The Asian-American Arms Race In Charts

Tyler Durden's picture

"Asia is a study in contrasts. It is home to economic freedom and political liberty; it is also home to political instability and tyranny. Some of Asia’s borders are unsettled and volatile. And military budgets and capabilities are expanding, sometimes faster than economic growth. The rise of China as a great power presents both sides of this equation. It is being watched carefully by all the countries of the region. It is the U.S. that is recognized as the catalyst in ensuring a prosperous peace over conflict. America is a Pacific power. That much is a matter of geography and history. But the facts – and America’s principles and interests – demand more than resignation to geography. They call for continued American leadership, commitment, and the predominant comprehensive power that has enabled Asia’s very welcomed, opportunity-laden rise."

Thus prefaces the Heritage Foundation its Asian 'Book of Charts', which summarizes most of the key economic, financial, trade, geopolitical, most importantly militaristic tensions both in Asia and, by dint of being the global marginal economic force, the world itself. And while we will present the complete deck shortly, of particular interest we find the summary in 7 easy charts how Asia is slowly but surely catching up on that accepted by conventional wisdom GloboCop - the United States.

We present it in its entirety below.

Arms race brewing in Asia

Asian Navies vary broadly in size

China is gaining on US Navy

Americas forward deployed military

areas disputed in China, Japan, and Koreas

China's desruptive South China Sea

Areas disputed in China and India Mainland

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
iDealMeat's picture

Schank you bitchez



Michael's picture

The USA can blow up the entire planet 10 times over. Who cares about increasing it another ten times, you only need to do it once.

In other news;

Sen. Paul Introduces "Write the Laws Act" as promised

AKRON, Ohio, July 18, 2012 -- /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

"Legislation without representation: Every day new laws are imposed on you by people who aren't elected," says Jim Babka, President of, Inc. "But that could change, thanks to Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who has introduced our 'Write the Laws Act' (WTLA) in the Senate."

"WTLA would prohibit unelected bureaucrats from passing laws and compel the elected Congress do its job," Babka explains. "WTLA would require that all laws, even the ones called 'regulations,' be passed by the people's representatives in Congress."

"It's frankly un-Constitutional to impose on the people without first consulting them, through their elected representatives," declares Babka. Pointing to the legal concept of "separation of powers" Babka continues, "Regulation without representation is an unconstitutional delegation of powers."

By introducing WTLA (S. 3361), Senator Paul fulfills a campaign promise. But he's also addressing a passion he has for accountability.

Paul is already the lead sponsor, in the Senate, for the REINS Act, which works from the opposite direction on a very similar problem. "As we have seen at the EPA and FCC, unelected bureaucrats can advance a radical agenda when it loses legislatively or in the courts."

WTLA requires that . . .

•Any rules that citizens must obey must be passed solely by Congress, with no details left to bureaucrats.
•Americans must be held blameless, in the courts, against any rules created in violation of this requirement.
•Previous grants of legislative power to bureaucrats must be identified, so that Congress can efficiently exercise its prerogative to repeal or reform them.

Babka commends Senator Paul for keeping his word. "It's a rare politician that honors his promises. Now we can begin to collect Senate co-sponsors for this vital reform," Babka concluded.


rocker's picture

You would have thought Tyler would look at ALL weapons and the simple fact that all militaries are overstocked.

There are ways that we have. Many are not even mentioned anywhere. Think HARP, LASER, SOUND. LIGHT and Chemical.

Just what we need, something else to get the Neocons in a truffle again.  GEEEZZZZZZZZZZZ.

john39's picture

overstocked with crappy equipment... and yet soldiers on multiple tours committing suicide at higher rates than combat deaths...

The They's picture

The USA is making the same mistake that germany did in the world wars: they will start any conflict with the most powerful military but will have created it by sacrificing actual production capacity (which we've been doing for decades).  military might isn't just about how many troops/ships/planes etc one can deploy all at once.  it is also about how fast one can REPLACE the troops/ships/planes etc.... In this sense we are ill equiped for a major war (unless we go nuclear, in which case everyone loses).

mjk0259's picture

Indeed, we can't even make most weapons without Chinese parts and they may have viruses and trap doors embedded. China can make them without US parts and steals our designs almost immediately.

monoloco's picture

If we engage in an arms race with the Chinese, they'll do to us what we did to the Soviets.

The They's picture

Exactly.  Not to mention the fact that a lot of the raw materials (do you know how many pounds of rare earths from china go into one patriot missile?) and even produciton of our military equipment is done overseas.  This is a  major weakness.

The They's picture

certainly... but also:

"|There isn't anything electronically that the Department of Defense does that does not involve the use of rare earth elements. Some other defense uses we like to talk about are guidance and control systems, smart bombs and Patriot missiles. None of these devices works without rare earths in them."

slackrabbit's picture

4 people voted negative?

How many nukes do these people think we need?

I would have thought 1000% earth distruction would have been enough!

Or does someone want have an interest in the military-indutrial complex?

They can send their kids first...and last.

Bleeding Fart's picture

Oh, hmm... I thought this post was going to discuss the arming of Ivy League whizkids.

Zone1's picture

And I thought this article was going to be about how the percentage of Asian Americans packing heat was going up.

Xibalba's picture

military industrial complex complexity...

q99x2's picture

Yes but the US has Hillary.


Normalcy Bias's picture

Yes, I see your point! It's good to be playing checkers while China, Russia, Iran, etc. play chess...

FieldingMellish's picture

Hildog! Woof! Woof! We could sneak a snuke up her snizz.

buzzsaw99's picture

The numbers during the cold war were scarier than that. I wonder if the chinese nuke subs are armed with nuclear weapons or just propulsion systems? Either way I wouldn't want a ride on one.

FieldingMellish's picture

Look at the submarine graph (blue). It looks like they have 2 that are equiped with ballistic missiles. Such large and expensive sub-orbital missiles are rarely cnventional and almost certainly nuclear.

buzzsaw99's picture

Thank you.

edit: according to wiki the missiles have a range of 5000 miles:

nmewn's picture

Thank you Loral Space & Bubba.

Ghordius's picture

I remember how Bush the Younger came back from Taiwan with an arms shopping list featuring prominently diesel-electric subs. He went to GE, and they told him they would not do them - only nuclear subs. Of course the Dutch, the Germans, the Italians and a few more were very keen on getting on board of a deal, since they do produce them, but this did not fit the prez's strategies at all, he preferred to lose face in front of the Taiwanese and renege his promise to them.

In case you wonder, diesel-electric subs are seen as the cheapest maritime defensive platform, thanks to the small size they can have, and of course their quiteness.

Dr. Engali's picture

Are you saying there might be a problem with Chinese construction?


Certainly not.

FieldingMellish's picture

An extremely expensive (read: taxpayer funded) arms race. What could possibly go wrong?

I am Jobe's picture

Guns Vs Butter Bitchezzz. Penis size does matter in wars.

Segestan's picture

Global cop and Liberal leadership has been a Huge success for America.... except we're broke.

miltiadis's picture

Size Matters but skill matters more...

john39's picture

300 spartans....    yes, they had allies...  but you get the point.  and yes, they lost the battle and died, but how did the war work out in the end.

slackrabbit's picture

In the famous word of Edmund Black-Adder 'Its not size that counts, its where you stick it'

MrPalladium's picture

The idea that the US must deploy bases and naval forces around the World in order to maintain peace and stability is laughable.

The US is the greatest force for instability and violence in the World.

yabyum's picture

Dear Heritage Foundation, You write the checks for your adventure, and send your kids to go fight and die, Mittins has five boyz ready to join up and go. Me, I am broke but will stay here to watch over the women, old and the kids.

john39's picture

mittens is probably brain washed enough to send his kids to die...  despite that he toughed it out in France to dodge the draft during vietnam.  total tool, not that obomber isn't.

FieldingMellish's picture

That is why I support a draft with the children of elected officials first in line to go. This will make them think twice or three times about going to war.

PulpCutter's picture

My idea, now that war isn't 100% physical, is to draft ALL 55yr-old males for mandatory combat duty anytime America is at war.  I imagine you'd see a sudden downturn in sabre-rattling by the right.

cynicalskeptic's picture

When a nation's leaders - be they kings, emperors or presidents - were at head of armies on the battlefield, nations were far less inclined to go to war.   Thew number of elected officials in COngress - and their CHILDREN - who have served in the military are minimal.  An 'all-volunteer' military is viewed as 'expendale'.  Remember the smirk on W's face when queried about our troops in Iraq?   'Well.... they volunteered, didn't they?'

mjk0259's picture

Don't think so. A lot of them liked wars and they didn't know how to do anything else. There was endless wars for thousands of years when kings used to go. Rarely did a person escape one during their lifetime.

PulpCutter's picture

America spends more on "defense" than the rest of the world, combined.   $1050 billion/year including Department of "Homeland" Security, VA, NSA, and military parts of the CIA and State Dept.  China runs a very, very distant second, at $115 billion/year.

Yet in the eyes of the Heritage Foundation, we're in an arms race with China.  Heritage Foundation are the same right-wing waterheads who proposed the individual mandate in 1989, but now calls it a Constitutional crisis.

These guys bend over for whoever is paying them.  They can't be trusted as far as you can throw them.

Dr.Vannostrand's picture

You make a good point @ 1st, but then must water it down with your left/right diatribe that you MUST include in every post you make. Come on man, I'm sure most ZHers are intelligent enough to know which way the Heritage F leans without you bitching about the right. Just saying, it gets a little old and turns the comments into an arguement. For a youngin like myself, the comments provide a lot of good info from more seasoned vets on a plethora of topics. Just laying it out there, and no, I'm not a rethug; I'm 30, wrote in Dr. Paul in '08 and will again.

PulpCutter's picture

Just curious, when have you ever seen a left-leaning ZH article? 

Excellent, very fresh market commentary, combined with right-wing propaganda.  Not that they have any responsibility in that regard - it's their site, as far as I'm concerned that gives them every right to publish whatever they like.

Bringin It's picture

ZH is anti-war.  In your cosmology is that considered "left-leaning"?  Being anti-war?

I agree with Kramer.  The dichotomy is just cover for the mafia looting.  You can debate abortion while they empty out the inventory.

nmewn's picture

China doesn't have the equivalent of DHS, NSA, CIA and State Dept. ?


Fucking sign me

old naughty's picture

I wonder if Heritage got the data from Chinese propagander machines?

There's a TV channel broadcasting military might 7/24 in China. Nauseating.

slackrabbit's picture

Which one CNN, Fox and MSNBC?