The way this article is written is very US centric I think, or at least with US foreign policy in mind.
The expenditure of other countries is more or less indirectly ridiculed and portrayed as dangerous, unnecessary and threatening, while the US spending is shown in a more neutral, if not slightly positive, light.

Also, what's the active duty and reserve count for the US armed forces (all of the different military types you guys got, like army, navy and what-not). The article is omitting that.