| Military Budget Of The United States |
Article Index for Military Budget |
Website Links For Military |
Information AboutMilitary Budget Of The United States |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT MILITARY BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES | |
| military of the united states | |
| united states budget | |
|
BUDGET FOR 2004 The military expenditure of the Department Of Defense for 2004 was: This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance and production (which is in the Department of Energy budget), or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which are largely funded through extra-budgetary supplements). MILITARY SPENDING RELATIVE TO OTHER COUNTRIES s and thus is not adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity ]] The current ( 2005 ) United States military budget is larger than the military budgets of the next twenty biggest spenders combined, and six times larger than China 's, which places second. The United States and its close allies are responsible for approximately two-thirds of all military spending on Earth (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for two-thirds), and spend 57 times more than the seven so-called "rogue" nations combined ( Cuba , Iran , Iraq , Libya , North Korea , Sudan and Syria ). Military spending accounts for more than half of the United States' federal Discretionary Spending , which is all of the U.S. government's money not spoken for by pre-existing obligations. {Link without Title} According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute , in 2003 the United States spent approximately 47% of the world's total military spending of US$956,000,000,000. Relative to the total GDP of the United States, the total spending on the military was 3.7% in 2003 . This spending rate has been in a slow decline since peaking in 1944 at 37.8% of GDP. Even during the peak of the Vietnam War the percentage reached a high of 9.4% in 1968 . Yet some point out that to compare government spending on the military to the total sum of all goods and services produced by the national economy in a year is purposely misleading. For example, according to the Center for Defense Information, the US outlays for defense as a percentage of federal discretionary spending has from Fiscal Year 2003 consumed more than half (50.5%) of all such funding and is steadily rising. {Link without Title} Finally, it must be stressed that the recent invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are funded outside the Federal Budget (i.e. are paid for through supplementary spending bills) and are therefore external to the military budget figures listed above. In addition, the United States has long had a history of Black Budget military spending which is not listed as Federal spending and is not included in published military spending figures. Thus, the true amount spent by the United States on military spending is much higher than the figures maintained in the Federal Budget. REASONS FOR LARGE U.S. MILITARY EXPENDITURES There exist a number of reasons for comparatively large American military spending. First, as of the early 21st century, the American military is unique among national militaries in its goal to maintain a large number of capabilities and to have the ability to project power globally. If its only goal were to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent and sufficient forces to defend against a direct attack on the American homeland, it could well have made do with a smaller budget. However, the goals of the American military are more expansive than that. Since the 1940s, there has been a national consensus within the United States that the American military must maintain the capability to fight and win wars overseas in order to defend American allies and to maintain control over the high seas to protect American trade from disruption. This definition of American national interest began in World War II with the attack on Pearl Harbor which diminished the support for Isolationism . This way of thinking continued during the Cold War when many Americans believed that the United States must maintain a global military presence to defend against Communist forces led by the Soviet Union . By the 1990s, the Soviet threat had largely disappeared, however there remains a national belief that the United States must maintain a global military presence to uphold democracy and maintain international stability. The United States is currently among the few military forces in the world which are capable of global operations. Maintaining the ability to conduct operations throughout the world includes the need to maintain Power Projection capabilities and the ability to deal with unexpected events - this includes the ability to fight (and win) multiple wars at the same time. Second, while the United States' military budget is numerically large, the spending represents only a small fraction of its national economy. Some argue that the current rate of expenditure is sustainable, unlike the case with the Soviet Union . Indeed, as a percentage of Discretionary Spending or Gross Domestic Product , the U.S. military has shrunk since the 1950s, although since the September 11, 2001 attacks this trend has been reversed. {Link without Title} . Third, while there is a national consensus within the United States to maintain a military of global capability, there is also a national consensus to minimize the human cost to the United States both in terms of number of possible casualties and in terms of the overall size of the military. The solution to this dilemma has been to focus on improvements in technology, and hence the American military is committed to having a technological edge over its potential enemies and an expensive research program to maintain such an edge. Defense related research over the years yielded such major breakthroughs as space exploration, Computer s, the Internet , Hypertext , nuclear energy, Global Position System , Stealth Aircraft , "smart" Weapons , better Bullet-proof Vests , Microwaves , and more recently lasers that can shoot down cruise missiles. Military technology maintains a close relationship with the civilian economy and has contributed to general technological and economic development of the USA, and often, via technology transfer, other countries as well. Conversely, the military has also benefited from the American civilian infrastructure. Fourth and finally, when comparing defense expenditures in the USA and in other nations, it must be appreciated that the buying power of money is different in different places. For instance, with relatively high American general living standards, paying decent salaries to American soldiers, who are all volunteers serving on a contract, is expensive in absolute terms. By comparison, countries with lower living standards with volunteer militaries (e.g. China or India), as well as those who Conscript men for the military and pay them only basic living expenses (e.g. Russia, both Koreas, and Taiwan), would spend a lot less in dollar terms to maintain similar personnel strength. Similarly, military technology produced by civilian companies in the USA and bought by the American military would be more expensive than that produced by Chinese companies and for the Chinese military simply because of lower production costs due to lower living standards, even in cases where the technological sophistication of goods procured is equivalent. EXTERNAL LINKS
SEE ALSO
|
|
|