SOURCE
CIA World Factbook, 28 July 2005
 |
|
| Home | Encyclopedia | Statistics | Countries A-Z | Flags | Maps | Education | Forum | FAQ | About |
SUBSCRIBE TO NEWS Receive our NationMaster newsletter: (Privacy) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
del.icio.us| COMMENTARY |
|
15th April 2005 |
Although $400 billion is an enormous figure, we can't jump to the conclusion that this reflects American superiority in conventional arms, personnel, or total standing military force. We have to consider that much of America's expenditures were for readiness, fuel, and the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Many other nations have militaries more comparable with the United States than these figures show. |
|
Goodman 20th April 2005 |
Hi, I agree with Hans. This is a very good and informative site. It is specially good for those who have to complete class projects. But please update the data of all the catagories. |
|
Longhorn from TX 8th June 2005 |
To Kelvin: Acutally US has over 10,000 nuke warheads that can destroy the world many times over, so it's probably true that US can win against the entire world. But as Iraq shows, U.S. can conquer the world, but it can't win the hearts and minds of the people. |
|
Victor 3rd July 2005 |
To Longhorn: Certainly Russia still has the largest nuclear arsenal almost two times that of the US (about 12000 in the US against 22000 in Russia). And the destructive power (the sum of its warheads in kilotons) that its nuclear warheads carry is more than three times greater, so the US is not really in a position to conquer any large part of the world. |
|
David Gealikman 16th October 2005 |
Another intresting fact is that the total US budget for all spending each year is 2.5 trillion (2,500 billions) it spends less than 1 quarter of 1 percent on ending global starvation (20 billion) and around 400-500 billion on wars. Justice? |
|
Mike in Tokyo Rogers 2nd November 2005 |
"...in fiscal year 2004, through which we are passing currently, the grand total spent for defense will be approximately $695 billion. To this amount will have to be added the $58.8 billion allocated to fiscal year 2004 from the $87.5 billion supplemental spending authorized on November 6, 2003, for support of U.S. military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq and for so-called reconstruction of those despoiled and occupied countries. Thus, the super-grand total in fiscal year 2004 will reach the astonishing amount of nearly $754 billion—or 88 percent more than the much-publicized $401.3 billion—plus, of course, any additional supplemental spending that may be approved before the end of the fiscal year." http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1253 |
|
Kashif (Canada) 11th December 2006 |
In the stats above there is no figure for the military ependitures of Russia. |
|
Joe (Texas) 10th August 2007 |
Longhorn - you obviously have a severe lack of education, either that or you slept during school. |
|
Bill (Washington) 13th August 2007 |
To Mr. Gealikman: You may be correct about US GOVERNMENT spending. But United States citizens and NGO's collectively spend more per year on direct foreign aid than the citizens of any other country. It is convenient to criticize the US--but the disparity in foreign aid spending vs. military spending is merely a result of the centralization of military spending and the decentralization of foreign aid spending. Nobody buys a tank on their own, but plenty of people send their money to aid starvation around the world. There is plenty to find fault with in US foreign policy--its not necessary to create issues where there are none. |
|
Russell (Texas) 14th August 2007 |
Bill wrote, "United States citizens and NGO's collectively spend more per year on direct foreign aid than the citizens of any other country." The problem is that much of that has no purpose other than religious outreach, and should no more be counted as aide or to the general benefit of people than should the House of Saud's funding of madrassas in various parts of the world. I discount most of the claims about the degree of private charity in the US, because most such claims do nothing to separate the charity from spending on missionaries, churches, and other entirely religious purposes. And yes, I know the same person who preaches also can dig a well. But if he spends 90% of his time preaching and 10% digging wells, it's an accounting error to count him as a full-time charitable worker. |
There are 16 more (non-authoritative) comments on this page
|
Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
Lesson Plans | Student Area | Student FAQ | Reviews | Press Releases |
Feeds |
Contact© Copyright NationMaster.com 2003-2008. All Rights Reserved. Usage implies agreement with terms.