• 1 Post
  • 195 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2025

help-circle
  • I spent some time thinking about your response and I’ll give it to you that Poland is heavily investing in their military which is probably a good thing long term for themselves and the EU. I think my qualm was specifically with the statement that they have been building one of the largest militaries on earth.

    On the evaluation of their investment by % GDP they are certainly investing heavily, this website puts them somewhere in the top teens out of ~265 regions (broken down even more than the 195 recognized by the UN). Another metric to look at is the raw total military, not just investment in %GDP. I don’t think it’s particularly fair to compare Poland with other countries which have dissimilar GDPs, for example that website says that Armenia invested 5.5% of it’s GDP in comparison to Poland’s 4.2%, but Armenia’s GDP is $27 billion to Poland’s $1.1 trillion and their military is ~1/3 the size.

    To your point (investment in equipment) we have to take into account the quality of the military, not just quantity; you can have 100x more troops but it doesn’t mean much if they are completely outclassed in gear.

    So yes, of the ~195 countries of the world Poland is in the top ~10% and if you review their investment by %GDP they are probably closer to the top 5%.

    The top 4 militaries by troops (China, the US, North Korea, and India) all have >1,000,000 troops and the top 4 by raw expenditure (US, China, Russia, and Germany) are all >$88.5 billion (and Germany is pulling that group way down).

    Let’s break down these metrics. 5% of the average of the top 4 in quantity is 76k troops and only ~50 countries have that amount or more. 5% of the average of the top 4 in expenditure is ~$19.3 billion and only ~21 countries meet that value.

    All this is to break down that Poland is in the top 5-10% of world militaries, but if you remove all the countries doing basically nothing they are basically in the middle (31/50 in quantity, 13/21 in expenditure). Poland is definitely making one of the strongest militaries in Europe, but a big part of that is that the other countries in the EU aren’t doing much. If you count up the EU countries that are included in that 21 listed above (UK, Germany, Ukraine, France, Poland, Italy, Spain, and Netherlands) Poland makes up $38 billion of the groups combined $423.5 billion (~8.9%), but all of those are half of the US expenditure ($997 billion) and 77% of the combined BRICS members in that group ($549.1 billion).

    EDIT: I totally missed that the Ukraine isn’t part of the EU, I had removed Algeria and Turkey as well, so that should change the % values; however, I kinda feel like if the Ukraine pulls through they likely will join the EU so I’m not gonna change things here.






  • To add to this, something I like to point out to people, but (for the US) only ~60% of military personnel are ever deployed. Of those 60% only 10-20% will ever see combat. To top that off ~25% of the military are actually civilian service members, people who work for the military but are not soldiers.

    So in summary, for each soldier that sees combat there are:

    • ~6 deployed soldiers who will never see combat.
    • ~11 non-deployed soldiers who never will be.
    • ~6 civilian military staff who will probably never need to move for work.

    Of these 24 people, all have access to the commissary, retirement and pension, top tier insurance, paid child care, up to 26 days of paid time off with 13 sick days and 11 fed holidays. The only things the military civilians don’t get are the VA, loan programs, and special protections.

    So unless you’re a complete block head with no skills or talent your odds of joining the military and basically getting socialism with no risks is pretty high. Remember this the next time someone gets mouthy about respecting “the troops” or “serving their country,” odds are they didn’t do shit.

    I used to work with a whole group of guys who their whole military career (20 years) was running a wastewater treatment plant on an Air Force base in the US, that’s it.






  • In the case of Canada I think that is inherently the problem. US Republican’s have been complaining specifically about Canada since about 2016 and how they aren’t meeting their NATO requirements, have no plans to ever meet them, and how Canada is basically free loading. I remember an article from ~2019 where a Canadian economist was quoted saying that if Canadians are going to be taxed more politicians are not going to spend that money on defense spending over programs which improve quality of life because defense isn’t a concern for Canadians due to being next door to the US.

    All this talk about Canada freeloading has some merit, but from a US perspective it completely ignores the huge economic benefits the US/Canada relationship has had for the US. At its heart a significant portion of the US has strong opinions and beliefs about the importance of military preparedness and a fascination with naive blind fairness. In their minds the US and Canada have a good relationship, but Canada isn’t doing their fair share and that makes them angry. For them they see Canada as a mooch and a bad friend.

    Canada not investing in it’s military defense both caused US conservative politicians to be upset and also puts Canada in the uncomfortable position they are in now. So yeah, Canada has a “strongest monkey with the biggest stick” problem in that they don’t have much of a stick.