SS said,

---

"That's all right, we'll keep throwing money at it until it kills people with precision."

---

Sounds very American alright...

When the first Nuclur bomb was made, the countries had three ways they could do it. All were expencive, all were tedious and long.

Germany did plan A
England did plan B, then gave up and worked on Radar
Russia did plan C

The States on the other hand, they decided to do all three.

The moto of the US, "Money, it solves almost everything, everything else responds well to the army."

No offence to our American friends, I hope my family dosn't shoot me now....

Life: No one gets out alive.

I didn;t know that the Republic of Ireland had an Air Force?

"A TopGun through and through"

@RILMS - lol. You gota admit it works tho

corse the republic of ireland have an air force top gun there not that poor ok us english kinda made the problem worse but the still have indepednce and there for have a right to have an air focre and afford it even thought they dont need it because there realtivly (not referring to paramiliatrys ) peaceful and there dont get in to wars ect

Captain

@ WB,

lol, true that. And you guys have the money to do it too.

Life: No one gets out alive.

@RILMS, not to get political, but rather to correct an assumption:

---

The moto of the US, "Money, it solves almost everything, everything else responds well to the army."

---

Our miliarty spending is only 3% of GDP, the lowest in all of US history. As opposed to the early 60's when it was closer to 50%. While social programs make up nearly 50% today, they used to be only around 3% back in the 60's.

You can agree or disagree whether the change in percentages is a good thing. But I just wanted to show how much more efficient the spending has had to become due to so many who don't want the military to have more.

Just a fact correction, not an argument.


Sir Spectre


... No more signature. <-----Irony

Edited by - Sir Spectre on 13-11-2003 19:14:13

@bob3terd, well done! I actually understood that 100%, now just work on those spellings!

@sS, 3%? are u sure? obv. i don't know for certain not being american, but i thought it was nearer 10% which would be a more realistic figure (i'm not promoting a 7% increase in US military spending! i just want to know the actual figure now) and are u quite sure about the 50% in the 1960's. i happen to remember that Soviet military spending from the mid-60s to the mid 80s averaged 22% iirc and they always spent far more than the West as a % of GNP. Can we find out for sure? not having a go or being pedantic, but if it's 3% as u say I'll eat my hat (Bertie Bassett's liquorice allsorts one of course!)

lol. Never seen neone eat a hat. Be shure to take a picture

I have no clue what we're spending, but with the recent war(s) it ought to be higher than 3%. As to the cold war all bets are off. We had a few radical anti comunist presidents who would foot the bill for anything, plus the pentagon was paying $50 for a screwdriver?! Or somthing like that...

@ SS,

Have you counted for the descripency between the american doller in the 1960s and the current value today? Or the changes in the Gross National Product in the two diffrent time periods?

And regardless of the military spending, I beleave the statment is correct because of the American theroy that they should remove things that do not conform to themselves.

Slightly like the British durring the days of Colinization.

And yes, I am being political. And for that I appologize. I'm also being quite historical.

Life: No one gets out alive.

@Taw

---

3%? are u sure?

---

Pretty sure, but my response to RILMS will clarify it.

@RILMS

---

Have you counted for the descripency between the american doller in the 1960s and the current value today? Or the changes in the Gross National Product in the two diffrent time periods?

---

I said "GDP" which already accounts for inflation. You have to realize though the GDP is much, much larger than all of history too. I don't deny that, in fact I'm pleased about it. But the percentages are near what I said. The reason why it seems out of kilter is because the economy has grown exponentially more than the percentage increase of the military budget.

Think about it, (I don't know how news is reported about US spending around the world) but here in the News we always hear about a new spending bill for social programs (which includes business programs) which they are happy to pass, but just to get $87 Billion increase for Iraq (less than 2 tenths of 1 percent of GDP) we had to fight tooth and nail.

Truth, with only a touch of opinion. Although, the exact specific numbers aren't known off the top of my head. But it is near to as I stated.


Sir Spectre


... No more signature. <-----Irony

Edited by - Sir Spectre on 13-11-2003 20:30:32

well i actually WAS going to say that % of GNP, like all statistics, doesn't show the complete picture, if GNP is higher (or lower) then the value of that % changes. but % of GNP has for a long time been considered a reliable way of comparing defence (and other) budgets.

actually u might well be right, sS, the last yr i have figures for US defence expenditure as a % of GNP has the figure at 4.3% which does come as a surprise to me! and bizarrely the highest % i can see is Saudi Arabia, 10.2% (why?) so i was completely wrong! except for that Soviet figure; no wonder they collapsed so suddenly!

@Taw, I seem to remember it being Gross Domestic Product, but it could very well have been Gross National Product. I know GNP is the higher of the two, but I think GDP is where you can accurately gauge incoming taxes to the government. Isn't that right?

---

so i was completely wrong! except for that Soviet figure; no wonder they collapsed so suddenly!

---

I'm glad you could admit it!! Also, now think about Soviet vs. US in this area of military expenditure. If you're right and the Soviets had a higher percentage spent toward their budget, yet I know we, the US, actually outspent them monetarily, that shows how lackluster their GNP/GDP was.


Sir Spectre


... No more signature. <-----Irony

Edited by - Sir Spectre on 14-11-2003 00:06:44

wow 42 replies cool he he

sS, i was just thinking that myself.