> For example, they spend more on their military than the next 15 highest spending countries combined, and don't get proportionally better results.
Hmm what do you mean by results here? Like winning more wars? You can’t really compare two different wars. I don’t think it’d be crazy to say instead that the US can indeed project as much power as the next 15 spending countries, so results are proportional.
Don't forget that the usa sells arms at a loss to it's Ally's when you consider all the r&d aspects.
I'd also bet that you are underestimating some of the militarys classified weapons. Wouldn't even surprise me if we have nukes in space.
Finally look at it this way. There's 23 aircraft carriers in the world right now. The us has 11 of then. China's aircraft carriers are 2nd hand from Russia.
The us navy might not be 15x the size of the next 15 county's. However on a per equipment basis it's likely got a good advantage and we are likely some multiple bigger.
> Wouldn't even surprise me if we have nukes in space.
There's a treaty prohibiting that. Of course, it wouldn't surprise me if the US broke a treaty unilaterally, then was eventually discovered prompting an international arms race to space to the detriment of everyone.
You don't need nukes in space with the "Rods from God" kinetic bombardment technology. The easiest way of putting WMDs in space even without breaching any international treaties:
Hmm what do you mean by results here? Like winning more wars? You can’t really compare two different wars. I don’t think it’d be crazy to say instead that the US can indeed project as much power as the next 15 spending countries, so results are proportional.