Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

China to Increase Military Budget to $35B

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 02:24 PM
Original message
China to Increase Military Budget to $35B
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060304/ap_on_re_as/china_m...

BEIJING - China's military budget will rise 14.7 percent this year to $35.3 billion, a government spokesman said Saturday.

The increase will be spent on salaries, new equipment, training and higher fuel costs due to soaring oil prices, said Jiang Enzhu, a spokesman for China's parliament, which opens its annual session on Sunday.

Jiang said China is a "peace-loving nation" and that despite the increase, its military budget is still relatively low.

China has announced double-digit spending increases for its 2.5-million-member military nearly every year since the early 1990s, causing unease among its neighbors.

Beijing's true military spending is believed to be as high as several times the reported figure, which doesn't include weapons purchases and other key items.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
brokensymmetry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. Meanwhile, the U.S. military is broken...
and dissipated in the sands of Iraq.

Can anyone say "disaster"? How about "Worst pResident ever"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhiteTara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. and the mis-administration
is bullying the world causing everyone to increase their arms and militias.
IMPEACH BUSH AND SEND THEM ALL TO THE HAGUE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PaulaFarrell Donating Member (840 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. Respectfully disagree
According to wikipedia there are 1.4 million active-duty personnel in the US military. So only aroiund 10% are being deployed in Iraq. What the hell are the other 90% doing? Mostly kicking their heels in the US apparently. I personnally would like to see a 50% reduction in military personnel and a similar closure of overseas bases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. No, they're not "mostly kicking their heels in the US apparently"....
...we have major bases on every continent but Antarctica:

America's Empire of Bases
<http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0115-08.htm >

QUOTE:

It's not easy to assess the size or exact value of our empire of bases. Official records on these subjects are misleading, although instructive. According to the Defense Department's annual "Base Structure Report" for fiscal year 2003, which itemizes foreign and domestic U.S. military real estate, the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries and HAS another 6,000 bases in the United States and its territories. Pentagon bureaucrats calculate that it would require at least $113.2 billion to replace just the foreign bases -- surely far too low a figure but still larger than the gross domestic product of most countries -- and an estimated $591,519.8 million to replace all of them. The military high command deploys to our overseas bases some 253,288 uniformed personnel, plus an equal number of dependents and Department of Defense civilian officials, and employs an additional 44,446 locally hired foreigners. The Pentagon claims that these bases contain 44,870 barracks, hangars, hospitals, and other buildings, which it owns, and that it leases 4,844 more.

These numbers, although staggeringly large, do not begin to cover all the actual bases we occupy globally. The 2003 Base Status Report fails to mention, for instance, any garrisons in Kosovo -- even though it is the site of the huge Camp Bondsteel, built in 1999 and maintained ever since by Kellogg, Brown & Root. The Report similarly omits bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan, although the U.S. military has established colossal base structures throughout the so-called arc of instability in the two-and-a-half years since 9/11.



In summary, whatever the NeoCon Junta is telling us about where our bases are located, don't believe a word of it. My personal guess is that well over half a million troops are deployed outside the U. S., NOT including those stationed in Iraq.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. A peace loving nation has dropped more tonnage of tnt, nukes,
cluster bombs, napalm, white phosphorous, smart bombs, dumb bombs, DU and other niceties than any other nation in the history of the world... so this doesn't say much for China's longterm intent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #2
17. So you believe their propaganda when they tell you the USA is a peace lovi
nation. Why would you believe that when all the evidence screams out the opposite? Name the wars China has started if you would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Not for a minute.... nope, I don't have the blinders on... sorry if I
led you to think that. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mom cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. And US asks for 3 times that much for just a war supplemental.
Is this part of the push to demonize the Chinese?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Monkey see Monkey Do Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Indeed. US budget for 2004 was $437.111 billion
Larger than the next 20 countries budgets combined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mom cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. So, lets really point out China's tiny increase.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Make7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
7. If they go to the U.N. Security Council demanding....
...weapons inspections to disarm America of its WMD, I am gonna be seriously worried.

:) Make7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporate_mike Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 01:36 AM
Response to Original message
8. while millions go hungry in China
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robeson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Just like the U.S. with our 430 billion+ military budget.....
...I say plus, 'cause Bush is always hitting congress up for supplemental income for his wars....

And yes, people are going hungry here, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. What else is new?
Edited on Sun Mar-05-06 09:08 AM by HypnoToad
I'll worry about them when they grow up. Hell, they can't even maintain a proper population - well over one BILLION. :wow:

I'd rather worry about the US right now. We're putting ourselves on our sword and we're a mere friggin' three hundred MILLION. 1/3rd China's population! Damn straight something's wrong. And it ain't entirely us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #8
16. The last figures I saw indicated that about 6 million Americans....
...are being fed by the food lines that are operating in every urban and rural location.

Yes, millions are hungry in China, but we have a growing problem with hunger right here in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
19. You're not very original, are you?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

By the way: my reply there also applies here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
54anickel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
11. In Deal With India, Bush Has Eye on China
Not sure if this ever made it to LBN when it came out. Sorry if it's a repeat.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-us...


WASHINGTON A key factor behind the nuclear cooperation agreement reached this week between the United States and India was a simple trade-off: The White House was willing to risk losing ground in the worldwide campaign to limit the spread of nuclear weapons for a deal with India that could help it counter the rising power of China.

Despite widespread criticism that the pact sets back global nuclear nonproliferation efforts, Bush administration officials praise the deal for its promise of better ties with a thriving democracy and reduced competition for world oil.

snip>

"This is an effort to counterbalance the rise of China, but I wouldn't go so far as to say to contain China or to be antagonistic toward it," said L. Gordon Flake, executive director of the Mansfield Foundation in Washington. "We obviously have an interest in a large, democratic, multiethnic society as a counterbalance to the Chinese in the region."

snip>

Under Thursday's deal, India retained the right to deny United Nations inspectors access to a "fast-breeder" reactor suitable for producing weapons-grade fissile material. Since India refused to agree to a cap, there is no limit on the expansion of its nuclear arsenal a fact that critics say could provoke a regional arms race.

At the beginning of President Bush's first term, dealing with China's growing power was a top priority of many policymakers, beginning with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. The need to meet the challenge of China was a central tenet of the neoconservative creed associated with Bush's inner circle.

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. self-del
Edited on Sun Mar-05-06 09:12 AM by HypnoToad
x
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-05-06 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
12. Anyone read this tidbit from 23 November 2005?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/23/uttm/main1070...

Is the Chinese military getting better, stronger? Absolutely. Will it someday catch up with the U.S.? Not at this rate. Not now, and unless something radical changes probably not ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 17th 2014, 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC