this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
320 points (97.3% liked)

Cool Guides

5997 readers
2 users here now

Rules for Posting Guides on Our Community

1. Defining a Guide Guides are comprehensive reference materials, how-tos, or comparison tables. A guide must be well-organized both in content and layout. Information should be easily accessible without unnecessary navigation. Guides can include flowcharts, step-by-step instructions, or visual references that compare different elements side by side.

2. Infographic Guidelines Infographics are permitted if they are educational and informative. They should aim to convey complex information visually and clearly. However, infographics that primarily serve as visual essays without structured guidance will be subject to removal.

3. Grey Area Moderators may use discretion when deciding to remove posts. If in doubt, message us or use downvotes for content you find inappropriate.

4. Source Attribution If you know the original source of a guide, share it in the comments to credit the creators.

5. Diverse Content To keep our community engaging, avoid saturating the feed with similar topics. Excessive posts on a single topic may be moderated to maintain diversity.

6. Verify in Comments Always check the comments for additional insights or corrections. Moderators rely on community expertise for accuracy.

Community Guidelines

By following these rules, we can maintain a diverse and informative community. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for contributing responsibly!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
JCSpark@lemmy.ca
320
The 'totally necessary' amount the US spends on Defense (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 1 week ago by Stamets@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/coolguides@lemmy.ca
71 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Y.S.K. some countries are bigger than others. Per capita or G.T.F.O.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

This is the weirdest justification to me. Military spending is for specific purposes. Like, if your hostile neighbor has twice the population as you and spends X dollars, then you don't spend 0.5 * X dollars. You're probably going to end up with higher spending per capita in order to reach parity. So why on earth would we compare by capita?

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Building all my bombs in the Vatican so I get that high per capita ratio

[–] Echofox@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

So which is it. Stellaris, Hearts of Iron, or Crusader Kings?

[–] MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Make sure to baptise them so you get holy hand grenades

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

Good post 👏

[–] Bldck@beehaw.org 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Please look at basically any asymmetric war in the past 75 years. E.g. Vietnam, Afghanistan (twice), Ukraine.

You do not need to spend as much on defense as your larger opponent.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, now look at casualty rates in Vietnam and Afghanistan and ask yourself whether that's really what most people would pick as a Plan A.

[–] Bldck@beehaw.org 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Looking at just combatant deaths:

Conflict Country / Side Years Active Total Military Deaths Duration (Days) Deaths per Day (Avg.) Approx. Troops Engaged Deaths per 1,000 Troops (Full War) Relative Intensity (U.S. in Vietnam = 1×)
WWII – European Theater USSR (Red Army) 1941–1945 ~8,700,000 ~1,410 ≈6,170/day ~34,000,000 ~255 ≈310×
WWII – European Theater Germany (Wehrmacht) 1941–1945 ~4,300,000 ~1,410 ≈3,050/day ~17,000,000 ~250 ≈150×
Vietnam War North Vietnam (PAVN + VC) 1965–1975 ~600,000–800,000 ~3,650 ≈165–220/day ~3,000,000 ~230 ≈8–11×
Vietnam War South Vietnam (ARVN) 1965–1975 ~250,000–313,000 ~3,650 ≈70–85/day ~850,000–1,000,000 ~280 ≈4×
Vietnam War United States 1965–1973 58,220 ~2,920 ≈19.9/day ~2,700,000 ~21 1× (baseline)
Soviet–Afghan War USSR 1979–1989 14,453 ~3,330 ≈4.3/day ~620,000 ~23 0.2×
Soviet–Afghan War Afghan Mujahideen 1979–1989 ~75,000–90,000 ~3,330 ≈23–27/day ~250,000–300,000 ~300 ≈1–1.3×
U.S.–Afghan War United States 2001–2021 2,461 ~7,270 ≈0.34/day ~775,000 (rotated) ~3 0.017×
U.S.–Afghan War Afghan National Forces 2001–2021 ~66,000 ~7,270 ≈9/day ~300,000 ~220 ≈0.45×
U.S.–Afghan War Taliban & Insurgents 2001–2021 ~52,000–60,000 ~7,270 ≈7–8/day ~200,000–250,000 ~250 ≈0.35×

Now look at combatants and civilians:

Conflict Country / Side Years Active Military Deaths Civilian Deaths Duration (Days) Total Deaths/Day (Avg.) Approx. Troops / Population Affected Relative Intensity (U.S. in Vietnam = 1×)
WWII – European Theater USSR (Red Army + Civilians) 1941–1945 ~8,700,000 ~15,000,000 ~1,410 ≈16,900/day ~34M troops / 110M pop ≈850×
WWII – European Theater Germany (Wehrmacht + Civilians) 1941–1945 ~4,300,000 ~3,800,000 ~1,410 ≈5,750/day ~17M troops / 70M pop ≈290×
Vietnam War North Vietnam (PAVN + VC + Civilians) 1965–1975 ~600,000–800,000 ~1,000,000 ~3,650 ≈440–500/day ~3M troops / 17M pop ≈22–25×
Vietnam War South Vietnam (ARVN + Civilians) 1965–1975 ~250,000–313,000 ~1,000,000 ~3,650 ≈340–360/day ~1M troops / 18M pop ≈17×
Vietnam War United States 1965–1973 58,220 N/A ~2,920 ≈19.9/day ~2.7M troops 1× (baseline)
Soviet–Afghan War USSR 1979–1989 14,453 N/A ~3,330 ≈4.3/day ~620,000 0.2×
Soviet–Afghan War Afghan Mujahideen + Civilians 1979–1989 ~75,000–90,000 ~850,000–1,000,000 ~3,330 ≈280–330/day ~15–17M pop ≈14–17×
U.S.–Afghan War United States 2001–2021 2,461 N/A ~7,270 ≈0.34/day ~775,000 0.017×
U.S.–Afghan War Afghan National Forces + Civilians 2001–2021 ~66,000 ~46,000 ~7,270 ≈15/day ~35M pop ≈0.7×
U.S.–Afghan War Taliban & Insurgents 2001–2021 ~52,000–60,000 – ~7,270 ≈7–8/day ~200,000–250,000 ≈0.35×

So now let’s look at the Vietnam war and military expenditure for each side:

Country / Side Years Active Estimated Military Expenditure (1965–1975) Approx. 2025 USD (Inflation-Adjusted) Military Deaths Combatant Deaths per $1B (2025 USD) Notes
United States 1965–1973 ~$141 billion (nominal) ≈$1.3 trillion (2025 USD) 58,220 ≈45 deaths per $1B Includes DoD + support spending; excludes veterans’ costs
North Vietnam (PAVN + VC) 1965–1975 ~$4.6 billion (nominal, incl. Soviet/Chinese aid) ≈$43 billion (2025 USD) ~700,000 ≈16,000 deaths per $1B Relied heavily on foreign aid and low-cost mobilization
Metric Result Meaning
Expenditure ratio (U.S. ÷ N. Vietnam) ≈30× U.S. spent ~30× more than North Vietnam
Combat deaths ratio (N. Vietnam ÷ U.S.) ≈12× North Vietnam suffered ~12× more combat deaths
Cost-per-death ratio (U.S. ÷ N. Vietnam) ≈350× U.S. spent ~350× more dollars per soldier killed

Interpretation:

  • North Vietnam traded manpower for resources, accepting high losses.
  • The U.S. used capital- and technology-intensive warfare.
  • Despite enormous expenditure, asymmetric strategy and morale offset the imbalance.

Tie it all together… in total war against a near peer, casualty rates are significantly higher. 50x for the Red Army in WWII, 17x for the Wehrmacht.

In asymmetric war, casualty rates are lower overall. And total GDP expenditure is significantly lower.

I don’t want to ignore the human cost here. But we’re talking about specific quantifiable metrics here, not the emotional trauma

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That was entirely unnecessary and missing the point.

I don’t want to ignore the human cost here. But we’re talking about specific quantifiable metrics here, not the emotional trauma

Then it's not a valid analysis.

What question are you even trying to answer here? Because whatever it is seems to be entirely unrelated to anything I was talking about.

I just realized you wrote the infuriatingly wrong claim, "North Vietnam traded manpower for resources, accepting high losses." No, dumbass, they didn't skimp on equipment because they were "willing to accept casualties," they didn't have money for equipment and fought tooth and nail with everything they had to avoid colonial subjugation. It wasn't some kind of policy choice.

[–] m4xie@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Percentage of GSP would also be a relevant figure