What drives some to make the assumption that the U.S. is NOT as Militarily Advanced as it truly is?

reply to post by peck420

The OP is 100% dead on correct about how insanely advanced our military has got to be. It's got to be a relatively small but very advanced group....because no vet or serving member I know or am related to has seen what accounts for this:

U.S. Defense spending in global context

The spending...when I first realized the true scale of it in real terms of what those dollars ARE...made me sick. One of those gut moments. Our military is smaller than China, by a large margin. Yet look at the spending difference. Russia isn't dramatically less advanced if noticeably less so than we are....they've stolen most before we've had a prototype of our own. ...but R&D doesn't...even...begin...to explain that. Annual spending. Every 12 months. (???) Seeing the breakdown doesn't make it more logical either. No..The OP is right about the advanced core somewhere...and it's costing enough to have the Starship Enterprise every couple years, too.

Originally posted by watchitburn
I have been in the military for 12 years now. I can vouch for your assertion that if the gloves ever came off, any conflict would end quickly and decisively.

A military is only as strong as the government, and by proxy, the people, behind it.

The gloves will never come off until it is far to late for everybody to care who wins.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

Not as disastrous as it would be for China! We do not import anything from China that is VITAL. The Chinese economy however is completely dependent upon U.S. Purchases. Split Infinity

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


US defence spending, it terms of dollars spent, means absolutely squat.

What would be valuable, and never actually reported, is the true purchasing power of the military in question.

And that title has belonged to China for a little over a decade now. The really big question is what has China done with that advantage?

At first blush, I would say squandered, but...

USA vs. Russia vs. Iraq vs. Great Britian vs. Japan vs. Iran vs. Germany vs. China vs. FILL IN THE BLANK ...

It's all a theatre to distract us all from the real war going on.

You nor I are likley to be on the 'winning' side.

reply to post by MonkeyFishFrog


In my experiences I have found that advertised BLUNDERS of the U.S. Military are by design. How easy is it to get more money for your Military System if you allow a SAFE BLUNDER to occur having the knowledge you were never really putting people in jeopardy since the other side will not attack but at the same time screaming...WE NEED TO UPGRADE OUR SYSTEMS.

Such events are systematic to how we sometimes lobby for spending. Split Infinity

no country has the logistics in place to have an entire army mobilized and sent to any location in the world as soon as the order is given, like the united states has.

plus a modern soldier in the u.s. can have air support in minutes if he is engaged in a battle and the enemy is out of reach or dug in.

imagine using an f-16 as your weapon if you can't reach him with your m4.

but then again, all that tech is expensive and limited.

a smart enemy would try to negate all of the u.s.'s main weapons and try to level the playing field.

but all that weaponry is redundant in the nuclear age. you have nothing to gain if you're all dead.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by peck420

 

The OP is 100% dead on correct about how insanely advanced our military has got to be. It's got to be a relatively small but very advanced group....because no vet or serving member I know or am related to has seen what accounts for this:

U.S. Defense spending in global context

The spending...when I first realized the true scale of it in real terms of what those dollars ARE...made me sick. One of those gut moments. Our military is smaller than China, by a large margin. Yet look at the spending difference. Russia isn't dramatically less advanced if noticeably less so than we are....they've stolen most before we've had a prototype of our own. ...but R&D doesn't...even...begin...to explain that. Annual spending. Every 12 months. (???) Seeing the breakdown doesn't make it more logical either. No..The OP is right about the advanced core somewhere...and it's costing enough to have the Starship Enterprise every couple years, too.

edit on 2-11-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

On one hand there is the possibility that the USA is building the Death Star

The other possibility is epic, mind altering levels of waste, fraud and corruption hiding behind a web of secrecy so big and deep nobody understands all of it.

I suspect reality is actually in between.

reply to post by Frogs

YES...that is a very GOOD example. We could easily wait till Spring when the Taliban come back to Afghanistan from the tribal regions of Pakistan. We could draw our forces back away from the boarder to draw them in then using Satellite IR-Detection fly in a Very Large and Multiple Wings of B-52H's loaded with New Smart Conventional Carpet Bombs which explode over target and have Hundreds of MIRV like sub_munitions which are rendered inert if they do not explode thus it keeps us in line with the International Cluster Bomb Ban.

We could destroy a swath 50 Miles Wide by 500 to 700 Miles long at the boarder and THAT would be the end of the issue. Split Infinity

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I realised that my last post was a little too ambiguous, so I figured I would clarify.

In terms of total USD spent, the US is the worlds largest.

But, it terms of value for every dollar spent the US is not even in the top 50.

Unfortunately, China (Russia, Brazil, India, etc) can get up to 10 times what the US can per dollar, due mostly to the severe differences in costs of living.

For example, a decent scientist in the US would cost $100,000+ USD. That same calibre of scientist in China could be had for $10,000 USD.

So comparing total dollars spent is really a waste of time.

reply to post by watchitburn


This is what I have been trying to explain to some over much time. The U.S. Military was put on a leash by POLITICIANS! You think we would have learned our lesson after Nam. If the leash is ever taken off...NO COUNTRY or even GROUP of COUNTRIES could stand against an all out Non-Nuclear U.S. Military attack.

Split Infinity

To be truthful there is only one place in the world that could blow us all to smitherines and we all hate talking about that, so lets look back a little about where this would have come from....

Yes there was a time that other nations could have come by and gave us a dose of medicine that would have caused great chaos in the Ole US. But if you look at what we have.... where we got it, by either sharing "democracies" with others, while sneeking their weapons out the back door, or backing our "power" with "allies" then that would pretty much sum up what the US is about.

If you can beat um.. join um.

Peace, NRE.

reply to post by peck420


Yes for the most part I can agree with that.

But if it ever comes to a fight on American soil for American civilians, the gloves will come off. Long before anyone makes the descision for it, and regardless of what any politician.has to say.

I apologize for the random periods, I'm on my phone and it is too tedious to go back and get them all.

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Incorrect.

The 'leash' on every Western military is provided by Joe Public.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by MonkeyFishFrog

 

In my experiences I have found that advertised BLUNDERS of the U.S. Military are by design. How easy is it to get more money for your Military System if you allow a SAFE BLUNDER to occur having the knowledge you were never really putting people in jeopardy since the other side will not attack but at the same time screaming...WE NEED TO UPGRADE OUR SYSTEMS.

Such events are systematic to how we sometimes lobby for spending. Split Infinity

History has proven unequivocally that you can have the most advanced military but if you're poorly organized or caught unawares you can be beaten by a naked army equipped with sticks and stones.

Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by peck420

 

Yes for the most part I can agree with that.

But if it ever comes to a fight on American soil for American civilians, the gloves will come off. Long before anyone makes the descision for it, and regardless of what any politician.has to say.

I apologize for the random periods, I'm on my phone and it is too tedious to go back and get them all.

No need to apologise, your points come through clear.

The highlighted section is my biggest concern, actually. The only way that any country could currently attack the US is via unconventional weapons. By the time the US responds, the world will be in trouble.

My personal belief is that we will all be considerable safer if the US is not so secure, as there would be less chance of a 'mutually assured destruction'. But, that seriously conflicts with my personal wish that we, as a species, be done with wars completely.

reply to post by peck420

Peck...the COVERT ULTRA-HIGH TECH WEAPON SYSTEMS that the U.S. has developed are HIDDEN with the total Military Budget. This is why it seems as if we are not getting our Moneys worth.

The REALITY is that the COVERT PROGRAMS BUDGET is larger than many Countries entire GNP.
Split Infinity

reply to post by peck420

Yes...and No. The People of the U.S. do not want WAR. But the World is a DANGEROUS PLACE! There is occasion now and then that the leash should come off.
Split Infinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by peck420

 

Peck...the COVERT ULTRA-HIGH TECH WEAPON SYSTEMS that the U.S. has developed are HIDDEN with the total Military Budget. This is why it seems as if we are not getting our Moneys worth.

Do you honestly think that other countries don't have covert operations? Every major player has them.

The REALITY is that the COVERT PROGRAMS BUDGET is larger than many Countries entire GNP.
Split Infinity

And, once again, in terms of absolute dollars that means jack squat. If it costs you $1 million to make a cruise missile, and it costs the other guy $100,000 to make a comparable missile, does it matter if his budget is 10 times less? No it doesn't. You will both be getting the same number of missiles as a percentage of your overall budget.

The unfortunate truth is, every Western military budget is grossly inflated in comparison to their true purchasing power, and every 3rd world country is grossly deflated.

Unless you actually think that $100 USD will get you the same goods in China as it would in the US. Or Russia, or Brazil, or India, or South Africa, etc.

reply to post by MonkeyFishFrog

This is true...but the level we are at now is so High in it's abilities...it Boggles the Mind. Can't use a Stick or a Stone if another country can't get to the Fight. Logistics are everything.

China has Millions of Soldiers but without any real Force Projection Capabilities these Soldiers just become....TARGETS. Split Infinity