Throughout the 19th century, the share of military personnel employed by the United States government was below 0.2 percent of the total population in most years. There were noticeable spikes in enlistments and conscriptions during the American Civil War (1861-65), the First World War (1917-18*), and Second World War (1941-45*), as well as smaller increases during the Mexican-American War (1946-48) and the Spanish-American War (1898), but figures were generally much lower than the post-WWII era.

Following the Second World War, the United States abandoned many of its isolationist positions as it sought to become the world's leading superpower. This involved stationing millions of troops in overseas bases during the Cold War, in strategically important locations such as West Germany, Japan, and Taiwan. Additionally, involvement in conflicts such as the Korean War (1950-1953) and Vietnam War (1964-1973*) kept military employment high, usually between 1-2 percent until the 1970s. Figures remained just below the one percent mark until the 1990s, when the end of the Cold War and the growing influence of technology in conventional warfare saw a decrease in demand for many traditional combat roles. Despite U.S. involvement in a number of overseas conflicts in the 21st century, military personnel represented less than 0.5 percent of the total population in most years between 2000 and 2016.

The graph illustrates the number of personnel in each branch of the U.S. Military for the year 2025. The x-axis lists the military branches: Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Space Force, and Coast Guard. The y-axis represents the number of personnel, ranging from 41,477 to 449,265. Among the branches, the Army has the highest number of personnel with 449,265, followed by the Navy with 333,794 and the Air Force with 317,675. The Marine Corps and Coast Guard have 168,628 and 41,477 personnel, respectively. The data is displayed in a bar graph format, effectively highlighting the distribution of military personnel across the different branches.

United States US: Military Expenditure data was reported at 609.758 USD bn in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 600.106 USD bn for 2016. United States US: Military Expenditure data is updated yearly, averaging 277.591 USD bn from Sep 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 711.338 USD bn in 2011 and a record low of 45.380 USD bn in 1960. United States US: Military Expenditure data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Military expenditures data from SIPRI are derived from the NATO definition, which includes all current and capital expenditures on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other government agencies engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if these are judged to be trained and equipped for military operations; and military space activities. Such expenditures include military and civil personnel, including retirement pensions of military personnel and social services for personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; military research and development; and military aid (in the military expenditures of the donor country). Excluded are civil defense and current expenditures for previous military activities, such as for veterans' benefits, demobilization, conversion, and destruction of weapons. This definition cannot be applied for all countries, however, since that would require much more detailed information than is available about what is included in military budgets and off-budget military expenditure items. (For example, military budgets might or might not cover civil defense, reserves and auxiliary forces, police and paramilitary forces, dual-purpose forces such as military and civilian police, military grants in kind, pensions for military personnel, and social security contributions paid by one part of government to another.); ; Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Yearbook: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security.; ; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates. For additional details please refer to the military expenditure database on the SIPRI website: https://sipri.org/databases/milex

This dataset, released by DoD, contains geographic information for major installations, ranges, and training areas in the United States and its territories. This release integrates site information about DoD installations, training ranges, and land assets in a format which can be immediately put to work in commercial geospatial information systems. Homeland Security/Homeland Defense, law enforcement, and readiness planners will benefit from immediate access to DoD site location data during emergencies. Land use planning and renewable energy planning will also benefit from use of this data. Users are advised that the point and boundary location datasets are intended for planning purposes only, and do not represent the legal or surveyed land parcel boundaries.

United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: Total data was reported at 1,348,400.000 Person in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,347,300.000 Person for 2015. United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: Total data is updated yearly, averaging 1,546,000.000 Person from Sep 1985 (Median) to 2016, with 29 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2,240,000.000 Person in 1989 and a record low of 1,347,300.000 Person in 2015. United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: Total data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Armed forces personnel are active duty military personnel, including paramilitary forces if the training, organization, equipment, and control suggest they may be used to support or replace regular military forces.; ; International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance.; Sum; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates.

United States US: Military Expenditure: % of GDP data was reported at 3.149 % in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 3.222 % for 2016. United States US: Military Expenditure: % of GDP data is updated yearly, averaging 4.864 % from Sep 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 9.063 % in 1967 and a record low of 2.908 % in 1999. United States US: Military Expenditure: % of GDP data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Military expenditures data from SIPRI are derived from the NATO definition, which includes all current and capital expenditures on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other government agencies engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if these are judged to be trained and equipped for military operations; and military space activities. Such expenditures include military and civil personnel, including retirement pensions of military personnel and social services for personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; military research and development; and military aid (in the military expenditures of the donor country). Excluded are civil defense and current expenditures for previous military activities, such as for veterans' benefits, demobilization, conversion, and destruction of weapons. This definition cannot be applied for all countries, however, since that would require much more detailed information than is available about what is included in military budgets and off-budget military expenditure items. (For example, military budgets might or might not cover civil defense, reserves and auxiliary forces, police and paramilitary forces, dual-purpose forces such as military and civilian police, military grants in kind, pensions for military personnel, and social security contributions paid by one part of government to another.); ; Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Yearbook: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security.; Weighted average; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates.

This report presents findings from the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) with a focus on comparing estimates related to substance use and mental health for military family members (spouses and children) with general population estimates. The numbers of military family members included in the 2015 NSDUH were relatively small. As a consequence, the report focuses on wives aged 18 to 49 and children aged 12 to 17. In the general area of substance use, the report includes estimates for past year use of any illicit substances (marijuana, cocaine in any form including crack, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, and methamphetamine and misuse of four categories of prescription drugs -- pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants and sedatives), past year cigarette use, past year alcohol use (both any use and binge use), and past year treatment for substance use, including alcohol use. In the general area of mental health, the report includes estimates for any mental illness (AMI) in the past year for wives. For both wives and children, the report includes estimates for past year major depressive episode (MDE) and mental health service use. For children, estimates of mental health service are reported by general treatment setting (e.g., mental health, educational, medical). As additional years of data become available, it will be possible in future reports to include both male and female spouses and to make more detailed comparisons -- for example for more specific types of illicit substances used and for treatment received by setting, by race/ethnicity and for spouses, by employment and educational background.

The 2012 US Army Anthropometric Survey (ANSUR II) was executed by the Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center (NSRDEC) from October 2010 to April 2012 and is comprised of personnel representing the total US Army force to include the US Army Active Duty, Reserves, and National Guard. The data was made publicly available in 2017. In addition to the anthropometric and demographic data described below, the ANSUR II database also consists of 3D whole body, foot, and head scans of Soldier participants. These 3D data are not publicly available out of respect for the privacy of ANSUR II participants. The data from this survey are used for a wide range of equipment design, sizing, and tariffing applications within the military and has many potential commercial, industrial, and academic applications.These data have replaced ANSUR I as the most comprehensive publicly accessible dataset on body size and shape. The ANSUR II dataset includes 93 measurements from over 6,000 adult US military personnel, comprising 4,082 men (ANSUR_II_MALE_Public.csv) and 1,986 women (ANSUR_II_FEMALE_Public.csv).

The ANSUR II working databases contain 93 anthropometric measurements which were directly measured, and 15 demographic/administrative variables.

Much more information about the data collection methodology and content of the ANSUR II Working Databases may be found in the following Technical Reports, available from theDefense Technical Information Center (www.dtic.mil) through:

a. 2010-2012 Anthropometric Survey of U.S. Army Personnel: Methods and Summary
Statistics. (NATICK/TR-15/007)
b. Measurer’s Handbook: US Army and Marine Corps Anthropometric Surveys,
2010-2011 (NATICK/TR-11/017)

The dataset depicts the authoritative boundaries of the most commonly known Department of Defense (DoD) sites, installations, ranges, and training areas in the United States and Territories. These sites encompass land which is federally owned or otherwise managed. This dataset was created from source data provided by the four Military Service Component headquarters and was compiled by the Defense Installation Spatial Data Infrastructure (DISDI) Program within the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, Business Enterprise Integration Directorate. Sites were selected from the 2010 Base Structure Report (BSR), a summary of the DoD Real Property Inventory. This list does not necessarily represent a comprehensive collection of all Department of Defense facilities, and only those in the fifty United States and US Territories were considered for inclusion. For inventory purposes, installations are comprised of sites, where a site is defined as a specific geographic location of federally owned or managed land and is assigned to military installation. DoD installations are commonly referred to as a base, camp, post, station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity under the jurisdiction, custody, control of the DoD.

This layer is sourced from maps.bts.dot.gov.

A dataset to advance the study of life-cycle interactions of biomedical and socioeconomic factors in the aging process. The EI project has assembled a variety of large datasets covering the life histories of approximately 39,616 white male volunteers (drawn from a random sample of 331 companies) who served in the Union Army (UA), and of about 6,000 African-American veterans from 51 randomly selected United States Colored Troops companies (USCT). Their military records were linked to pension and medical records that detailed the soldiers������?? health status and socioeconomic and family characteristics. Each soldier was searched for in the US decennial census for the years in which they were most likely to be found alive (1850, 1860, 1880, 1900, 1910). In addition, a sample consisting of 70,000 men examined for service in the Union Army between September 1864 and April 1865 has been assembled and linked only to census records. These records will be useful for life-cycle comparisons of those accepted and rejected for service. Military Data: The military service and wartime medical histories of the UA and USCT men were collected from the Union Army and United States Colored Troops military service records, carded medical records, and other wartime documents. Pension Data: Wherever possible, the UA and USCT samples have been linked to pension records, including surgeon''''s certificates. About 70% of men in the Union Army sample have a pension. These records provide the bulk of the socioeconomic and demographic information on these men from the late 1800s through the early 1900s, including family structure and employment information. In addition, the surgeon''''s certificates provide rich medical histories, with an average of 5 examinations per linked recruit for the UA, and about 2.5 exams per USCT recruit. Census Data: Both early and late-age familial and socioeconomic information is collected from the manuscript schedules of the federal censuses of 1850, 1860, 1870 (incomplete), 1880, 1900, and 1910. Data Availability: All of the datasets (Military Union Army; linked Census; Surgeon''''s Certificates; Examination Records, and supporting ecological and environmental variables) are publicly available from ICPSR. In addition, copies on CD-ROM may be obtained from the CPE, which also maintains an interactive Internet Data Archive and Documentation Library, which can be accessed on the Project Website. * Dates of Study: 1850-1910 * Study Features: Longitudinal, Minority Oversamples * Sample Size: ** Union Army: 35,747 ** Colored Troops: 6,187 ** Examination Sample: 70,800 ICPSR Link: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06836

https://i.imgur.com/Vrs6apv.png" alt="">

Context

There is a well-documented phenomenon of increased suicide rates among United States military veterans. One recent analysis, published in 2016, found the suicide rate amongst veterans to be around 20 per day. The widespread nature of the problem has resulted in efforts by and pressure on the United States military services to combat and address mental health issues in and after service in the country's armed forces.

In 2013 News21 published a sequence of reports on the phenomenon, aggregating and using data provided by individual states to typify the nationwide pattern. This dataset is the underlying data used in that report, as collected by the News21 team.

Content

The data consists of six files, one for each year between 2005 and 2011. Each year's worth of data includes the general population of each US state, a count of suicides, a count of state veterans, and a count of veteran suicides.

Acknowledgements

This data was originally published by News21. It has been converted from an XLS to a CSV format for publication on Kaggle. The original data, visualizations, and stories can be found at the source.

Inspiration

What is the geospatial pattern of veterans in the United States? How much more vulnerable is the average veteran to suicide than the average citizen? Is the problem increasing or decreasing over time?

SELECTED SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS IN THE UNITED STATES VETERAN STATUS - DP02 Universe - Civilian population 18 Year and over Survey-Program - American Community Survey 5-year estimates Years - 2020, 2021, 2022 Veteran status is used to identify people with active duty military service and service in the military Reserves and the National Guard. Veterans are men and women who have served (even for a short time), but are not currently serving, on active duty in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or the Coast Guard, or who served in the U.S. Merchant Marine during World War II. People who served in the National Guard or Reserves are classified as veterans only if they were ever called or ordered to active duty, not counting the 4-6 months for initial training or yearly summer camps.

United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: % of Total Labour Force data was reported at 0.828 % in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of 0.838 % for 2015. United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: % of Total Labour Force data is updated yearly, averaging 0.995 % from Sep 1990 (Median) to 2016, with 27 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.704 % in 1990 and a record low of 0.828 % in 2016. United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: % of Total Labour Force data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Armed forces personnel are active duty military personnel, including paramilitary forces if the training, organization, equipment, and control suggest they may be used to support or replace regular military forces. Labor force comprises all people who meet the International Labour Organization's definition of the economically active population.; ; International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance.; Weighted average; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates.

United States US: Military Expenditure as % of General Government Expenditure data was reported at 8.807 % in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 9.042 % for 2016. United States US: Military Expenditure as % of General Government Expenditure data is updated yearly, averaging 11.141 % from Sep 2001 (Median) to 2017, with 17 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 11.769 % in 2011 and a record low of 8.807 % in 2017. United States US: Military Expenditure as % of General Government Expenditure data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Military expenditures data from SIPRI are derived from the NATO definition, which includes all current and capital expenditures on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other government agencies engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if these are judged to be trained and equipped for military operations; and military space activities. Such expenditures include military and civil personnel, including retirement pensions of military personnel and social services for personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; military research and development; and military aid (in the military expenditures of the donor country). Excluded are civil defense and current expenditures for previous military activities, such as for veterans' benefits, demobilization, conversion, and destruction of weapons. This definition cannot be applied for all countries, however, since that would require much more detailed information than is available about what is included in military budgets and off-budget military expenditure items. (For example, military budgets might or might not cover civil defense, reserves and auxiliary forces, police and paramilitary forces, dual-purpose forces such as military and civilian police, military grants in kind, pensions for military personnel, and social security contributions paid by one part of government to another.); ; Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Yearbook: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security.; Weighted average; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates.

Over the course of the Second World War approximately 127.2 million people were mobilized. The world's population in 1940 was roughly 2.3 billion, meaning that between five and six percent of the world was drafted into the military in some capacity. Approximately one in every 25 people mobilized were women, who generally served in an administrative or medical role, although hundreds of thousands of women did see active combat. Largest armies In absolute numbers, the Soviet Union mobilized the largest number of people at just under 34.5 million, and this included roughly 35 percent of the USSR's male population. By the war's end, more Soviets were mobilized than all European Axis powers combined. However, in relative terms, it was Germany who mobilized the largest share of its male population, with approximately 42 percent of men serving. The USSR was forced to find a balance between reinforcing its frontlines and maintaining agricultural and military production to supply its army (in addition to those in annexed territory after 1941), whereas a large share of soldiers taken from the German workforce were replaced by workers drafted or forcibly taken from other countries (including concentration camp prisoners and PoWs). Studying the figures The figures given in these statistics are a very simplified and rounded overview - in reality, there were many nuances in the number of people who were effectively mobilized for each country, their roles, and their status as auxiliary, collaborative, or resistance forces. The British Empire is the only power where distinctions are made between the metropole and its colonies or territories, whereas breakdowns of those who fought in other parts of Asia or Africa remains unclear. Additionally, when comparing this data with total fatalities, it is important to account for the civilian death toll, i.e. those who were not mobilized.

ANSUR 2 (2012)

A public dataset drawn from the 2012 U.S. Army Anthropometric Survey. This sample is improved in all respects from the ANSUR 88 study and should be used in place of ANSUR 88. Note that this military population is not likely to be representative of any particular user population, but remains valuable because of the ability to explore interrelationships among the variables.

References:

1. http://mreed.umtri.umich.edu/mreed/downloads.html

Judgement on the presence of American troops in West Germany. Topics: Most important problems of the FRG; attitude to participation of the FRG in the costs of stationing NATO military forces and to American troops remaining in the FRG; attitude to a reduction in American military forces; general judgement on the American soldiers; perceived changes in the relationship of American soldiers to the German civilian population; criticism of the way of life of American soldiers; frequency of contact with American soldiers after the war; attitude to construction of housing settlements for the families living in Germany; perception of the Americans as occupying forces or protective forces; attitude to children of members of the occupying forces and their mothers; judgement on the confiscation of buildings by Americans; residency; participation in the world war and deployment in battle against the Americans. Demography: membership in clubs, trade unions or a party und offices taken on there; party preference; age (classified); sex; marital status; religious denomination; school education; occupation; employment; household income; head of household; state; Interviewer rating: social class and willingness of respondent to cooperate; number of contact attempts; city size. Also encoded was: identification of interviewer; sex of interviewer and age of interviewer. Beurteilung der Anwesenheit der amerikanischen Truppen in Westdeutschland. Themen: Wichtigste Probleme der BRD; Einstellung zu einer Beteiligung der BRD an den Stationierungskosten der NATO-Streitkräfte und zu einem Verbleib der amerikanischen Truppen in der BRD; Einstellung zu einer Verringerung der amerikanischen Streitkräfte; allgemeine Beurteilung der amerikanischen Soldaten; wahrgenommene Veränderungen im Verhältnis der amerikanischen Soldaten zur deutschen Zivilbevölkerung; Kritik an der Lebensweise amerikanischer Soldaten; Kontakthäufigkeit zu amerikanischen Soldaten nach dem Kriege; Einstellung zum Bau von Wohnsiedlungen für die in Deutschland lebenden Familien; Wahrnehmung der Amerikaner als Besatzungstruppen oder Schutztruppe; Einstellung zu Besatzungskindern und ihren Müttern; Beurteilung der Beschlagnahme von Häusern durch Amerikaner; Teilnahme am Weltkrieg und Einsatz im Kampf gegen die Amerikaner. Demographie: Mitgliedschaft in Vereinen, Gewerkschaften oder einer Partei und dabei übernommene Ämter; Parteipräferenz; Alter (klassiert); Geschlecht; Familienstand; Konfession; Schulbildung; Beruf; Berufstätigkeit; Haushaltseinkommen; Haushaltungsvorstand; Bundesland; Flüchtlingsstatus. Interviewerrating: Schichtzugehörigkeit und Kooperationsbereitschaft des Befragten; Anzahl der Kontaktversuche; Ortsgröße. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Intervieweridentifikation; Interviewergeschlecht und Intervieweralter.

The Military Service Personnel Photograph Collection Index, (circa 1938-1953) was created by Connecticut State Library staff to highlight and better utilize these unique archival photographs and honor those who served in the military.  Great effort was made to identify the individuals depicted using information provided with the photograph. Please keep in mind however that names, geographic locations, or other information may be misspelled or in error as a result. Branch of service, rank, military unit, residence, and other notations were included in the index to assist the researcher or family member to determine if there is an image for a specific individual. Please be aware that prior to 1947 the United Sates Air Force was a branch of the United States Army and as a result, images may be listed as Army Air Corps. Please keep in mind that names and locations may be misspelled as a result.   You may conduct a search in any of the columns, or any combination of columns to limit your search.  If a name of an individual of interest is found in the below Connecticut Military Service Personnel Photograph Collection Index, and a reproduction of the original record is desired, you may submit a request via E-mail or by contacting the History & Genealogy Unit of the Connecticut State Library at (860) 757-6580.  Reproduction formats and fees available, are as follows: Photocopy: black & white copy, 8 1/2 X 11″ or 11 X 14″ sized paper, 25 cents; 11 X 17″, 50 cents per photocopied page, plus a $3.00 handling fee and first-class postage charges. Photocopy: color copy 8 1/2 X 11″ or 11 X 14″ sized paper, $1.00 per photocopied page, 11 X 17″, $1.25 per photocopied page plus a $3.00 handling fee and first-class postage charges. Digital images (low or high resolution): PDF, JEG, TIFF, or DNG images, 25 cents per image, plus a $3.00 handling fee.  Digital file may be delivered via internet for no additional cost. Pre-payment is not needed as a bill will accompany the finished product, either in the mail with photocopies or with the digital images. Please include the military service person’s name and the box number location in requesting a copy of the image.

This dataset investigates the Instagram engagement metrics (likes and comments) of the U.S. and British Armies to understand their strengths and weaknesses in their marketing. For the quantitative data collection, a random number generator was used to compile a 20% data sample (73 posts) from a total of 365 posts from each account. For instance, a number 1 in the random generator corresponded to the most recent post from the start date of data collection (May 23rd, 2024). By picking from 365 posts, the data collection was meant to represent roughly a year of Instagram content, assuming their Instagram accounts posted every day. This method ensured an unbiased representation of which content was included in the 20% data sample.However, the U.S Army posted almost once a day while the British Army posted only a few days a week. In the end, data was collected across 365 U.S. Army posts from May 23rd, 2024, to October 28th, 2023. For the British Army’s Instagram, the data collection span from May 23rd, 2024, to November 25th, 2021. By engaging with recent posts, the purpose was to understand how effectively these Armies responded to their recruitment crisis (which started in 2022).For the data collection, variables for each post included the following:Date of postNumber of likesPercentage of likes by follower populationNumber of commentsPercentage of comments by follower populationTo understand which Instagram posts were successful, the content with the highest number of likes and comments were defined as the most engaged. But, to accurately compare the British Army’s Instagram engagement to the U.S., the number of likes/comments was divided by the number of their followers. As of May 23, 2024, the U.S. Army had 2.9 million followers on Instagram whereas the British Army had 594,000 followers. While social media users outside of the Armies’ followers engaged with the posts, these ratios provided a basis to fairly compare their engagement metrics.

We analyze how the deployment of US troops affects host-state defense spending. We test this relationship, from 1951 to 2003, by examining how the deployment of US military forces impacts defense spending in different types of states, including US allies, NATO members, non-allies of the United States, and all states. We also utilize spatial measures of US troop deployments to analyze how regional and neighborhood concentrations of forces shape host-state policies. Using both traditional panel methodology, and incorporating a simultaneous equation model for the deployment of troops, we find that non-allied states tend to decrease their defense burden when the United States places troops within their borders. However, NATO allies consistently increase their defense burden in response to the presence of US troops within their borders. Additionally, most states tend to increase spending when the United States places troops near their borders.