Smart Military Spending...

[militarymafia]

Ok I didn't know where to put this it's my first time on the forum so go ahead and move it somewhere else if it's in the wrong section.

Smart Military Spending:

Which top 10 nations do you think have the smartest military spending?

This means which nations spend little to get alot?

For example, I was browsing through some countries militaries yesterday and stumbled upon Egypt's military, which only spends around 2.5 billion dollars of it's own money annually, plus about 1.3 billion dollars of US military aid each year. That totals up to 3.8 billion dollars annually. Also, I've noticed Egypt's armed forces to have a large inventory, and it combines both American and Russian weaponary. It may not have the best military equipment, but for this amount of money I think it's spending smart on military hardware. I read somewhere that Egypt's military is the strongest and largest in Africa, and the second strongest in the Middle East after Israel.

Military of Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Egyptian Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note - For the Egyptian army, the number of vehicles, such as about 1000 Abrhams tanks and almost 10,000 Jeeps. This is the kind of spending I'm talking about.

Well all in all, which 10 nations do you think have the best and smartest military spending on a money to amount ratio.

Note that nations like the USA do not spend smart, since the USA spends alot to get the best and most expensive equipment, even though it's good equipment, it's not smart spending. I'm talking about nations, both poor and rich, that spend little to get alot. Equipment quality doesn't matter.

Post your 10 nations and opinions on them. :D

[militarymafia]

Did I double post a topic? Sorry. Delete one of the two topics if you wish.

[entropy]

Certain members of this board would gladly fight 10 tanks that cost as much as the single superior tank that they sit in.
Same applies for any military hardware.

Equipment quality does matter. Anyone who has ever used any equipment will tell you that.

Please make use of the introduction equipment. Introduce yourself in the appropriate subforum, and then prepare to have your butt kicked, because I do see truckloads of inaccuracies in your post, but I leave it to the professionals to explain to you.

[militarymafia]

Certain members of this board would gladly fight 10 tanks that cost as much as the single superior tank that they sit in.
Same applies for any military hardware.

Equipment quality does matter. Anyone who has ever used any equipment will tell you that.

Please make use of the introduction equipment. Introduce yourself in the appropriate subforum, and then prepare to have your butt kicked, because I do see truckloads of inaccuracies in your post, but I leave it to the professionals to explain to you.

'

Now I don't know whether that was some form of hostility or a joke, but anyways...

I'm not a military professional, just a normal person who's interested in different topics of the military, and I don't spend alot of time to research my topics, so bear with me, it will be inaccurate.

The reason I said that Egypt spends smart is because of what I've seen in a ratio of numbers to spending, which I was wrong of course because all inventory could've been previously obtained.

Now, equipment quality does matter in the military, but I would rather spend 2 billion dollars on a 100 Russian bomber airplanes than a single B2 bomber, just because it would be worth more for me to have alot that is as equally effective in bombing a certain target and because it is more cost effective.

I don't know for what reason, but when you wrote that post, you made it seem as if every single country in the world had the spending capibility of the USA. I am not talking about what the USA would spend it's money on because the majority of countries in the world cannot do this, as you might already know. I am talking about if you had little money to spend, how would you spend smart???

For example, would you buy a single 2 billion dollar B2 bomber and waste your whole 2 billion dollar budget?

Or would you rather buy a 100 bomber airplanes that a single one is NOT as good as a B2 bomber in technology, capibility, stealth etc. but would still destroy the intended target?

In the sense of this. Maybe I didn't mention that you don't have a 500 billion dollar budget to spend...

[entropy]

You are comparing apples to oranges. I would much rather have Bears than any US bomber for long range coast patrol duty, but I sure as hell want a Spirit if I plan to attack nations that are more advanced than Angola.

And I would buy 10 bombers that are better than the poor Russian ones but cheaper than the overpriced US ones.

And besides, situation matters. What country are you, what are your plans, who are your neighbours, who are your people?

[soyeen]

Https://www.petitionOnline.com/VS070821/petition.html

US government has been hidden spending big $ for its space base weapon since for long. They are all in dirty and hidden activities now.

[bolo121]

Every army would like to get more bang for its buck.
Sadly in most cases if you build at home the Defence company has lots of chums in government and sucks you dry. The most conspicious recent example is the USAF's F-22, it swallowed immense amounts of money.
If you are forced to buy from abroad you pretty much have to pay more as the countries selling to you need to make a profit. In additon once you acquire a weapon system you will have to keep paying for spares, maintenance and of course upgrades down the line. In any case you never get the most cutting edge stuff which they keep for themselves.

[cuba]

I think that's right in some cases. Many countries in the Asia-Pacific region are acquiring Russian fighter jets which are relatively cheaper than American jets and far superior.

[shrikantR]

i guess it depends a lot on the situation and we cant comment unless and untill use of such weapons is actually made

ultimatly all is dependant on a country's own goals Economic, cultural Etc. wether such spendingg fits to its pocket.

another point to be noted is the need of such weapons to a country.

so for every country its spending on defence would be more or less different this is because a country might require higher spending to protect itself from hostility however other may not need it.

what is your view

[zeus920]

some israeli experts says that egypt lies about it's real expendure on defence as they say that egypt must be spending around 14 billions on it's military ..
read the following and let me know what u think ..

Shawn Pine: EGYPT’S DEFENSE EXPENDITURES

[dave lukins]

The US Central Intelligence Agency estimate is that Egypt's defence spending in the 90s, was US$ 3,2 billion anually average.( about 8,2% of the national budget). Major Shawn Pine, a US specialist in counter intelligence claims, in an in-depth study published by the rightwing oriented Ariel Center for Policy Research( ACPR), that Egypt's real defence expenditure reached closer to US$ 20 billion.
Leading Israeli academic sources, which doubt Pine's estimates, do however agree, that the defence budget has increased during the last decade and could be around US$ 7-8 billion annually.

As Egypt does not make public it's Defence spending it's a good bet it's closer to the Israeli academic estimates. It's a matter of "need to know"

[cuba]

Does Egypt really need to spend that much on its defense force?

I don't know much about Egypt and it's enemies and allies. Is it still at loggerheads with Israel?

[dave lukins]

Cuba this may suprise you;)

Denmark is one of Egypt's worst enemies, second only after Israel, an Egyptian government poll has indicated.

Israel was considered most hostile to Egypt, followed by Denmark, Britain and the United States - in that order.

[glyn]

Cuba this may suprise you;)

The date of that publication did'nt co-incide with the beginning of this month, did it?

[dave lukins]

The date of that publication did'nt co-incide with the beginning of this month, did it?

No..it was published on 06. I do see what you are getting at;)