[cinquemb]

The thing is, I don't think this will end well for the US as long as its politically feasible to maintain the huge "investment" (political/economic) in military infrastructure that will provide nothing that will look like returns compared to a huge economic push would.

I'd say China benefits the longer the US is "forced" to spend what amounts a little more than half of this infrastructure project every year.

At best, I think the military expenditures the US puts out is good for protecting economic assets for all interested parties in/through volatility high areas, but it's not exactly something that all parties contribute to maintaining in proportion of the benefits they receive from it.

I don't really know what war in the 21st century will look like (I have some ideas), but so far it doesn't seem like its benefiting many people outside of those who get the contracts to enable such war making. So it seems like in stalemate that's present now, and arguably has been in place since ww2, it seems like non-state actors have more to gain.