is there a advantages or disadvantages if a country increases its military budget?
929396
Its the country have a avearge fix budget,then increasing its spending on its military strenght would mean that there is less spending in other areas...like social development etc etc.\n\nincreasing its spending on military will also make the surrounding nation more suspisious.\nThe fact that a country begin to spend more on military hardware means something...and ost of the times,offensive purpose.\nThis usually can lead of various political unstability.
1150071
Depends on how you define powerful\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_size_of_armed_forces\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
609066
Defense, being a superpower has the major economical factors of meaning large army.\n\nNow for this, other thigns suffer, such as Health and Education, meaning that as a whole the society will stagnate as new ideas can't spread through education and Health is the way you keep people around to remember the old.
974505
The answer is the same for all institutions, industries, companies and that is to refine, enhance and innovate new processes, products ("weapons") to improve your game.  In the military's case that is by developing new weapons that replace older more expensive and most likely more dangerous to the solidier using it (not necessarily to those receiving it).\n\nWe are America we don't lose in the war games we got the best toys and hence the best toy makers (plus the Israelis help us a lot).
256461
yes. why spend all the money developing it if your not going to use it. also in order for a military to be affect it needs the latest technoligy.
351669
A trade imbalance does not necessarily imply that there will be a negative effect on a country running either a trade deficit or a trade surplus, as there can be other factors within a nation's economy that allow that trade deficit (or surplus) to be beneficial.  The consequences of that trade imbalance may also be a short term benefit, but with adverse long term consequences.\n\nTaking the US economy as an example, it has been running a trade deficit for many years, as well as a budget deficit, yet it has enjoyed, in the near term, productivity growth, a strong employment market, high consumer confidence, and with the recent exception of gasoline, fairly low consumer prices.  While long term consequences, such as adverse effects from foreign purchasing of US debt, as well as the long term growth of the national debt causing problems in the future, in the short term, the trade deficit has overall  contributed to our economic well being.
1008857
The US military is certainly the most advanced and superior in the world.  However, the same was true for the British army in 1776.  It sometime comes down to a matter of will and determination and the willingness to make tremendous sacrifices (imagine millions of casualties).  I don't know if the US population is as prepared for this as it could be.  Not to be generalizing, comfort, lifestyle and convenience has less value in China than in the US and they certainly have many more people to sacrifice in a war.\n\nIt doesn't help matters that we purchase so much of what we consume from them (speaking of China) and that we owe them trillions of dollars as part of our national debt.  This puts us in a vunerable position economically. In 20 years when the oil really starts to run out, it may be in their interest to "put us in our place", and will use every means possible, I believe.
1182668
It causes the government to spend money on war materials, many of which are made in the USA. The money is debt-financed, which suggests that the positive effect may only be short-lived.
212844
If our military is appropriately equipped, funded and manned...if we have the right strategy...if we have the UN, the EU and all our allies behind us...then no, we'd have no problems.  BUT we don't have all of those things.  Iraq has stretched our army, our budget and our tolerance for any further interventions.
115391
One way to structure an answer is to look at the resources the United States had and now has to deter Communism abroad. During the Cold War vitually our entire military capability was focused on deterring the Communist threat to the U.S.  Today in spite of 1.5 Communist nuclear equipped countries (China 1.0, N. Korea .5), virtually none of our defense budget is directed against this "threat".  Economic globilization has (since the wall came down in Germany) and will continue to "protect our six" from Communism
732440
Positive:\nMore peace\nComplete military conrol\n\nNegative:\nPeople might hate the government\nMilitary and the Head of State could abuse their power
422507
advantage? if there is one, i do not know it.  this just allows the government to do whatever they want in the name of national security.  it is an outrage
550227
1) Higher population\n2) Larger Navy\n3) More factories to produce goods to fuel the war effort\n4) Stranglehold on Southern exports
213477
After the collapse of the Soviet Union a lot of politicians saw no need for us to have a large military, since we were the only super power left. Unfortunately, many politicians continue to *act* like we have a large military.\n\nThey claim that by trimming the force down some, we can accomplish "more with less." However, there comes a time when less doesn't get you more of anything other than exhausted troops.
1109313
the foundation of American military superiority is its cutting edge technology. and the best way to maintain that superiority is to build a more modern weapons that is more advanced than their European and Asian counterparts. By these method, the US monopolized the superpower status which prevents any aggressive countries to become superpower.
244319
After almost 20 years of service between 3 separate branches of the military I can tell you the pros and cons are as different as night and day. In many cases they can be the same thing. Travel for instance  Pro- You get to go to places where most people will never get to visit. Con - You might be visiting with the intentions of having to fight, kill or be killed. That is just one area to look into. There are others, but my suggestion is look inside yourself and see if you really have the desire to SERVE your fellow countrymen or are you just doing it for the "benefits". If its for the paycheck or the schooling or other benefits you Will be miserable most of the time. If you are here to try and "make a difference", All I can say is GO FOR IT! The worse that can happen is you quit or die. Everyone dies, but not everyone truly lives. Take a chance!
632888
No. Not just on its military. China's economy is growing rapidly. China's products are exported to all over the world especially in most Asian countries and some European contries. Through economic growth, its power status grows. China's economy is among the strongest in Asia, if not the world. So if China's economy gets bad, it will affect most countries that it has economic ties with. So, its power status is dependent on its rapidly-growing economy and not just its military although its military is the largest in the world.\n\n(China used to be a communist country but things have since change a bit after nearly a century the communist party took over the country which used to be a monarchy. China is kinda like just partially communist now.)