Does the US need more military spending?

[Medwind]

Does America need to spend a higher amount of money on it's military in 2019-2020? With the modernization of Russian and Chinese militaries, and the recurring threats faced abroad, does the US need to increase spending to stay competitive? There are many problems that need to be addressed, such as a replacement to the brad, better training, (training has been extended recently to account for this however), the fact that we're downsizing at a time we need to be expanding, poor VA services, etc. etc. Has President Trump met his obligations to the military when he promised to support it while campaigning? With many overseas threats in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and North Korea, among others, is the US military adequately prepared for any conflicts that might arise? Are we spending too much as it is? Do we need to scale further back, so as to spend more on healthcare, education etc. or do the threats we face in a resurgent, ambitious Russia, and a modernizing China trump such concerns? More information here:

https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2015/0 ... ng-vehicle
https://www.newsweek.com/if-war-north-k ... der-707212
https://www.theepochtimes.com/chinas-mi ... 68768.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/china-mili ... rnization/
https://www.newsweek.com/china-military ... rld-785045
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-mil ... star-says/
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-we-n ... _b_5960804
https://patriotsnews.com/pentagon-milit ... r-upgrade/
http://time.com/4680885/nato-defense-sp ... get-trump/

What should the US response to foreign aggression be? Are US allies meeting their treaty obligations? If you're not a US citizen, please feel free to talk about the state of your nations military, what your opinion on it is, and your opinion on US military spending is as well. Hearing the opinions of citizens of other countries can provide an important third person perspective on this matter.

[Cetacea]

No

[Medwind]

No

Yes, great rebuttal. 10/10 You've convinced me.

[Risottia]

What should the US response to foreign aggression be?

Aggression?
Exactly what US territories are currently occupied or bombed by foreign armies?

Are US allies meeting their treaty obligations?

Yes.

Anyway I hope the US military expands its budget even more. Ideally to 50% of the US gov't budget and buying a lot of stuff from Beretta, Agusta-Westland, Thales, Rheinmetall and Leonardo.

[Medwind]

No

I really love how you managed to answer all of my questions with a single word. I mean, I didn't expect any significant amount of support for this, but I was hoping to see something positive. With China, and Russia increasing spending, North Korea, and Iran both pursuing nuclear weapons, the number of terrorist organizations world wide, the historical failure of isolationist, and pacifist movements, with the EU divided, and not meeting their treaty obligations, with Russia expanding, and projecting power across the globe, including in the US's backyard, and so on, and so forth, people are still so anti military, that they refuse to acknowledge the threats around them, and respond appropriately. I suppose we have to wait until our citizens are dying before we can actually prepare.

[Medwind]

What should the US response to foreign aggression be?

Aggression?
Exactly what US territories are currently occupied or bombed by foreign armies?

Are US allies meeting their treaty obligations?

Yes.

Anyway I hope the US military expands its budget even more. Ideally to 50% of the US gov't budget and buying a lot of stuff from Beretta, Agusta-Westland, Thales, Rheinmetall and Leonardo.

Did you read a single link? The answers are there, but I'll cover it a bit. There are only 5 NATO countries meeting the required military spending, as outlined by the treaties they are bound to uphold. Russian ships in the gulf of Mexico, Russia annexing territory in Ukraine, sending troops into the middle east & Africa, threatening nuclear war, China using belligerent rhetoric, and modernizing, and expanding the military, terrorists abroad, North Korea prepping missile sites, and continuing nuclear research, etc. etc. I suppose by your standards Europe wasn't under threat until Hitler invaded Poland.

[Kowani]

What, so America can have quadruple the rest of the world’s aircraft carriers?

[Valkalan]

Having served in the US armed forces, I've observed that huge amounts of the budget are generally wasted on bureaucracy, benefits and aid programs rather than weapons and training. Actually, this is common around the world. Many European nations push their budgets toward the 3% of GDP NATO standard by simply increasing personnel expenses rather than buying new weapons.

Honestly, the military has more than enough funding, but it needs to use it more efficiently.

[Havarland]

No

I really love how you managed to answer all of my questions with a single word. I mean, I didn't expect any significant amount of support for this, but I was hoping to see something positive. With China, and Russia increasing spending, North Korea, and Iran both pursuing nuclear weapons, the number of terrorist organizations world wide, the historical failure of isolationist, and pacifist movements, with the EU divided, and not meeting their treaty obligations, with Russia expanding, and projecting power across the globe, including in the US's backyard, and so on, and so forth, people are still so anti military, that they refuse to acknowledge the threats around them, and respond appropriately. I suppose we have to wait until our citizens are dying before we can actually prepare.

Most people on NS are like this. Even in "Would you live in AN?" etc forums. That's the reason why this forum and game is getting kinda boring.
I say yes, the US needs more military spending. The World is very unstable now.

[Medwind]

What, so America can have quadruple the rest of the world’s aircraft carriers?

Stop exaggerating things also, realize that this applies to many things, not just aircraft carriers, China & India's militaries outnumber us, I don't see anyone calling for them to cut back on the number of troops they field.

[New haven america]

What should the US response to foreign aggression be?

Aggression?
Exactly what US territories are currently occupied or bombed by foreign armies?

Are US allies meeting their treaty obligations?

Yes.

Anyway I hope the US military expands its budget even more. Ideally to 50% of the US gov't budget and buying a lot of stuff from Beretta, Agusta-Westland, Thales, Rheinmetall and Leonardo.

No they don't.

Only ~4-5/29 NATO members actually pay their required dues.

[New haven america]

Nope.

/thread

[Radiatia]

I'm not sure whether or not more spending is justified - the assumption is that more spending will mean more effectiveness, but that might not necessarily hold true.

Either way, the US does need to upgrade and modernise its military forces. It is facing competition from Russia and China who are slowly but surely making the technology the US currently rely on obsolete, and I do think the US has been complacent for too long.

[Aclion]

8.5% seems like enough. We should be doing more to ensure we're funding stuff the pentagon actually wants though.

[New haven america]

8.5% seems like enough. We should be doing more to ensure we're funding stuff the pentagon actually wants though.

The Pentagon wants more money...

[Indian Empire]

There are 750 Million people in poverty on this earth and we're asking if we need more military spending?
There are 30 Million Americans without insurance and we're asking if we need more military spending?

Seems like a good idea. (Sarcasm)

[Havarland]

Nope.

/thread

Yup,
we just got a brand new TV show called "Miami Vice" and "Full house" and ever since then I have fallen in love with The USA and I want them to take over the world.
Now, I am obligated to say that we're on the first season, but Americans can already probably see the second season. If The USA were to take over the world, I'd see new seasons much faster.

[Saiwania]

No it doesn't, but greater spending efficiency is needed. Russia and China builds comparable if not superior fighter aircraft at less cost. There is no reason why this can't be the case with the US as well. Take away Lockheed Martin's control and go with a state owned firm and the F-35 would cost millions instead of billions or trillions.

[Havarland]

There are 750 Million people in poverty on this earth and we're asking if we need more military spending?
There are 30 Million Americans without insurance and we're asking if we need more military spending?

Seems like a good idea. (Sarcasm)

The World is over populated. There isn't enough jobs for everybody, especially now when the AI is taking over. There are robot chefs and self driving cars and soon they'll be pretty common.
We need fewer people if you ask me

[Medwind]

Having served in the US armed forces, I've observed that huge amounts of the budget are generally wasted on bureaucracy, benefits and aid programs rather than weapons and training. Actually, this is common around the world. Many European nations push their budgets toward the 3% of GDP NATO standard by simply increasing personnel expenses rather than buying new weapons.

Honestly, the military has more than enough funding, but it needs to use it more efficiently.

C'mon battle, you gotta know the brad needs to go, thing throws track all the time. When I was a dismount I was in one that caught fire, from some electrical problem. Trash man. We need more money, and we need to increase the size of personnel. They are handing out chapters like their candy, trying to get rid of people when we should be trying to increase retention, and get more people in, especially in our current world situation.

[Indian Empire]

There are 750 Million people in poverty on this earth and we're asking if we need more military spending?
There are 30 Million Americans without insurance and we're asking if we need more military spending?

Seems like a good idea. (Sarcasm)

The World is over populated. There isn't enough jobs for everybody, especially now when the AI is taking over. There are robot chefs and self driving cars and soon they'll be pretty common.
We need fewer people if you ask me

So are you saying those problems are impossible to tackle, even though much of the industrialized world has to this point (barring the US, of course, because of corporate interests).

[Purgatio]

Just to clarify something, the OP talks about US allies meeting their treaty obligations, and some of the articles linked make reference to the NATO defense spending targets, nothing in the North Atlantic Treaty actually compels or obligates Contracting Parties to spend 2% of GDP on defense, and NATO's annual report (https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/nato-defense-spending-target/index.html) noted that whilst only a minority of members met that target, there was a noticeable increase in defense spending across the board as a percentage of GDP and numerous members like Romania were close to hitting the target, so the idea or the notion that NATO members are just leeching off the US military spending isn't really true

[Havarland]

The World is over populated. There isn't enough jobs for everybody, especially now when the AI is taking over. There are robot chefs and self driving cars and soon they'll be pretty common.
We need fewer people if you ask me

So are you saying those problems are impossible to tackle, even though much of the industrialized world has to this point (barring the US, of course, because of corporate interests).

What I am saying is that The USA and Americans in general shouldn't care about the world. Most people that live in poverty are from poor countries and they bread like rabbits.
Not America's problem.

And there are already robot lawyers and judges (on test now)…This isn't the industrialisation era anymore.

[Medwind]

8.5% seems like enough. We should be doing more to ensure we're funding stuff the pentagon actually wants though.

We only spend 3% annually though, I agree on aiming for what the pentagon wants, and not what politicians think is good.

[Havarland]

Just to clarify something, the OP talks about US allies meeting their treaty obligations, and some of the articles linked make reference to the NATO defense spending targets, nothing in the North Atlantic Treaty actually compels or obligates Contracting Parties to spend 2% of GDP on defense, and NATO's annual report (https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/nato-defense-spending-target/index.) noted that whilst only a minority of members met that target, there was a noticeable increase in defense spending across the board as a percentage of GDP and numerous members like Romania were close to hitting the target, so the idea or the notion that NATO members are just leeching off the US military spending isn't really true

Your link is broken. Even if I delete the "." at the end.
Thank you very much for providing a beautiful broken link.