North Korea spent $5.2 billion on their military last year, less than 1% of what we spend.

I wonder how accurate that is, I mean they have a 1 million man army??

What I find interesting is that when it comes to education, health care, or other problems, people love to say "throwing money at the problem won't solve it". Yet when it comes to military issues, then they are all in favor of throwing money at the problem. Could it be that the solution to the problem of terrorism is one that does not require spending more money every year?

And regarding the question about whether you would feel comfortable living in the Mafia Boss's house, you missed that analogy entirely.

Like I said, security is 90% based on your bahavior, and maybe 10% (or less) based on your strength. It doesn't matter how strong you are.....if you go around bullying people, you are not going to be very secure.

And like I said, countries like New Zealand or Finland haven't had any problems with terrorism. I guess they must have some great military strength...right?

Their entire GDP is only around $40 billion.

Eric, when you are #1 you always have a target on your back. When we aren't a target anymore, that's when we've lost all dominance. New Zealand or Finland are not big players in the world. Why would anyone want to terrorize them?

I think the same way. If we save every child, then we get into an overpopulation scenario. Which leads to more pollution, less food, more contention for jobs, more crime.

In 2004 they spent 15.5% of their budget on their military. What was the U.S. percentage again? Since you don't provide it, I will: U.S. defense expenditures are around 6% of GDP.

Percentages are a much more accurate way to compare - you pull out a dollar figure, and you're not comparing apples. You're comparing apples and Buicks. But then that's your usual method. Smoke, mirrors, change subject.

:popcorn:

Edit: Correction - in 2003-2004 they spent 25% of their GDP on military expenditures.

FAS.org Link - bottom of page 8

"Military expenditures account for 31.3 percent of GDP expenditures, making North Korea --- dollar for dollar --- the world's most militaristic state."

CNN Link

Wow. Two years ago, CNN calls N. Korea "the world's most militaristic state." Interesting. As I said before, you're entertaining, if not accurate (or perhaps because...).

Last time I checked, both of those countries have a higher average standard of living than does the United States. What exactly are we #1 in?

Yes, and that is why North Korea is a country where half of the population is starving to death. But that still does not change the fact that they spend such a puny amount on their military and yet they are considered some big threat. I'm pretty sure that the might of your military is not determined by the percentage of your GDP that you send.

So by that measure, our military should be 100 times the size and power of North Korea. Is it? Truely doubtful. But then, that is not the goal of spending all of that money. The goal is simply to spend the money. The military budget is maybe 25% real military spending and 75% overbloated corporate welfare.

And yes, my personal experience with dealing with the US military is that if you know someone on the inside, you can get them to spend extra money and you can avoid the bid process. And they always make sure to use up every last penny in their budget for fear that if they don't use it this year, it will be taken away from them in future years. So instead of bargaining with you like they should, they tell you how much they have to spend, and you charge them that amount.

The only difference here, is that the contracts my company does are for several thousand dollars, while the ones we are talking about here are in the billions. And even though I personally benefit from the current system, I know it is wrong and do think it needs to be changed.

[sarcasm]Wouldn't an occasion terrorist attack accomplish the same thing?[/sarcasm] :confused: