Here (you’ll have to scroll down). Apparently he’s standing by his contention that the United States spends ten times what China does, despite the fact that the director of the organization that compiled the data he’s using said “anybody who thinks there’s a meaningful number for China’s defense budget has not studied it for very long.” Also no explanation for his ridiculous claim that America is “the most militarized country in the world by far.” But he does quibble with the notion that, as Ramesh said, “We’d expect the police department to have a budget many times that of all the criminals combined, wouldn’t we?” Greenwald:
For a lawyer, that’s not a very close reading. I don’t think Ramesh was calling all the other countries in the world criminal, as illustrated by the fact that we don’t spend “many times” the amount of all the countries in the world combined. Our defense spending is merely “many times” that of the rogue states, criminal regimes, and potential foes this country faces–or at least I hope it is. And I’d like to keep it that way. America’s commitments are global, China’s and Russia’s are regional. Had we a simple defense requirement like say, Switzerland, we could afford to spend like Switzerland. But America is the backbone of world stability. That’s a responsibility that doesn’t come cheap, so simply pointing to a few charts and saying “look at how jingoistic and warlike America is!” grossly oversimplifies the issue. Greenwald also writes that conservatives advocate maintaining the current order through the force of American arms because we are intent on “saving everyone from all the bad people and bad things that threaten them.” This is a classic case of projection: Greenwald seems to think that his opponents are as juvenile as he is.
