about 24.4% of it's population in the military or reserves.

Russia has a population of 141,888,900
With a standing army of 1,200,000 and reserves totaling 1,620,000
for a total of 2,913,000
So about 1.9% of it's population in the military or reserves.

Iran has a population of 70,495,782
With a standing army of 615,000 and reserves totaling 350,000
for a total of 965,000
So about 1.3% of it's population in the military or reserves.

Vietnam has a population of 87,375,000
With a standing army of 484,000 and reserves totaling 3,000,000
For a total of 3,484,000
So about 3.9% of its population in the military or reserves.

Syria has a population of 19,929,000
With a standing army of 296,000 and reserves totaling 354,000
For a total of 650,000
So about 3.2% of its population in the military or reserves.

I could go on but I think you can see the pattern, There are many nations who have a higher % of there population in the military or reserves than the US.

On a side note, can you say HOLY CRAP almost 25% of North Koreans are in the military or Reserves LOL


Sources:
List of countries by size of armed forces - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and
List of countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And in my Russian History II: Stalinist Era, Russian History II: Russian since Stalin and Far East History courses, taught by a man who served this country in Korea and did his primary research in Moscow both before and after the fall of the Soviet Union and got his PhD in Comparative Communist Studies at BC. I took 18 history classes to get my degree.

Now instead of telling me what I don't know, tell me how Marshall was in China after being recalled.

Mis remembered by a couple months, sue me. 47/48 same thing, as you well know. Now remind us how Roosevelt did not make the deal with the Soviets to force Nationalist China to allow Communist participation in the Government? Remind us how the US did NOT cut arms and ammo shipments to Nationalist when they refused. Explain to us where The communist with no outside support got all those Japanese weapons, ammunition and equipment to beat the Nationalists. Tell us where the Soviets put the 700k weapons and equipment they got when the manchuko garrisons surrendered.

Remind us how Marshall did NOT advice Truman to rearm and reequip the nationalists when he got back?

 

[Paulie]

Mis remembered by a couple months

Roger, is that you?

 

[Annie]

What words? What do we need to back up so desperatly? Why doesn't China feel the need to have this gigantic military force?


History teaches many lessons, like wasting resources can damage your nation's ability to move forward.

I thoiught this would be an esay question for people to answer, but all I get are vague references, an insult and foolery.

Congrats!

Actually China spends a bit more of its GDP on military than does the US:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2034rank.html

 

[BrianH]

By your own admission they are not threats to our homeland. You pointed out foreign nations we might get dragged into a war to defend. I just do not see them as a threat where we need this overbloated, giant military. I'll also point out, that whereas we spend more money than the rest of the world combined on the military, most of the other countries that have significant military spending are our allies. So what's the point?

The world is moving past war as a tool for international order. It's just becoming obsolete. The US and China couldn't fight a war with the global economy surviving. It would be such a disaster for the entire world that its almost unthinkable.

Da Nile isn't just a river in Egypt, obviously...

There are conflicts and wars every day. Everyone thought WWI had solved things until WWII.

 

[Reality]

Mis remembered by a couple months, sue me. 47/48 same thing, as you well know.

Don't wanna sue, just stop being a confrontational ass to me.

Now remind us how Roosevelt did not make the deal with the Soviets to force Nationalist China to allow Communist participation in the Government?

What was it called? Where was it made?

China was thought of as a better market than a proxy. Coalition government keeps them off the battlefield and makes the market viable. Good policy given the desires.

Remind us how the US did NOT cut arms and ammo shipments to Nationalist when they refused.

Marshall and everyone else had lost faith in Chiang.

Explain to us where The communist with no outside support got all those Japanese weapons, ammunition and equipment to beat the Nationalists. Tell us where the Soviets put the 700k weapons and equipment they got when the manchuko garrisons surrendered.

Obviously from the Soviets. Stalin pumped a billion $ in as well. Once Mao started writing about the superiority of Asian communism in '47 the Sino-Soviet split began, in my opinion. Stalin couldn't take anyone being anything but his subordinate.

Remind us how Marshall did NOT advice Truman to rearm and reequip the nationalists when he got back?

Have a source? To the best of my recollection, Marshall recommended that his mission be terminated. Chiang refused to do anything but line his military up and be flanked no matter what anyone told him. Mao didn't win the war, Chiang lost it. Thats how his dumb ass ended up on Taiwan with his hot wife who was way smarter than he ever was.

 

[Charles_Main]

Check out how much North Korea, and China spend on their militaries compared to GDP people, our military is neither the biggest, or the most spent on, per capita.

 

[Charles_Main]

Check out how much North Korea, and China spend on their militaries compared to GDP people, our military is neither the biggest, or the most spent on, per capita

 

[Orange_Juice]

exactly my point:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Seven years after the September 11 attacks, the Pentagon on Thursday officially named "the long war" against global extremism as its top priority and pledged to avert any conventional military threat from China or Russia through dialogue.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Defense Department, in a new national defense strategy, also emphasized the need to subordinate military operations to "soft power" initiatives to undermine Islamist militancy by promoting economic, political and social development in vulnerable corners of the world.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he hoped the change would help establish permanent institutional support for counterinsurgency skills acquired in Iraq and Afghanistan within a defense community heavily skewed in favor of expensive conventional and strategic modernization programs.

"If I could describe the new national defense strategy in one word, it would be 'balance,"' Gates told reporters, saying there was a danger that U.S. ability to wage war against militant groups could be neglected in the future without a shift in emphasis.

The pragmatic tone of the 23-page document, crafted to reflect Gates' priorities, contrasted sharply at different points with the last national strategy, issued in March 2005, under Gates' more brash predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld.

Like Rumsfeld, Gates sees parallels between violent Islamist theology and the 20th-century ideologies of fascism and communism.

Where Rumsfeld called for pre-emptive action against threats and envisioned U.S. partnerships with "like-minded states," the new strategy calls for the patient accumulation of quiet success against militant adversaries and the importance of improved relations with "old allies and new partners."

"For the foreseeable future, winning the long war against violent extremist movements will be the central objective of the U.S.," the 2008 strategy said.

Pentagon makes fighting extremism its top priority - Yahoo! News

 

[Orange_Juice]

Check out how much North Korea, and China spend on their militaries compared to GDP people, our military is neither the biggest, or the most spent on, per capita

That doesn't matter, they were surrounded by enemines, we are not

 

[BrianH]

That doesn't matter, they were surrounded by enemines, we are not

Proof please?

 

[Orange_Juice]

Actually China spends a bit more of its GDP on military than does the US:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2034rank.html

Ya, and our GDP is how many times bigger than theirs?

 

[Orange_Juice]

Very well said.

Look at it this way, The US has the third largest population of any nation in the world, and the second largest standing army.

Many nations around the world have much bigger militarizes when compared to their populations.(per capita)

Examples:

The us has a population of 304,695,000
with a standing army of 1,450,000 and reserves totaling 1,463,000
for a total of 2,913,000
so about 0.9% of it's population in the military or reserves.


North Korea has a population of 23,790,000
with a standing army 1,106,000 and reserves totaling 4,700,000
for a total of 5,806,000
Or about 24.4% of it's population in the military or reserves.

Russia has a population of 141,888,900
With a standing army of 1,200,000 and reserves totaling 1,620,000
for a total of 2,913,000
So about 1.9% of it's population in the military or reserves.

Iran has a population of 70,495,782
With a standing army of 615,000 and reserves totaling 350,000
for a total of 965,000
So about 1.3% of it's population in the military or reserves.

Vietnam has a population of 87,375,000
With a standing army of 484,000 and reserves totaling 3,000,000
For a total of 3,484,000
So about 3.9% of its population in the military or reserves.

Syria has a population of 19,929,000
With a standing army of 296,000 and reserves totaling 354,000
For a total of 650,000
So about 3.2% of its population in the military or reserves.

I could go on but I think you can see the pattern, There are many nations who have a higher % of there population in the military or reserves than the US.

On a side note, can you say HOLY CRAP almost 25% of North Koreans are in the military or Reserves LOL


Sources:
List of countries by size of armed forces - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and
List of countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Great, let's be like shithole countries like Iran, Syria and North Korea!

Just wonderful!

 

[Orange_Juice]

Mis remembered by a couple months, sue me. 47/48 same thing, as you well know. Now remind us how Roosevelt did not make the deal with the Soviets to force Nationalist China to allow Communist participation in the Government? Remind us how the US did NOT cut arms and ammo shipments to Nationalist when they refused. Explain to us where The communist with no outside support got all those Japanese weapons, ammunition and equipment to beat the Nationalists. Tell us where the Soviets put the 700k weapons and equipment they got when the manchuko garrisons surrendered.

Remind us how Marshall did NOT advice Truman to rearm and reequip the nationalists when he got back?

Were they not just left there when the Japs surrendered?

 

[Gunny]

That doesn't matter, they were surrounded by enemines, we are not

Correct. Our worst enemies live here.

 

[BrianH]

Were they not just left there when the Japs surrendered?

Sound like you're the one caught up in the WWII days....

 

[mightypeon]

As the old saying goes: In war the strong conquer the weak, in peace the rich conquer the poor.

However, beeing strong in peace times can make someone rather poor, so the strong have little interest in beeing peacefull. Coupled with the not exactly great US economy, the US reliance on Strength does in fact raise some eyebrows here in Europe.

On the other hand, on could hardly expect the US to throw away its military Strength in the face of a decreasing economy, especially with some Terrorist nutheads providing free Casus Bellis for everyone interested in grabbing some Oil.

If I would be from the US, I would propably call for a revamp of the military instead of a size cut, backed by a rigourus investigation where all that money is actually going to.

At the moment, it seems that the ability to project military strength for a long time, is more important than beeing able to cause a lot of damage in a short time.
That the US is currently offering armed service for citicenship deals seems to imply moves in this direction.

 

[chopcrazy]

Were they not just left there when the Japs surrendered?

What size military do you think the U.S.A. should have? What troop levels are would you deem sufficent to defend, keep the sea lanes open and help with our allies. If you want to be the the world's policeman, how many more troops would you want to have?

How much should be spend on R&D? Development helps reduce troop levels. I am sure this is one of the major differences between our country and others is R&D.

 

[editec]

I don't think our military is too big.

I think our enemies are too small.