The Myth of American Military Dominance

Something I never understand when defence spending is compared: how do they account for differences in PPP and different levels of grease/corruption?

E.g if the US spends twice as much as X on fighter planes, but they are built in an uneconomic place because of politics and wages there are double than the average of X. I would say it might mean it actually spends only half, no?

This article is trying to claim that the Nazis only lost on the eastern front because of the Soviets ("but the Soviet Union destroyed the largest portion of the Nazi military and defeated the Army of Manchuria, Japan’s strongest ground force.") But fails to mention that the US was actively supplying the Soviet forces with food and equipment through the lend lease program.

A few paragraphs later they try to downplay the first gumf war ("Unfortunately, the first Gulf War was not a strong indicator of American military power compared to other major powers") while completely failing to mention that the iraqi army was considered top 5 world wide. The fact that the US beat the Iraqis in such a short time frame was an "oh shit" moment that caused a crisis of faith in the Soviet leaders and directly led to the military overthrowing the Soviet Union.

This author seems to be trying to change history to fit his narrative by cherry picking interpretations of events and making false claims about the effectiveness of America's past allies and enemies.