This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Balance Of Superpowers: Comparing The US And Chinese Armed Forces

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Whether China is busy championing trade deals outside of the US dollar, buying up some of the world’s biggest companies, taking over foreign housing markets, or building massive networks of nuclear or wind power grids, it is clear that the country is a world power to be reckoned with. To be considered a true force, China also needs to be able to back up its economic and political might with a top notch military. Today’s infographic compares the armed forces of China with the United States.

click image fir massive legible version

 

In terms of military spending per capita, China is the new kid on the block. Although it has increased in recent years, China is still behind Russia, Turkey, South Korea, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and the United States. However, the country does make up for it with in absolute terms by its sheer population. In terms of total military expenditures, China spends the second most worldwide with a total of approximately $216 billion per year, which is about one-third of the US.

In GDP terms, China spends about 2.1% of its annual GDP on military, and the United States spends 3.8%.

Perhaps the biggest difference between the two superpowers is influence in other parts of the world. The United States has 133 military bases outside of its territory, and China has zero. More specifically, the United States has bases in multiple jurisdictions that surround China: South Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Japan, Singapore, Guam, Afghanistan, and Diego Garcia, a set of small islands in Indian Ocean.

Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:10 | 6321946 Newsboy
Newsboy's picture

I'll take Global Hegemony to win, Alex.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:18 | 6321981 Ultimate_Warrior
Ultimate_Warrior's picture

My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do... www.earnmore9.com

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:29 | 6322029 MonetaryApostate
MonetaryApostate's picture

I believe it's global digital totalitarianism for the win...
http://galeinnes.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-awakening-of-technology.html

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:36 | 6322060 LongMarch
LongMarch's picture

"In the first six to twelve months of a war with China, I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success." - Some American General.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:19 | 6322229 Uchtdorf
Uchtdorf's picture

It is highly unlikely that the US and China will engage in any serious warfare. What is more likely, and almost assured, is that the Chinese army will be invited to the US to quell unrest, for humanitarian purposes, under the lovely powder blue banners of the United Nations.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:25 | 6322242 LongMarch
LongMarch's picture

I concur with your conclusion, but your timline is off. Unrest in America will only come after the defeat of the military and,-most importantly- loss of  the reserve currency. Nothing happens until they loose the ability to buy people off.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:35 | 6322259 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

So if the U.S. spends $1.5 trillion on fighter planes that cannot fly and we match this force against a $100B Chinese flighter fleet that is so defective it kills all its pilots in training who is the victor?

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:58 | 6322311 ThroxxOfVron
ThroxxOfVron's picture

The manufacturers of fighter planes.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:44 | 6322609 pretty bird
pretty bird's picture

I really don't see an actual war between China and the United States.  Maybe a few proxy wars down the road.  So all you alarmists can relax.  The sky isn't falling...yet.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:57 | 6322621 COSMOS
COSMOS's picture

Who says China doesn't have bases around the world.  Just look at all those CHINATOWNS.

Great way for their intelligence agents to slip in and out of countries and hide out etc.
Plus the intelligence pick ups/drop offs and payoffs are easily done with Chinese Takeout deliveries. 

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:12 | 6322680 roddy6667
roddy6667's picture

Spies don't drop off paper any more. With the internet, any info/blueprint/map can be encrypted and hidden and passed off much more easily.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 06:34 | 6322753 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

The US has vastly more capability to project its power around the globe. China is at present little more than a regional hegemon whose moves can be severely checked by creative US projections of force, and when push comes to shove, the US has the nukes to bury them, not that thst would be much of a victory in the greater scheme of things.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:18 | 6322685 BigDuke6
BigDuke6's picture

MDB is that you?

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:52 | 6322702 Klaatuwept
Klaatuwept's picture

I knew there was something fishy about the messages in fortune cookies

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:12 | 6322970 TwelveOhOne
TwelveOhOne's picture

I love that the map they chose is the "UN flag" map, and also the "flat earth" map (although they rounded the sides so they didn't have to show that Antarctica surrounds the world and keeps the oceans in).

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:58 | 6322312 old naughty
old naughty's picture

Win? Lose? Matters not...

Deliverance in Sept,

holy see...

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:35 | 6322394 e_goldstein
e_goldstein's picture

monkey do?

 

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:18 | 6322686 Luau
Luau's picture

Reserve currency status doesn't give the US a ability to buy people off anymore than another country with massive economic power could, so that's kind of a problem with your plan. And no, the petrodollar doesn't mean what you think it means. Even without it, the USD would stay strong relative to other currencies because other countries consistently devalue their currencies relative to the dollar. Either way, the US becomes a huge void of trade deficits, but that isn't really a privilege. It's not even particularly politically useful because it's a permanent feature of the USD.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:17 | 6322986 1033eruth
1033eruth's picture

This is one thing Americans ALWAYS prefer to ignore.  Just exactly who can AFFORD to war with us.  Nobody.  We can't afford to go to war but we do it anyway because we have a central bank that can print.  The only other countries that can "afford" to war with us are those that have central banks.  

I'm really tired of the notion that China is going to war with us some day just because they can "afford" to.  NOBODY wins.  China would much rather build infrastructure and keep siphoning from their #1 customer.  Its sooooo much easier to win without firing a shot and they know this.  But the American public doesn't.  They see threats where ever the media tells them to.   

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:01 | 6322570 OldPhart
OldPhart's picture

Targets at the rifle range are powder blue.  Some are actual helmets.

Helmets don't last very long, nor do the target.

I picked up a helmet last time I was there that barely had any color left.  The damned thing had been blasted by, I imagine, every weapon in the area.  It was little more than crunched up, holey shell.  I put it on the hill at about a thousand yards and blew it off the rock.  Didn't go get it, so it's still up there.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:51 | 6322134 Tribulation Blues
Tribulation Blues's picture

There are numerous testimonies of Russian Spetsnaz now in USA to grab guns and enforce Martial Law... http://revelation12.ca/?p=11

Do not fall for the New World Order 'good cop/bad cop' routine... they all work for Satan... http://revelation12.ca

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:40 | 6322544 Volkodav
Volkodav's picture

Crazy....  Dave Hodges? is that you..?

 

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:46 | 6322283 post turtle saver
post turtle saver's picture

this would all be worth discussing, if China were actually a superpower... which they aren't...

 

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:34 | 6322694 HolyfieldsOtherEar
HolyfieldsOtherEar's picture

Aren't, and never will be. China will blow itself apart by the same centrifugal forces that have always blown it apart in the past. Warring States Too: Electric Boogaloo is coming soon to a wannabe superpower near you.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:19 | 6322356 TheReplacement
TheReplacement's picture

Everybody knows that Australia is the key to Risk.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:10 | 6321949 boogerbently
boogerbently's picture

Aircraft carriers and aircraft (jets and helicopters)......thank you......the end.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:16 | 6321973 BarkingCat
BarkingCat's picture

Aircraft carrier vs supersonic anti-ship missile.

One is very slow and big and the other is very fast and much smaller.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:00 | 6322167 22winmag
22winmag's picture

Airborne missile = still relatively easy to shoot down.

 

Underwater missile = good luck shooting it down.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:26 | 6322463 angel_of_joy
angel_of_joy's picture

Yeah, the Brits thought they could easily shoot down airborne missiles too, some years ago in South Atlantic... Care to find out what happened ?

http://www.naval-history.net/F62-Falklands-British_ships_lost.htm

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:59 | 6322708 invisible touch
invisible touch's picture

shkval is russian technology, not chinese one.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 16:42 | 6325040 Abbie Normal
Abbie Normal's picture

The shipkillers are ballistic missiles, which mean they come in at over 10,000 miles per hour.  It would be the equivalent of trying to shoot down a bullet with a slingshot.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:24 | 6322011 ClowardPiven2016
ClowardPiven2016's picture

China has 20,000+ air defense units, pairity with aircraft and subs, 900,000 more personel.....could be a long haul before we get to the end. Unless we light the fuses on some nukes, then it's game over for everyone.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:23 | 6322367 TheReplacement
TheReplacement's picture

Lotta room for error there.

What kinda war is this, land, sea, air, space, cyber, monetary/tactical vs strategic/geography/other?  There are a lot possibilities.  Anyone with half a brain would tell you that "war" is not a sure thing for either country, depending....

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:35 | 6322465 angel_of_joy
angel_of_joy's picture

There is a problem with this silly article. The author forgot to add Russia to the red side... Besides, that map is misleading; if you have a base in Thule, in the middle of nowhere, it doesn't mean that you control the entire Greenland. Same algo applies to all our "allies" (particularly Cuba)... LOL.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:26 | 6322689 cheech_wizard
cheech_wizard's picture

Submarine... one torpedo... no aircraft carrier, no planes.

Standard Disclaimer: You never studied, did you?

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:15 | 6321969 ZKnight
ZKnight's picture

The US is postured for warmongering (as their history demonstrates), China is postured for defence.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:39 | 6322075 Supafly
Supafly's picture

Well said.  The distribution of China's military suggests defense.  In 40 years, it will look like ours.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:01 | 6322158 22winmag
22winmag's picture

With the amount of petroleum that will be left in 40 years, it will look like the Chinese army from 400 BC.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:21 | 6322998 TwelveOhOne
TwelveOhOne's picture

Admiral Byrd said that there were vast amounts of petroleum (and other resources) under Antarctica.  I wonder why companies never went in to drill and mine?  Seems it would go a long way to reduce the shortage.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:25 | 6322372 TheReplacement
TheReplacement's picture

Considering that major weapons systems like the B-52 last longer than that then we should still have the edge. 

EMP?

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:26 | 6322373 TheReplacement
TheReplacement's picture

Obviously I mention the EMP option as that is best used sooner than later, hence the more likely avenue.

Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:04 | 6322573 OldPhart
OldPhart's picture

It will have to, as the lone world superpower, after our collapse, they will be required to monitor the world as the new cop on the beat.

Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:20 | 6321992 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

  I like the comment at the end of the article.

 


You forgot to mention that the USA is the Worlds number 1 Bully & War Criminal having started 81% of ALL wars since WW2 ! World class A$$holes.

  • Reply
  • Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:44 | 6322094 SmackDaddy
    SmackDaddy's picture

    Still salty about Hiroshima? Don't start no shit won't be no shit

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:36 | 6322395 Quus Ant
    Quus Ant's picture

    An American saying don't start no shit..... holy shit!

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:21 | 6321996 thesonandheir
    thesonandheir's picture

    ISIS -

     

    Total Spending = $10

    Tanks = 0

    Nukes = 0

    Helicopters = 0

    Car bombs = 50000?

    Lunatics ready to blow soft targets up by suicide = limitless

     

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:27 | 6322012 rbg81
    rbg81's picture

    No mention of other important factors, such as Space assets and Command, Control Intelligence Surveillance and Reconaissance (C2ISR) These are critical and in some ways more important than the others--and the US rules in both categories.

    Comparing numbers alone, withing weighting for technological superiority, is very misleading.  I've been to China.  With a few exceptions, a lot of the stuff they build is shoddy.  I've seen buildings less than 5 years old already falling apart.  Some things are well done (like the Beijing Subway system), but they are the exceptions to the rule.  I suspect a lot of their weapons aren't worth a squirt of piss.

    That, plus just about all of China's neighbors view her as hostile.  If the Japanese wanted to, they could tear China a new asshole in a conventional war.

    The one place the US is vulnerable is in land based missiles.  Our missile launch infrastructure is aging and borderline obsolete.

     

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:28 | 6322023 me or you
    me or you's picture

     

    Just like the 'flip-flops' guys crushed US army in Afghanistan.

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:32 | 6322036 rbg81
    rbg81's picture

    Crushed?  You're delusional.  Compared to past wars, we have lost very few people in Afghanistan.  We are leaving because it's expensive and we suck at nation building.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:19 | 6322453 ILLILLILLI
    ILLILLILLI's picture

    Someone once made the comment "you don't have to win, you just have to not lose".

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:10 | 6322577 Volkodav
    Volkodav's picture

    funny these ideas about lose or not, when has been all downhill in real....

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:24 | 6323010 rbg81
    rbg81's picture

    Americans can blitzkreig better than anyone--the problem is that we don't have the staying power required for a successful occupation.  You saw that with Vietnam, Iraq and Afganistan.  But what about Germany & Japan you ask?  The key difference there is that those opponents were sufficiently exhausted that they had no strength left to resist.  They were also developed countries who wanted to rebuild, not resist.  If we had a few years of guerilla type warfare in either country, we would have left too.  Korea was a different animal--we had the unconditional support of the South and, unlike Vietnam, no entrenched insurgency.  Lastly, after 1960, the MSM has not been supportive of our military adventures--this has been a big contributor to our lack of staying power as well.

    Now, as Curtis LeMay advised, we could win another war by bombing the enemy back to the Stone Age and then totally remake the country in our image.  But we just don't have the stomach (or finances) for that anymore.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 05:37 | 6322697 HolyfieldsOtherEar
    HolyfieldsOtherEar's picture

    Opium production back up to 1970s levels. Mission accomplished.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:55 | 6322919 Arnold
    Arnold's picture

    We didn't have much opium in the 70's.

    Weed, Speed and (LS)Deed.

     

    (course my memory is a little hazy.)

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 16:57 | 6325092 Abbie Normal
    Abbie Normal's picture

    But you had morphine, heroin and its ilk -- which come from opium.

     

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:35 | 6322055 humble_man
    humble_man's picture

    You mean they crushed the RUSSIAN army, right?  I don't recall a single battle in Afghanistan that the US Army lost or that resulted in a retreat. I'm not waving a flag here...just correcting BS because I was there.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:08 | 6322335 Payne
    Payne's picture

    Winning a battle but not being able to afford the War is still a loss.

    The US marches to one tune,  spend more on War and less on actual people fighting in Wars.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:23 | 6322400 Volkodav
    Volkodav's picture

    Battle of Kamat, Battle of Kamdesh, many others

    also lost small teams, though you won't hear.

    when heavy losses and soon abandon position might be a loss, is not exactly a win..but survived

    especially when much better equipped and cannot even compare expense.

    eventually remain close to base, never controlling near as much ground as Soviets had.

    or is your idea of battle lost complete anniliation? 

    btw, was Soviet army, not Russian...and made orderly withdraw

    and were not fighting only certain Afghan elements, but enabled aided and armed

    major covert operations from outside countries.

     

     

     

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:41 | 6322494 aurum4040
    aurum4040's picture
    • I respect you to no end for being there and doing what you may have thought was right at the time. You are a hero, no questions asked.  But the US, has not won a war since World War. If Hitler slowed down just a tad, perhaps never invading Russia, the US and its NATO allies wouldnt have won that war either. Given time and technology, there has never been a more powerful military force then WWII Germany, bar none. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq 1 and 2, and Afghanistan were not 'wins' by any means unless you consider North Korea non-Communist,  a 10 year plus war again TINY Vietnam ending with the North Vietnam win a US win, Iraq 1 and 2 ending with the Iraq we see today, and Afghanistan nearly the same as Iraq with a mind blowing  US herion use proliferation and epidemic all US wins, I dont know what to say. If the US invaded China, an enormous, the most populace, and one hell of difficult piece of terrain nation tomorrow, the US and all of its 'technology' would be done - forever. Russia, China and their allies together would absolutely crush US/Nato forces and I am not even speaking of the instaneous effects caused by China and Russia  dropping a financial nuclear bomb the size of the entire world on US heads, obliterating the USD and its citizens in the process. I am sorry my dear soldier friend and I mean that from my heart, but we (the US) are not in any position whatsoever, albeit from numerous standpoints, to win a war of that caliber. Additionally Russian and Chines citizens are infinitely more hardened then American fakebook pussies. 
    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:19 | 6322523 Volkodav
    Volkodav's picture

    you betcha...  Otto Skorzeny told:

    "It was an unpleasant suprise...

                        at Borodino we fought with Siberians for the first time...

                        These were strapping men...superior well armed Soldiers,

                         they were dressed in wide fur coats and hats and wore

                         fur boots on their feet."

                         Commando Extraordinary  A Biography of Otto Skorzeny 

                                  -Charles Foley-

     

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 04:35 | 6322648 aurum4040
    aurum4040's picture

    Agreed. Time and time again it has been proven that the the supposed strength of a Military, particularly the US Military, has little bearing in unconventional warfare. And one simple reminder for anyone who doubts my opinions, in a recent event who's naval ship was left incapacitated after one, one an unarmed Russian MIG flew over the ship and then mocked the entire crew, performing flyby after flyby, simulating a takeout sending the ship back with its tail bewtween its legs ? The US Navy. And who was just 200 miles off the coast of California, completely capable of launching multiple nuclear HEMP/EMPs over the middle of the US that would have sent us back into the middle ages. Russia again. At the moment, however, I am sure all enemies are quietly laughing, biding there time, as we slowly destroy ourselves from within, being more concerned with the Confederate Flag, among many other matters of 'importance',  then reality itself. 

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:10 | 6322960 rbg81
    rbg81's picture

    It was inevitable that Hitler would have lost WWII.  Once we developed the A-bomb, it would have been game over for Nazi Gerrmany.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:20 | 6323000 loonyleft
    loonyleft's picture

    You are a hero, no questions asked

    Why is a member of the US military a hero, no questions asked? Is it heroic to join? Is it heroic to attack your enemy using extreme force and advanced weapons? Is heroism, using unparralleled force to kill? People have their beliefs, but I think maybe it's OK to question why troops are in Afghanistan, what is the true motivation there, and what is the motivation of the actual troops that enlisted in the first place. 

    I don't think hero is the first word that comes to mind. 

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:13 | 6323488 holycrap
    holycrap's picture

    I can answer that one for you. At the young age of 18, a kid who knows nothing, signs a blank check in the amount up to and including his life, for what he believes is a patriotic duty to serve his country. This is a naive piece of unselfish sacrifice, that puts him in a hero category. Regardless of what you think. What altruistic thing have you ever sacrificed yourself for? I am not saying our 18 year olds should do this, I did, and looking back on it with the wisdom of age, I would not. For you to question that is your right, and that is what the 18 YO kid believes he is fighting for by signing up. If I had read "war is a racket by Smedley Butler in high school, it may have changed my thinking. I didn't, and I bet neither have any of our young men that serve. Freedom of speech is one of the many things kids sign up to protect, so thank you might be a better thing for you to say.

    I also noticed how you question the heroism of a Soldier, do you question the heroism of Bruce Jenner? I do.

     

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:30 | 6322383 TheReplacement
    TheReplacement's picture

    Like Norinco?  Compare reliability of basic infantry weapons.

    Seriously, do you think China would advertize what they have if they have anything capable of defeating their most likely foe? 

    Same for US.

    The truth is where lead meets kevlar, or misses.  Nobody thought Japan could destroy the Pacific Fleet but they did,  Only providence preserved the carriers from being there in the first place.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:11 | 6322443 Lurk Skywatcher
    Lurk Skywatcher's picture

    "providence"? I've heard FDR called many things but thats a first...

    Obviously, the most important weapon in war is propaganda - and you, good sir, have been slain already.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 06:08 | 6322715 nevadan
    nevadan's picture

    Providence?  The reason the carriers weren't in Pearl Harbor is because they were delivering fighter aircraft to the Dutch East Indies where the Japanese attack was expected.

    http://www.amazon.com/Pearl-Harbor-Seeds-Fruits-Infamy-ebook/dp/B003ZDP0...

    This book is the definitive work on Pearl Harbor.  Written by a man who was involved in the first investigation after the war and continued for the rest of his life.  It was finished by his widow and is a chronology of the events leading up to and post attack.

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:25 | 6322015 me or you
    me or you's picture

    The author forgot to mention ISIS and Al Qaeda they two belong to US unconventional arm forces.

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:40 | 6322081 22winmag
    22winmag's picture

    Not to mention NATO, which is equipped with something like 94% American hardware.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:31 | 6322384 TheReplacement
    TheReplacement's picture

    Do not forget the weegers (sic, duh).

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:37 | 6322071 NoWayJose
    NoWayJose's picture

    China is using the 'free market' and 'Western Laws' to dominate the world. They can buy Canadian tar sands companies, sign deals with Brazilian iron ore companies, merge with Aussie miners, buy homes in Vancouver, or anything else they want. They can set up their factories in Vietnam or Thailand. Best of all, they get the United States military to 'protect' their assets. No one is going to attack China, so they don't have to spend big bucks on their military. The U.S. Fears China - but Turkey spends more on defense? Go figure out why...

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:32 | 6322386 TheReplacement
    TheReplacement's picture

    Not free markets.  Credit markets.

    Confucious say, "He who defaults last, wins!"

     

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:45 | 6322098 litemine
    litemine's picture

    What a Christian thing America is Doing. Helping others.....Well, thats what I'm told. Don't believe what you read, The USA doesn't torture, doesn't use dirty bombs, Hell....It's for the Children.

    Yes....I'll include a Sarc. tag.

    All moneys profit those who bribe the Government. Look around, is your neighbours doing good. Do they feel free or have they been conditioned to surrender to the Banks.

    http://www.iamthewitness.com/books/Andrew.Carrington.Hitchcock/The.History.of.the.Money.Changers.htm

    It's all about money.....not the Individual, even paid Minions are Fools. 

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:49 | 6322128 Tribulation Blues
    Tribulation Blues's picture

    Numerous testimonies of Russian Spetsnaz now in USA to grab guns and enforce Martial Law... http://revelation12.ca/?p=11

    Do not fall for the New World Order 'good cop/bad cop' routine... they all work for Satan... http://revelation12.ca

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:01 | 6322569 Volkodav
    Volkodav's picture

    crazy 

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:31 | 6322868 Victor999
    Victor999's picture

    That's not Russias - it's your own Speical Forces.  Don't look over there - look behind you.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:25 | 6323013 Arnold
    Arnold's picture

    This meme started when we imported a bunch of Mi-17 helicopters to learn how to fly and maintain them.

    This was the chopper the Afgan.Gov wanted and received in lieu of Blackhawks.

    Yup, lots of russians.mil came with them.

    Another two week wonder story.

     

    http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2013/06/mi17-helicopter-buy.html

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:37 | 6323055 Arnold
    Arnold's picture

    As an aside, the internal rumor mill has Loghead buying the Sikorsky Division.

     

    Never mind, I see goog already has it.

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:48 | 6322122 Phillyguy
    Phillyguy's picture

    The US has been almost continuously at war since 1940. US taxpayers have spent $ trillions on wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen plus paying for multiple Israeli wars on Lebanon and Gaza (again, paid for with our tax dollars), what do we have to show for all of this? Failed states in Iraq, Afganistan, Libya, Syria and Yemen. Israel is putatively the strongest military force in the ME, with the best weapons US taxpayers can provide. Despite this, Israel has not won a war since 1973. There were defeated by Hezbollah in 2006 and have been unable to defeat the Palestinians (from my perspective the toughest people in the world) in Gaza. Although armies are better equipped, war has not fundamentally changed in centuries. Invasions and occupations still require boots on the ground (approximately 1 soldier per 20 people in the targeted country). Recall the exchange between an American and Vietnamese general- “You know you never beat us on the battlefield.” “That may be so,” the Vietnamese replied, “but it is also irrelevant.” ... that winning all the battles won't do it, … (Link: historynewsnetwork.org/article/125760)

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 22:49 | 6322127 hannah
    hannah's picture

    the korean war ended the day we looked over the hill and saw 1 million chinese standing there. they were about to kick our ass so we signed the truce. the chinese and russians can 'turn off' our smart weapons. the chinese could literally send 50 million troops to fight us.

     

    wars are won on the ground face to face. no one is going to fight anyone. this is all bullshit distraction. 

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:16 | 6322218 Uchtdorf
    Uchtdorf's picture

    That's not exactly what happened in Korea, but I know stories from soldiers who were there. They said the Chinese looked like blitzing ants. There were so many of them. US gun barrels got so hot that the rifles seized up and wouldn't fire. Mow 'em down and still they came.

     

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:15 | 6322214 Super Hans
    Super Hans's picture

    China would still have the Japanese hobnailed boot on their neck if it was not for the effort of the U.S. during WWII. The only advantage the Chinese have over the U.S, is a larger population, and possible resolve based on current trends.

    SH

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:40 | 6322273 Runs-With_Toast
    Runs-With_Toast's picture

    My God yr dum. Russia destroyed the Jap land Army

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:28 | 6322376 Super Hans
    Super Hans's picture

    Huh? Sure... The U.S. and British wasted resources on the worthless Chinese.  You can not debate this.  

    SH

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:44 | 6322496 Runs-With_Toast
    Runs-With_Toast's picture

    DO YOU UNDERSTAND Sheep Head in 1945 russia sent its veteran combat divisions equipped with tanks the US could only dream about and this Russian Army annililated the 1 million man Jap Army in China. An Army the usa requested at Yalta Russia take on, because it couldnt. Forget what you think you know. Start again.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:26 | 6322534 Beltain
    Beltain's picture

    Possible resolve is an understatement. At this point who can say? Chinese military types are pretty much untested and when it comes to a knock down drag out conventional fight against a well armed force so is the US military to be honest. US spends more but how much of that extra spending is wasted on social BS that has no business in the military? China has politcial favortism for positions of power, US has affirmative action promotions just so they can have tits and dark skin in the right places for a group photo and general officers can pretend diversity is a strength. US has gay activist pulling the trigger while China has 300 Million unmarried Men who's only hope at getting some is defeating the enemy. After years of Clinton cuts, Bush mismanagement and now more Obummer cuts along with weeding out every patriotic White Male field grade and above he can identify v. political hack officers that at least look like the Chinese soldiers they pretend to lead I am not sure which side would come out on top.

     

    In a stand up fight of long duration the US would have to turn to all the immigrants they been bussing in, handing them an EBT card and a Democrat voter card as they passed the border, to join the fight and fill in the casulaties hole. What we might want to be asking ourselves is how well would the Mexican army fare against the Chinese if they had more money to spend.

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:26 | 6322849 Victor999
    Victor999's picture

    You are really short on history.  The Japanese occupation of China was broken by Russia, not the US.  Typical American - thinks WWII was won by America.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:49 | 6322912 One of these is...
    One of these is not like the others..'s picture

    World war two was won by the British royal air force.

    Thought everyone knew that...

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:20 | 6322234 Super Hans
    Super Hans's picture

    China would not even be in the 21st century if the U.S. had not allowed them to steal it's  technology.

    Why even bother?: the flow of technology to China is like an open sieve. 

    Drinking some shitty malt liquor and making some Angus chuck sliders; 1/3 cup per slider, pan seared, yummy!

    SH

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:39 | 6322269 Runs-With_Toast
    Runs-With_Toast's picture

    SH = Shit Head

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:27 | 6322378 Super Hans
    Super Hans's picture

    You don't know your history. 

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:30 | 6322382 Super Hans
    Super Hans's picture

    Chinese solders fighting the Japanese during WWII wore more than worthless. It is a fact.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 04:07 | 6322627 atthelake
    atthelake's picture
    • While working at Pratt and Whitney Aircraft, in East Hartford, CT in the 70s we were awarded a contract for engines. It was a huge contract and the customer was China. One of the contingencies was that Pratt give China ALL production methods knowledge. All knowledge. And they did it. The handwriting was on the wall.
    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:49 | 6322290 Runs-With_Toast
    Runs-With_Toast's picture

    Pretty basic and dum article, ZH needs to filter better. Add Russia to China, take away the hype around US weapons, get real about how stupid many US weapons are (F35, Patriot, Aegis) add civil chaos to USA plus massive debt. Add S500 blocking Russias airspace and US being a big fat open target. Now the US looks like a tired flabby ex champ.

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:20 | 6322524 newsoutlet
    newsoutlet's picture

    There is no military alliance between Russia and China. Both countries only have disputed territories and actually China is taking over Russia territories - step by step. So when Russia will cut of it self from western world completely - China will use it to bully Russia even more. China is no friend to anyone - it has always thought in it's best interests.

    BTW China has not officially admitted annexed Crimea as part of Russia Federation - think about it.

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:21 | 6322835 Victor999
    Victor999's picture

    Not true.....Russia and China have resolved their disputed territories question - some time ago actually.  The Chinese are not taking over Russia bit by bit as you imply - that is a myth.  As for frineds, I think it was Lord Palmerston of Enland who said it best in the 19th century, "Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they onl;y have permanent interests".  If you believe the US has permanent friends or allies, think again - or any other nation for that matter.

    Thu, 07/16/2015 - 23:49 | 6322295 appocean
    appocean's picture

    it really is remarkable that our anti imperialist president has not attempted to close one international base.  I imagine he just sees them as another way of redistributing american tax dollars overseas.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:14 | 6322346 PrayingMantis
    PrayingMantis's picture

     

     

    ... "The United States has 133 military bases outside of its territory, and China has zero. "

       ... they forgot those little Spratly islands-turned military outposts ...

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:06 | 6322809 Victor999
    Victor999's picture

    Ahhh!  The TRUE Imperialist is revealed at last!!!

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:54 | 6322416 kchrisc
    kchrisc's picture

    One big difference. In China the treasure pissed away on the military pretty much stays in the nation.

    In the DC US, most of the wealth stolen by the MIC flows overseas into the pockets of the DC US' Zion overlords.

    If you disagree, go and look at the interlocking boards of these firms, and notice all of the "return" able names. A lot of them are even "dualies," as in dual citizens. Dig a little deeper and you will hit the Zionist pay dirt involving so-called contractors. Like the contractors involved with 9/11, many of them are run by Israelis, and/or dualies.

    This is another reason I get a chuckle, mixed with rage, whenever I think about the F-35. Especially amusing with the F-35 is when someone points out all of its flaws. I don't believe that it was designed to fly, but was designed to milk and further plunder the American country, and then hobble the DC US' air forces as Zion moves on over to Europe. I also noticed that some of the high-tech manufacturing involved with it was placed in Europe, while manufacturing know how that they already have over there was left here. In other words, they are subsidizing the building of new high-tech manufacturing facilities over there that they don't yet have with wealth plundered from the American country. Even my dad said, "It is as if the thing weren't designed to work."

    Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 11:19 | 6323793 optimator
    optimator's picture

    And don't foget, the F-35 is also meant to provide a forced export on our Allies.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 18:10 | 6325368 kchrisc
    kchrisc's picture

    Please explain.

    Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 00:57 | 6322427 NoBillsOfCredit
    NoBillsOfCredit's picture

    The article forgot to count weapons in private hands. Americans are 300,000,000 guns strong and no telling how much ammunition.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:47 | 6322500 Runs-With_Toast
    Runs-With_Toast's picture

    1/3 are obese 1/3 fat 1/3 stupid

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:38 | 6323065 Cloud9.5
    Cloud9.5's picture

    True, but even the dumb fat guy can shoot the first S.O.B. that kicks in his door.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:37 | 6323603 zhanglini
    zhanglini's picture

    that would be the pizza delivery guy lol

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:12 | 6322526 Lin S
    Lin S's picture

    Unless said Americans have anti-armor and anti-aircraft weapons, the State won't worry.

    Paper/scissors/rock.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:18 | 6323530 Arnold
    Arnold's picture

    You take out the mechanics, fuelers and pencil pushers that all .mil are required to have.

    Deal done

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:17 | 6322436 onmail
    onmail's picture

    All you need is few nukes over America.

    With the first shock EMP will stop ALL activity in America

    With the another strike directly on military installations ,

    these installations will melt away into a lave like mass 

    with evil Americans, burning, going to hell

    where they will be fried for thousands of years

    -----

    Btw you dont need huge budget, that only kills the economy

    Even North Korea can take on Satan America with few nukes.

    Its time , N.Korea should start exporting the nuclear weapons to nations opposed to America

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 01:17 | 6322450 Seek_Truth
    Seek_Truth's picture

    onmail,

    Look "up" the ladder.

    "up" = down.

    You don't get it.

    Yet.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:00 | 6322501 Md4
    Md4's picture

    Perhaps the biggest difference between the two superpowers is influence in other parts of the world. The United States has 133 military bases outside of its territory, and China has zero. More specifically, the United States has bases in multiple jurisdictions that surround China: South Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Japan, Singapore, Guam, Afghanistan, and Diego Garcia, a set of small islands in Indian Ocean."

    Recently, I was invited to a retired military association dinner, where a representative from Stratfor gave a long presentation entitled: "Pax Americana". The sheer global U.S. intelligence and military presence was, to say the least, staggering. This presenter also covered a vast array of threats facing the west, and particularly, the U.S., as he went around the globe.

    Something I found very surprising is just how many Chinese naval ports encircled the globe, especially among the South American and African continents. These may not be "bases" per se, but they were ports of supply for the Chinese naval vessels frequently visiting.

    China is not interested in projecting military power to bolster a political philosophy it wants to promote abroad, nor is it interested in policing international affairs/states.

    It's interested in acquiring and protecting assets and raw material access. That's what the Spratleys are all about.

    Given the collapse of western consumption of Chinese-made goods (eg the outsourced stuff we USED to make), it has reduced dramatically the importation of many commodities it doesn't need much of these days. Their efforts to build and transition to a domestic economy have also been delayed for the same reason; the needed income growth in the Chinese workforce just isn't there. That's an important reason for all of the margin debt in the Chinese stock racket, for example. They're trying to promote stocks with citizens who have little money to spend without loans to buy stock.

    The main thing we have to worry about are ABM's in the hands of neocon nuts who think first-strikes are possible because these missiles would reduce a retaliatory response's effectiveness...

    m

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:06 | 6322520 Lin S
    Lin S's picture

    Excellent post, very astute.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:18 | 6323531 KCMLO
    KCMLO's picture

    Ex AF Intel myself and this analysis is spot on.  I particularly share your sentiment regarding ABMs.  There's more than a bit of irony that what could ultimately destroy mankind (militarily at least) is the ability to defend AGAINST nuclear weapons.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:23 | 6323554 libertysghost
    libertysghost's picture

    I didn't read yours prior to basically making one of the same main points in a "reply" above...the graphic is distorted because it isn't recognizing the Chinese influence in Africa and S America IMO...where they are uses economic rather than military might to stake their claims and give themselves some "breathing room" on the international stage.  No Chinese attacks outside their borders anytime in the near future though...unless cornered or attacked themselves...as you said.  There's just no need and they have their own internal issues to deal with like everyone else.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:05 | 6322518 newsoutlet
    newsoutlet's picture

    China has no battle experience compared to US.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 02:08 | 6322521 Lin S
    Lin S's picture

    Plus we have gays in the military, so we've got that going for us.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:41 | 6322895 One of these is...
    One of these is not like the others..'s picture

    Gays in the military.

    A "farce multiplier" if ever there was one...

    :c)

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:51 | 6323114 Helix6
    Helix6's picture

    Actually, when it comes to fighting on one's own soil, China is light years ahead of the US.  Hasn't happened here since 1865.  China was fighting on it's own homeland for almost the entire first half of the 20th century, either with itself or with foreign powers. 

    Not to mention that China is also a nuclear power, meaning that the Mutually-Assured Destruction scenario would come into play should a shooting war between the US and China arise.  That said, it seems rather more likely that a series of proxy wars is more likely, with the US "winning" most of them, at the cost of destroying its economy and rendering its social contract with it's citizens almost unrecognizable as compared to today. 

    In the meantime, China will continue buying up assets in the US, Australia, New Zealand, Africa, and the Middle East.  They don't want to conquer the world.  They want to buy it.  At the moment, the strategy seems to be working very well indeed.

    China's best strategy is to simply wait the US out.  We've already sold out our working class to them.  Soon it will be our middle class as well.  Time is not on our side.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:37 | 6322592 GC
    GC's picture

    The whole numbers are pretty meaningless.

    Should ever a conflict come about, it will not be on a planetary scale, but in the sea before China, which means the 100+ bases in Europe count for nothing and a large part of the Americna military machine woudl had to be redeployed (takes quite a lot of time). Plus forces would have to be left aroudn the planet, so only a fraction of all those listed would be available.... it's the problem the Roman Empire (and any "world" empire) faced: on paper you have a massive force, but what you can actually commit in a specific teathre, and at the needed time, is entirely different.

    moreover, the American military doctrine since WWII (air domination first, then air domination, interdiction and shock and awe) would mean the USA would have to fight in the air over mainland China... plenty of targets indeed, but also plenty of AA batteries and local chinese fighter superiority of more or less same technologies once the Chengdu_J-7 are replaced (Yes, the USA has the -much maligned- F-22, but not so many of them and no one knows when the f-35 will be operative in numbers). It would be much more bloody than anything the americans faced since Vietnam... homefront?

    Incidentally, this is moot... the war woudl end in a month, once teh Chinese stop rolling over the american bonds and stop deliverying all the electronics: the Ipad revolts will be terrible.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 06:16 | 6322726 Klaatuwept
    Klaatuwept's picture

    This sounds most likely. A deciding factor in major wars is relative strength of the combatants economies. I think a war is unlikey however as the tactic is to fight enemies who are relatively defenceless or percieved to be so and more importantly a nuclear power has never in history fought a war against another nuclear power for obvious reasons and I can't see any reason that will change any time soon. The threat of war is however very useful to the MIC on all sides.

    To those arguing over what wars america has won or lost since the WW2, technically you could say they have lost every one as they have always pulled out after failing to meet their objectives (unless you count the victory against the mighty Grenada) But I believe its kind of missing the point, for the USA the objective is perpetual war itself, as evidenced by the off the scale military spending shown above.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 03:38 | 6322603 atthelake
    atthelake's picture

    The bought-and-paid-for state has turned against it's people. Depopulation is the agenda and this is a small part of it.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 04:07 | 6322628 laomei
    laomei's picture

    China likes to watch and observe.  China's not all that interested in force projection, it doesn't need to be.  As long as China can defend its own borders and repel any legitimate threats (it can), then everything else can be solved with the power of economics.  China simply does not need to try and go head to head with the US.  That whole arms race game was played before and it stupid.  All you have to do is counter expensive high-tech weapons with cheap and disruptive countermeasures and it ruins entire strategies.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 04:42 | 6322658 Fenix
    Fenix's picture

    Does China have any plans for Taiwan?

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:53 | 6322916 papaswamp
    papaswamp's picture

    Agreed, though their cyber power projection is substantial and quite effective. This is the one arena the US is sorely behind. China doesnt need to fire a shot and they could probably cripple US infrastructure and markets.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:41 | 6323622 laomei
    laomei's picture

    In a non-nuclear, non-shooting scuffle with China, here's what happens more or less Day #1:

    Key power grids in the US go down

    A few critical satellites go offline

    Potential communications failures

    Stock market problems.

    This alone throws most of the US into a panic... if things progress, then Day #2:

    Various military assets are shown to have lost opsec, think drone videos.

    China tests borders and defense response times of US ally bases in a semi-show of force while the nuclear forces are called to battle stations.

    Domestically the food distribution warehouse locations are publically revealed and the underground bunkers in all the cities are explained.

     

    China has now, without firing a single shot, crippled the US temporarily in a deniable way, demonstrated it has intel on US assets in theatre which would result in operation failure if actually deployed, and demonstrated that it is perfectly cool with an actual war as well as demonstrate care for the citizens in harms way with food and shelters.

     

    US surface fleet is a bunch of floating targets the instant they come near.  The US goal of course, is to prime the public to buy any story the regime puts out.  Deploying a warship to blackmail another nation and that ship is targetted/attacked/sunk?  TERRORISM.  Whip up the rage and insanity and suppress any rational thought or logic.  Even the "liberal icons", when put on the spot fall in lockstep.  Americans don't think for themselves anymore, they have their favorite leaders and look to them for appropriate reaction/response.  Which means that those figures are all that needs to be controlled and you control the masses.

     

    Day #3? Things would go hot and there would be some sunk ships, fallen satellites and pockmarked airstrips.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 11:12 | 6323756 optimator
    optimator's picture

    Day 1, U.S. achieves Air Superiority.

    Day 2  U.S. achieves Air Supremacy.

    Day 3 on, U.S. practices bombing until China says lets talk.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 13:47 | 6324370 laomei
    laomei's picture

    more like

    Day 1, us planes cross the dateline and all crash in the ocean

    Day 2, remaining planes run into a rain storm and all crash

     

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 04:38 | 6322654 Fenix
    Fenix's picture

    I have read that Chinese are preparing ballistic anti-ship missile (based on ICBM) for use specifically against American aircraft carriers. Are Americans concerned about that?

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 06:47 | 6322770 FreeNewEnergy
    FreeNewEnergy's picture

    We win. China comes in second, which is not good in war.

    Unless I am mistaken, four Marines were killed in Tennessee yesterday and the story didn't even crack the top five on ZH.

    Could be that the practice of a loose jihadist, identified as a "domestic terrorist" is simply becoming the norm. Besides, the guy was obviously of middle eastern descent, likely a Muslim, so why don't they label it correctly, as "immigrant terrorist?"

    Rub some people the wrong way?

    I suppose the families of those dead Marines might not be offended if the government and the media started correctly identifying the enemy as not "domistic" but imported.

    Now, when some Joe Jones from Dallas or Bob Melville from Ames, Iowa, or Dick Kubis from Queens starts whacking military types, then maybe we can call them domestic terrorists. Until then, these killings are generally being carried out by ISIL-inspired Middle Eastern Muslims.

    My point is, stop calling imported people (immigrants) domestic. They're not, and that is obviously the plan. The American people are not on trial here. These jihadists should be, and, of course, it goes deeper than that.

    /rant

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:57 | 6323151 Helix6
    Helix6's picture

    Somehow, I'm guessing you missed the irony of decrying attacks by "immigrant terrorists", while at the same time the US has been dropping bombs on Middle Eastern countries for the last 25 years.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:32 | 6322855 truthalwayswinsout
    truthalwayswinsout's picture

    Their military is a disaster; all for show.  Between party indoctrination, corruption, inability to cooperate between the various services, and unbelievably poor equipment about the only thing it can do is keep the communist party in power. To top that off it is pissing off Vietnam, Philippines, and Japan.

    If the Japanese rearm, and they are just starting, China's power will be greatly diminished. 

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:59 | 6323164 Helix6
    Helix6's picture

    Could be the US strategy.  War breaks out between Japan and China, decimating both countries.  Hundreds of millions are incinerated.  What could be better?

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:46 | 6322905 johnlocke445
    johnlocke445's picture

    For those of you that think China is not the sole owner of the Spratly Islands, read on...

    About three weeks ago I remember a geopolitical analyst giving an interview and he said, "if you have an old Rand McNally world map it shows the Spratly Islands belonging to the Peoples Republic of China" so I remember I had an old one lying around that I hung on my wall when I was a kid. When I checked it out (1965 edition) it did have the islands belonging to China.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 11:16 | 6323782 zhanglini
    zhanglini's picture

    yep

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 07:54 | 6322910 papaswamp
    papaswamp's picture

    China lacks power projection outside their region. Though massive land forces, their ability to project those for es outside their region is extremely limited. Certainly they can attack globally, but it is extremely limited with no ability to hold ground. Chinese are not ones to rush into anything. As long as they dont see a need to go beyond their region, why do so?
    Chinas cyber warfare capabilities are far different...and extremely effective. Why build massive carriers and troop transports when you can cripple a country from your own dest without firing a shot?

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:34 | 6323050 roadhazard
    roadhazard's picture

    There will be no world war against the US by Russia or China. I have said this from day one. Proxy wars for sure but no country will to go up against the US in total war. Even a combination of Russia and China which is highly unlikely in itself.  This is why the US can make a deal with Iran. If it doesn't work Iran is the big loser. The US did not need to make any deal with Iran but it was made so that in the future if the deal is broken the US is free to do what it wants with no regrets.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:11 | 6323487 libertysghost
    libertysghost's picture

    I agree and disagree...to an extent.  I don't see China or Russia ootright attacking the US.  There's not much point in them doing so in my opinion and it's a losing battle strategy when you can keep doing what you're doing and wait for the US to economically implode.  China, for sure, can't really send it's military out of its borders far as the government there isn't the model of stability either.  They have to many internal battles to fight on a daily basis.  But I do think the graphic misses some of their activities in Africa and in S Am even where they either own resources outright or have joint ventures where they have capitalized some socialist nations now.  They aren't "bases" in the traditional sense, but they are projecting their influence there for sure.  

    Russia...uhhh.  Their global strategy for power is their nuclear capabilities.  They aren't going too much further but will dance out in to areas their resources already project.  Here we are looking at the greater Asian/Eastern European areas. 

     

    Now Iran...I honestly think the "deal" there is because what other option did the US have?  The sanctions only push these countries to find new ways around the dollar and show others "the way".  Israel's PTB would likely prefer to have a nuclear Iran so they can rationalize their own stockpiles and keep a tight grip militarily on their own people and the people's around them geographically.  Iran is more about China and Russia and trying to weaken their growing influence in the ME.  The Ukraine was about Syria...and likely, Iran is about Syria and hoping to prop up the house of Saudi regime longer.  

    The graphic doesn't show much US influence in S America which is just plan misleading.  I know for a fact the US has a significant presence in Colombia...I was just near one of the bases there (near Melgar) that they train regularly a few weeks ago.  The people there assumed I was in the military because I am a gringo and it's not a tourist area (for gringos at least).  They also do stuff in the CALI/TULUA region as well.  I would be surprised if we aren't in areas close to the Venezuala border region too given Venezuala is the main "bread and butter" for the FARC (so Colombia would gladly let us be there) and the US likes to cause them (the Venezualan govt) headaches as much as possible without being too obviously.  

    But in the end, having all these bases is as much of a burden as it is a benefit at this point.  Some of those matter, but the great majority of them seem to be more for patronage than for strategic use, wouldn't you say?  

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 08:39 | 6323067 Helix6
    Helix6's picture

    Whistling past the graveyard?

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 10:01 | 6323453 KCMLO
    KCMLO's picture

    Not much that can be said that you all haven't, but stacking the two military compositions side by side shows something glaringly obvious.  China is actually configured for defense, the US is configured for offense.  Democracies are peaceful nations right?

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 11:05 | 6323721 optimator
    optimator's picture

    I'd like to know "real" military spending after pay and benefits is taken out of the equiasion

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 12:15 | 6323997 MEFOBILLS
    MEFOBILLS's picture

    Private credit money, meaning Jewish finance jumped from Amsterdam to England in 1694.  It needed a shipping power to attach to, especially after Vasco de Gama discovered the Southern Route. 

    The southern route overturned rents taken by finance on the overland caravan routes.  This cannot be overemphasized.  The loss of metal money exchange rate differences spawned the invasion of Amsterdam.  The east west business passed to the Portuguese who unloaded their ships in Amsterdam.

    This finance business of moving goods by shipping and controlling metal money then passed to London, especially after the parasite jumped and landed there.

    Controlling sea lanes and power projection by sea and air is the aim of “international finance” where the objective is to also control the flows of money, especially credit money and exchange rates.

    The U.S. was parasitized in 1913 with Federal Reserve Act.   The U.S. had turned to empire with the Spanish American War before 1913, so the money powers were already at work prior to their rigged election of 1912.

    Germany had the temerity to have its own industrial capital to then grow industry.  Germany then tried to make the Baghdad to Berlin Railroad, thus linking up Eurasia. 

    Think of rail and road routes as being shipping lanes on land.  Goods and money can move easily and also be easily defended by an ARMY.  ARMY.  ARMY.  ARMY.  ARMY.  ARMY.

    OK get it.  An army.

    China does not need to project Air power and Sea Power.  It only needs to threaten U.S. Airpower and Sea power.

    The new man made Spratly Islands are easily defended by an ARMY, thus neutralizing any Naval force in the South China Sea.

    An ARMY can easily jump from Island to Island, and move down into Japan and Korea.

    China and Russia are NOT part of Western Jewish Finance, despite all the noise that says they are.  The BRIC systems and Russia’s SWIFT are almost identical, but are not designed to merge with the Jewish finance hegemon.   Both Russia and China are NATIONALISTS, and are not the INTERNATIONAL.  Russia actually kicked out most of its Oligarchial Jews, who tried to take over during Yeltsin years.

    Russia’s pivot to China has also created a two front dilemma for the U.S. 

    No fighting two front wars or you will lose.  No fighting a land army on their land, or you will lose.

     

    An asymmetric high tech air/sea “projection” military as the U.S. has, does not match up well against a determined and well trained “high tech” land army.

     

    The game is over for private credit finance, it needs to be stuffed into the trash bin before it cycles man into yet more wars.  Nations are nuclear now, so the hairless monkey better get smarter in a hurry.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 12:24 | 6324036 MEFOBILLS
    MEFOBILLS's picture

    The TBill and Petrodollar economy was born in 1971 and 1973 respectively.

     

    Recycled petrodollars funnel into western banks and western markets.  The 1973/74 Kissinger Agreement with Saudi is key to understand this.

    After the Gold standard for international trade balancing was replaced, recycled dollars started buying TBills.

    This recycling of dollars can also be captured by Washington whenever they issue a new TBill.

    This then goes on to fund the MIC, hence 800 overseas U.S. bases.

     

    BRIC system cycles national money within their “collective” borders, and hence bypasses the TBill Economy and dollar as reserve.

    By defunding the mechanism, the BRICs have pulled a key support from underneath U.S. MIC

     

    Game over.

    Fri, 07/17/2015 - 12:53 | 6324149 libertysghost
    libertysghost's picture

    I'm always reminding students of the Kissinger trip through the ME during the "energy crisis" era...the real "default" that Nixon performed when abondoning the gold standard...and how that procession of changes was meant to fund perpetual debt as an artificially high demand for T-Bills was created.  It's so important in understanding where we are today and why our foreign policy is what it is...and by extension, why China's and Russia's is what they are.  

    Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!