US overstated China's military spending, study says

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Defense Department may have overestimated China's total military spending by more than two-thirds, according to a report for the Air Force released on Thursday.

The RAND Corporation, a research group that studies many issues for the Pentagon, estimated China's military spending totaled $31 billion to $38 billion in 2003, which it said was the most recent year for which full data was available.

By contrast, the Defense Department has put the 2003 figure as high as $65 billion, 71 percent greater than the high end of RAND's estimate.
...
RAND's figure could raise questions about some of the arguments used by U.S. decisonmakers to justify continued spending on big-ticket weapons systems.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/19/AR2005051902006.html

[punpirate]

1. ~ $30 billion or so...

... puts it in about the same range of spending as the UK, and China has something like five million troops to equip and feed and house, largely spread out on its borders. Doesn't sound as if they're trying to take over the world with that kind of spending.

Now, the US, on the other hand.... *sigh*

[Tempest]

2. Reagan did the same thing with the USSR

To justify his massive increase in military spending.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Hell, Kennedy did essentially the same thing too,

in selling the US public on a mythical "Missile Gap" that required a huge military buildup back then.

[tuckessee]

8. It's an American tradition.

Sad to see that some things never change.

[Javaman]

4. Overstated or out right lied...let's cut the BS

[Spiffarino]

5. China military represents 2.3 - 2.8 per cent of China's GDP

The US share is 3.8% of GDP. China is a communist nation with militaristic tendencies and yet it spends about 1/4 less of its national wealth on warriors and war toys than we do. This makes me very sad.

[Selatius]

6. China can beat the US through economic power, not military power

It'd be pointless to try to compete with the US. Going toe-to-toe with the US defense establishment is dumb. When faced with a superior adversary, you meet him on your own terms and attack him at his weak points. You have to adopt asymmetrical tactics in the face of a superior adversary.

China has more of a chance of outmaneuvering the US in the economic arena sometime during the 21st century than it does in the military arena.

[MisterP]

7. Committee On the Present Danger redux;

there's also a new version, with St. Palpalieberman in the guiding committee (what with the AVOT meetings and whining about how essential his neocon ilk are to the party, it's a miracle he finds any time to do some Senatin')