is that we want peace and to achieve this, the channels of communication must be maintained. seattle says the he accepted the invite to go to him is for the 2nd time this year, even though he knows that he pretty much risk being criticized for over in europe. yeah, that sounds like a good that, but he is to talking here about e colleagues whose idea of effectively serving the interest of piece is just to drive their cloud to all the way over to kia for a meeting amongst themselves they, he met virtue, signaling is all it takes and speaking of both in china shops, slow back here is new prime minister robert feet. so is making his e u debut for the 1st time since being re elected after previously b, i was didn't. what he described at the time is a sort of hollow revolution. so he had or bon, are over at this media, brussels acting like those 2 guys who sit up in the balcony on the muppet show. in this case, basically annoying everyone there with constantly speaking our about how much the

whole the use surface app just sucks and see. so didn't exactly weighed in just only to test the waters at this meeting. either. it's more like you did a running cannonball straight into the deep end. we're support humanitarian and civil assistance to ukraine. this will be the official policy of my government. will not supply your grain with any weapons. diesel had already made a campaign promise not to send any more weapons to credit, but he's going further now adding that he won't vote in favor of any anti russian sanctions until he can see an assessment of their impact on his country lines. so back here, which seems to align with his pro slovak here position. and which is critics, are qualified as pro food 10 or pro russia because he just small sacrifice back in national interest to satisfy the endless whims of queen ursula and her favorite princess the lensky. and he's not shy about calling on other you entries to do the

same in their own citizens. best interest, either the position of my government is that the media of secession of military operations is the best solution would have for ukraine. the european union should transform itself from an armed supply to a peacemaker. please hold a little of freestyle resting on the ukraine complex, saying that the whole fiasco stem from an attack, spiteful, ukrainian, fascist on the civilian population of russian nationality. so that probably rattled a few tea cups in brussels. it looks like b, u has its hands full with these 2 or bon and feet. so carpet bombing the file size with a barrage of truth torpedoes. maybe you should just make an effort to achieve actual unity that takes their descent on board democratic descent into account rather than just dismissing it to keep up false appearances and plough ahead with their agenda . i'm next of the cost of everything. we'll take the closer look at the movies.

plenty of countries as low homes that are developing, especially in the middle east with the card as well as complex. i will be back out of the the, [000:00:00;00]

the it seems that history is doomed to repeat itself as today. we find ourselves in scrunched in the middle of several global conflicts. there's a conflict between ukraine and russia moss and is re. 1 a security crisis triggered by north korea conflict in central america and more. this on russ all over the world puts more than half of the countries in a crisis of health economy and social safety, which is the biggest threat to human civilization. i'm christy, and you're watching the cost of everything we're today. we will analyze how much it cost countries to maintain, sustain and grow their military capability. the military spending is a significant part of many countries, budgets, and differs from nation to nation. not surprisingly,

the us has the largest military budget spending $877000000000.00. the next largest military spender is china, but only at $292000000000.00, followed by russia at $86000000000.00. india and saudi arabia around now the top 5 with budgets of $81.00 and $75000000000.00, respectively. now the top 5 countries alone account for almost 60 percent of the global military spending, with the us spending more than the next 11 countries combined. as each country has unique security challenges and geo political objectives, that then shape is military spending priorities. with the conflict in ukraine world military spending grew for the 8 consecutive year in 2022 to an all time high of $2.00 trillion dollars, which is the sharpest rise in spending. in recent years,

in the us defense spending accounts for 12 percent of all federal spending and nearly half of discretionary spending. from that it pays the salaries, the training and health care of uniformed and civilian personnel maintain arms, equipment and facilities, fun operations and develop. and to buy new items for r and d. additionally, a significant portion of the budget goes towards procuring new weapon systems, including air, cost, ships, and other vehicles. the weapon systems are a big factor that eats into the budget. now for an average weapon system over its entire service life, the purchase price is only a 3rd of the cost operating and maintaining and purchasing new munitions for it accounts for nearly $2.00 thirds. the budget also funds the army, the navy, marine air force and space force. now in 2018,

the u. s. military budget counts for approximately 36 percent of global arms spending. the us also maintains the largest number of military bases and foreign soils in the world. in terms of military power, the global fire power index offers insight into the military capabilities of nation's worldwide. now this is based on an assessment of over 60 factors, including man, power, technological capabilities, nuclear capabilities, strategic locations, financing, logistics, military assets, etc. now, according to this index, the us both the world's most powerful military followed by russia, china, india, the u. k. south korea, pakistan, japan, and france. on the opposite end the spectrum, the least powerful nations include futon, then in moldova,

somalia and liberia. this is due to limited resources, geo political factors, or a commitment to maintaining smaller defense forces. now with the big inequality gap and military powers and smaller nations, nato countries have set forth an agreement to raise the alliance is target for military spending to at least 2 percent of national g d p. however, only 11 out of the 31 members actually managed to reach that target. the western officials have underscore that many allies will have to spend more than 2 percent to meet the requirements of nato's new military plans and continue to provide aid. now today we're joined by keith, nick, henry, founder of food, not bombs, now case, can you provide an overview of global military expenditures and the total amount spent on defense by various countries in recent years? yeah, i think that the largest countries, um, by far our 1st uh,

the united states which spent the 8876000000000 dollars last year on its military. and that's the over number that they spent. because we do not know really about c. i a in other cobra military operations. then the next largest is actually china with $292000000000.00. that it's that in 2022. and then russia, oddly enough, only spend $881000000000.00 on his military nato. on the other hand, spence of $1232000000000.00 on the military. so it's kind of shocking that there would be a war against russia in ukraine by nato in the us. and the level of spending that those 2 groups spent, which is also both the nato countries and the u. s. or the other countries

basically suffering the most in homelessness and economic, the private, the. so it's a, it's pretty incredible that they've spent that much money yet. they're at a standstill in the front and the ukraine war. now, what are the key factors contributing to the substantial financial investments made by countries in the military forces? well, i think the principal thing, sadly, is the domestic issues, which so it's about in the united states and i'm certain this is another countries as well. it is that, for instance, we us make sure that components of almost every piece of military hardware are made in every single congressional district in the country. so it's, it's a combination of military contractors using their leverage to, uh, to get the u. s. federal tax payers to pay this huge amount of money. but also it's about control because you have uh, for instance, a lot of information that i glean about what's going on with military and expenses

on websites that are controlled by military contractors like, you know, i am and this nbc and so on. so they are tied into a whole propaganda situation. it's also they have leverage over these congress people. they're not going to back out out of worst. but i think even globally, only is it about profits for these. um, you know, for military contractors and i control domestically but also it's used mostly wars for instance, with the us have been wars of choice. and this was a choice to build popular support for either the president at the time. for instance, after 911 george bush before 911 was the rid of killed even by other conservatives and republicans for being a do 1st. and then he became like, really super popular because of he was in the middle of a war,

we can see that that's a lot of the reason for button waging a war against russia. and this work, they get much bigger. f p starts to look like he's losing a can't possibly win the presidential election. and then we will have to have us troops actually go had to had with the, with the russian military natalie for domestic purposes. so it's a rep, craig, pat, patriotism, and so on. and then for the smaller countries, sadly it's really their military spending is many cases either to buy weapons from the united states as a way saudi arabia and others have to stay in the good graces of the united states or your country that is being threatened with war by the united states. so for instance, syria or, you know, russia or any of the many countries united states has invaded sense. uh, basically the war of 1812, um is, uh, is, uh they people have to arm themselves to defend themselves against the united

states. and we can see that the u. s. military started, and we have the marine corps, a song is about um, you know, the halls of montezuma, where the us invaded mexico or were you, i really did not. when in that war or the uh stores or tripoli where the you half the u. s. navy was destroyed in, in their 1st uh, ford conflict. um, and so this, this is the sad thing that the world is based essentially, particularly since world war 2 been arming itself to defend itself against the united states. and why to some countries allocate a significant portion of their budgets to defense. are there specific concerns or jo, political factors that drive this decision? well, i think again, in, in each of the cases, either you are trying to defend yourself from the united states. or you are trying to court the united states, often more financially than anything else. so that, you know,

i think that the 5 wise countries which would be still. yeah. and i believe new zealand. definitely a great britain. the us and canada. they are um, you know, they, they essentially spy on one another for each other. but they also sell each other weapons and invested in weapon systems for that same reason. and, and it's essentially to control their societies. it's, it's the military, but just have made it impossible to have democracies in these countries unfortunately. and that's because there they, there are money goes to that. they control events. they have uh, the top priority. but if you look at the war uh, in, in the ukraine right now, there's not been one vote why the american people for the war. we didn't have a say in the over throw the credit and government in 2014,

when the war started on may 3rd of that year in odessa. we had no uh, you know, most americans have no idea bet that we spent billions of dollars to over throw the ukrainian government uninstall or on public losing their right in a long term plan to have a very long ongoing more in that country which would then profit mostly us a military contractors, but also would profit of the european contractors and british contractors. so it's a, it's sad that this is where, you know, the, the reason we're wasting this huge amount of money. but maybe even more tragically, the millions of people have been killed in this desk for basically domestic political interest, mainly the interest of propping up a huge financial bonanza for these military contractors. thank you so much case, but please stick around the founder of food, not bombs,

keys. mchenry will stay with us right here after the break. and when we come back, we will discuss what country has the head these military budget in the world. so don't go away. the russian states never is as tight as i'm one of the most sense community best, most all sense and up the in the system to progress be the one else holes. question about this, even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on russia scooting and split the ortiz phone next. even our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube tv services. for what question did you say a request,

which is the plug, the u. s. tots, the list of the biggest military budget. the country that spends the most on military and defense as a percentage of his gdp is surprisingly, oman, at 8.8 percent followed by saudi arabia, 9.5 percent. oh dear. yet 6 percent coate at 5.6 percent. and israel, a 5.3 percent, the us actually doesn't even crack the top 10 as a percentage of g d p. now in some countries of age cohorts are required to complete military service among them are and goal in south sudan and africa, as well as finland, austria, and switzerland,

in europe and asia as vietnam louse north and south korea as well as taiwan that still required universal military service of the around 85 countries worldwide that has some form of obligatory military training. even though this practice is controversial for many reasons, including opposition on religious grounds. however, it is enforced by countries to build a large and powerful military ready to be deployed in times of war, or when the need to protect the sovereignty of the state arises. mandatory military service come from the national unity. so citizens are able to develop an appreciation for the sacrifices others have made for their country. it also promotes equality among the citizens as mandatory and listen. it means that no one will be exempted from facing wars including celebrities, business men, or others. life and the military can also provide useful skills and instill

discipline and cooperation, responsibility, and teamwork. but on the other hand, mandatory military service violates free will, interferes educational pursuits and compromises the quality of the military. as not everyone is fit for it physically or psychologically. many dr. soldiers, often life and necessary experience and preparedness, providing low combat skill quality. one notable force in particular, is this really defense force, which is a national military of israel. the ideas is unique among the militaries of the world due to its regulated conscription of women. since the formation. it is one of the most prominent institutions and as rarely society due to its influence on the countries economy and political scene. they can be called upon to serve periodically until the age of 40. after her mom's last attack, israel has called up 236-0000 reserve us within 48 hours to launch and offensive many as well as abroad, or even had

a home to join the reserve units or to give aid. this is one of its largest mobilizations in history of roughly 4 percent of is really 9800000 population to take up arms against the palestinian militant group. it is also one of the fastest mobilizations in history, which is impossible for most nations in terms of cold start capabilities. the ivy remains unmatched by the rest of the world. now for this and more, let's bring it again keith nick, henry, founder of food, not box to now case. is there a growing debate or discussion about reallocating funds from military budgets to address other pressing issues such as health care, education, or environmental concerns? there has been like, be below the surface for years that this debate but this war in ukraine has flipped everything on its head. and so what i,

what seemed it's very interesting because the republicans now are kind of leading the of the struggle for the, in this debate. something i would have never imagined. and the, uh, you know, i suck for some reason my, uh, the hunger health line. instead of being really addressing the issue of hunger of homelessness, has been to shared with uh, health insurance companies across the country. so i'm getting about a dozen to 2000 calls a day from senior seeking food, home delivery of food, something sadly, food, not bombs, doesn't have the resources to do. but i am shocked at how often the people that call in will complain. they have no food in their pantry at all. um, they might tell me about some cat food that they're gonna eat or the last 3 cans of tuna and they're angry as can be that we send billions of dollars to the war and ukraine. so there's is bothering him in the united states of average people were

starting to see the connection between food and not bombs. and to me that's really exciting. i think, you know i, we started for the bombs in 1981 regen looked like you might become president. then he became president. and then he did what was we believe he would do, which was the vert um the public spending and those days we used to have public housing and things like that which and, and instead he diverted it into star wars and into amex missile system. and, and all those kinds of things. and by the end of, uh, his 2nd turn, we had 750000 homeless americans in united states according to the us government. and um, you know, we had it, they didn't even count the homeless when he came to office. so we're now, yeah, we, we proposed in 1980 that we need to build a movement where our focus was on things like food. he. 4 causing an education and

not on the military. and now i think we may be getting into that tipping point. we're aware of food, not bombs in the um, you know, maybe our messages finally coming through that we really need to be looking at feeding our people and not just draining our resources into the military. and what are some examples of countries that have successfully shifted resources away from military spending, to fund other national priorities and what were their outcomes? so it's actually the only country that i know that specifically did that was coast to rica and uh, and they've had, you know, they're very stable and peaceful place and you know it, them, but to have that little tiny country be the country that successfully did that is, is kind of disappointing. now, i think most a lot of the smaller countries um, you know,

have very little resources overall anyway. um and um and so their defense budget is uh, you know, it's probably just for a local graft itself, but i, but i don't think that there is any country that 6 that i was aware of anyway. maybe there's a country, it will be great to find out if there's some other country like post the rica that actually had a large military budget and then reduced it and then provided for other people. i, i, you know, this is a world basically where you, where money talks and where the mill is, where military spending and for this is basically the hands of, of every country. and it's really a shame. how does a country's level of military spending compared to its global counterparts? what insights can we gain from these comparisons? well, the in the countries a do spend the least amount of money on the military tend to have much better

health outcomes, much better uh, higher levels of education and, and are much more uh, there's much more less violence in there and there countries and so on. and, you know, and, and i would not say any of these countries were very r, perfect. but uh, but definitely the, the, you know, when you're there, these countries do a lot better because their focus then the, even the countries that do have relatively large military spending. but that's a smaller percentage of their total budgets have done really well. for example, i would say the, you know, norway, sweden and finland and denmark. i don't have met did, not until they became involved in this war in ukraine. have that massive of military budgets. but they did have a, you know, universal healthcare education and so on. i, you know, it's been kind of tragic to see the collapse of canada because that was

a very stable country and had a relatively small military budget. but it has to, has gone the route of, of, of militarism and you and uses like i, in visiting, even in the 90s in canada, the homeless population was really relatively small. that is been just ballooning. and in recent years, and it's a very wealthy country with massive amounts of resources and, and yet it has these really desperate outcomes where they're, there population where they're now even advocating people use their uh, made with uh, medical assistance and dying as a way to alleviate poverty, and if that trend takes off, we're, you know, the world isn't in real trouble. thank you so much case for your time and insight

experts say that prioritizing defense spend they over infrastructure investments might undermine economic growth in the long run. now coven 19 prove that the american priority on national security has been focused on the wrong threat. as us defense, expenditures rose in 2020 to $770000000000.00. a 3rd of small us businesses closed either temporarily or for forever. a high level as a military expenditures are often identified as a major source of waste of resources that could otherwise be directed towards human needs. the global campaign on military spend may, has called for a global reduction of 10 percent in military spending, with resources directed to development purposes. however, with the escalating global conflict these days, that seems highly unlikely. and then the biggest loser ends up being the tax paid citizens as infrastructure,

health care and other services are depleted. i'm christy, i thanks for watching and we'll see you right back here next time on the cost of everything. the some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities and other times the united states of america is different wherever people long to be free. they will find a friend in the united states, the, to the automated body of the volts in a very, very easy since only city and teach all the in service of each skid 18 color

revolutions is one of the on set for me is to reach the goal of conquering foreign lands and bringing them on to the helm of us, the western economic interest to go up inside it. i mean that's the, that's what everybody did with lexia core, lactic sol, suite of us a little bit soft by what i mean. you can see the final goal of these theme or of allusions to ensure that there are no independent players in the world anymore. the russian was a country where proud of we're proud to bring lights and wants to the world. we look forward with pride blazing, new trails across oceans, feeding gravity. we're proud of our successes, but never rest on our laurels discover our country's achievements come to the russia international expedition for him.

the headlines this our, i'm emergency section of the us, the cold from the arab world for a seems fine doesn't. the class has been to use to escalate the invoice of iran on building demand a peaceful resolution. let's restore fee in the peace process as the only past to ending this conflict once and for all that on it. so it is of the have moscow was silent ration movement has declared to residents to release the facilities for non military entities. level republic of ron most important in this area