Lets make some dough

medicineman

New Member
Making Money on Terrorism

William D. Hartung
This article is adapted from William D. Hartung'sHow Much Are You Making on the War, Daddy? A Quick and Dirty Guide to War Profiteering in the Bush Administration (Nation Books).
We all know that Halliburton is raking in billions from the Bush Administration's occupation and rebuilding of Iraq. But in the long run, the biggest beneficiaries of the Administration's "war on terror" may be the "destroyers," not the rebuilders. The nation's "Big Three" weapons makers--Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman--are cashing in on the Bush policies of regime change abroad and surveillance at home. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was on target when he suggested that rather than "leave no child behind," the slogan Bush stole from the Children's Defense Fund, his Administration's true motto appears to be "leave no defense contractor behind."
In fiscal year 2002, the Big Three received a total of more than $42 billion in Pentagon contracts, of which Lockheed Martin got $17 billion, Boeing $16.6 billion and Northrop Grumman $8.7 billion. This is an increase of nearly one-third from 2000, Clinton's final year. These firms get one out of every four dollars the Pentagon doles out for everything from rifles to rockets. In contrast, Bush's No Child Left Behind Act is underfunded by $8 billion a year, with the additional assistance promised to school districts swallowed up by war costs and tax cuts.
The bread and butter for the Big Three are weapons systems like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (Lockheed Martin), the F/A-18 E/F combat aircraft (Boeing/Northrop Grumman), the F-22 Raptor (Lockheed Martin/Boeing) and the C-17 transport aircraft (Boeing). Northrop Grumman is also a major player in the area of combat ships, through its ownership of the Newport News, Virginia and Pascagoula, Mississippi, shipyards. All three firms are also well placed in the design and production of target-ing devices, electronic warfare equipment, long-range strike systems and precision munitions. For example, Boeing makes the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), a kit that can be used to make "dumb" bombs "smart." The JDAM was used in such large quantities in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that the company has had to run double shifts to keep up with Air Force demand.
OAS_AD('Middle');The Bush nuclear buildup--large parts of which are funded out of the Energy Department budget, not the Pentagon--is particularly good news for Lockheed Martin. The company has a $2 billion-a-year contract to run Sandia National Laboratories, a nuclear weapons design and engineering facility based in Albuquerque. Lockheed Martin also works in partnership with Bechtel to run the Nevada Test Site, where new nuclear weapons are tested either via underground explosions--currently on hold due to US adherence to a moratorium on nuclear testing--or computer simulations. Late last year, Congress lifted a longstanding ban on research into so-called "mini-nukes"--nuclear weapons of less than five kilotons, about one-third the size of the Hiroshima bomb. It also authorized funds for studies on a nuclear "bunker buster" and seed money for a multibillion-dollar factory to build plutonium triggers for a new generation of nuclear weapons. These new investments will be presided over by Everet Beckner, a former Lockheed Martin executive who now heads the National Nuclear Security Administration's nuclear weapons complex.
The Big Three are also poised to profit from President Bush's plan to colonize the moon and send a manned mission to Mars, both of which are stalking horses for launching an arms race in space. Boeing and Lockheed Martin were already well positioned in the military-space field through major contracts in space launch, satellite and missile defense work, plus a partnership to run the United Space Alliance, the joint venture in charge of launches of the space shuttle. Northrop Grumman bought into the field through its acquisition of TRW, a major space and Star Wars contractor. The new presidential commission charged with fleshing out Bush's space vision is being chaired by Edward "Pete" Aldridge, the Pentagon's former Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and a current member of Lockheed Martin's board of directors. Meanwhile, over at the Air Force, the under secretary in charge of acquiring space assets is Peter Teets, a former chief operating officer at Lockheed Martin. His position was created in accordance with the recommendations of the Commission to Assess US National Security Space Management and Organization, an advisory panel that published its blueprint for the militarization of space just as Bush was taking office. The group, which included representatives of eight Pentagon contractors, was presided over by Donald Rumsfeld until he left to take up his current post as Bush's Defense Secretary. Rumsfeld has been dutifully implementing the commission's recommendations ever since.
The Big Three are also wired into numerous other sources of federal contracts for everything from airport security to domestic surveillance, all in the name of fighting what the White House now calls the GWOT (Global War on Terrorism). The $20 billion-plus total that Lockheed Martin receives annually is more than is spent in an average year on the largest federal welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, a program that is meant to provide income support to several million women and children living below the poverty line. Under Bush and company, corporate welfare trumps human well-being every time.
One would think that with the military budget at $400 billion and counting--up from $300 billion when Bush took office--all would be well in the land of the military-industrial behemoths, especially since the Pentagon budget is only one opportunity among many. (The budget of the Department of Homeland Security is $40 billion and counting, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have racked up $200 billion in emergency spending to date, over and above normal Pentagon appropriations.) Yet in my discussions with industry representatives at the June 2003 Paris Air Show as well as in their recent behavior, I have detected an unmistakable sense of desperation, a sense that even this embarrassment of riches may not be enough to stabilize these massive companies. I'll bet this chinese satellite destroyer caught them with theur pants down, eh!
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
what's wrong with them making money doing what they are good at? i thought you wanted more US jobs?



i personally can't figure out the whole satellite missile thing. it's really old technology and unless they know we're up there making clandestine toys i don't see how it's applicable...
 

medicineman

New Member
what's wrong with them making money doing what they are good at? i thought you wanted more US jobs?

Good at War, hooray, we're the best at war. What a compliment!
 

dankciti

Well-Known Member
what's wrong with them making money doing what they are good at? i thought you wanted more US jobs?

Good at War, hooray, we're the best at war. What a compliment!

yay feudal 1800's its like all the old fashions always come back into style.!!:roll:
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
the companies in the article are good at making stuff to kill people. do i think it's good to kill people, no. if you need to kill it is good to be good at it though.
 

ViRedd

New Member
I got to the word "Halliburton" in the very first sentence of the article and stopped reading right there.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
if you need to kill it is good to be good at it though. It's only people like you that can say with a straight face "need to kill people", there is never a need to Kill. Don't you practice Christianity, No, I thought not. Your greedy mindset sees the oportunity to kill people as a profit making enterprise, Again I say, Rest in Hell!
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
i didn't say it was Christian to fight wars, don't be such an asshole. there should be no wars.

i'm taking a step back, looking at this from a gvnmnt perspective, which you of all people should be proficient at med. if you need to kill a bunch of people you pay the experts to come up with good ways to do it.

my approach to this entire situation would have been completely different from what is going on right now.
 

medicineman

New Member
i didn't say it was Christian to fight wars, don't be such an asshole. there should be no wars.

i'm taking a step back, looking at this from a gvnmnt perspective, which you of all people should be proficient at med. if you need to kill a bunch of people you pay the experts to come up with good ways to do it.

my approach to this entire situation would have been completely different from what is going on right now.
Why would you need to kill a bunch of people when diplomacy has not been tried. Did Jesus say if they don't like you, just kill them. He said love your enemys.. And by the way, what would your approach have been? It seems it's ok to you to spend a trillion bucks on a needless war but fuck the poor, cut their money and they'll find these non-existent jobs and move on up. I mean, what fucking world are you living in?
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
there's no high fives for playing monday morning quarterback unless you're a democrat, which i'm not.

i would certainly not have invaded Iraq. W's dad knew better and he's prob one of the smartest presidents to get elected. the CIA reports of WMD, 9/11, the UN failing to enforce resolution after resolution and the plot to kill his dad all intertwined to result in a bad move by W. he messed up but we're there and we have to leave it better than it was when we got there, that's what America should always do. we shouldn't leave it to Iran to take over and ruin no matter what. Iran is a weak country, they can't do to us what China did in Vietnam and Korea so we should make up our minds to get this job done, let the Iraqis control their fate by giving them a fresh start.

when those people come asking for death by taking a shot at one of our soldiers who is there trying to provide some order, helping people restore running water and power we need to answer them loud and clear. the spirit of love can overcome their love of death but only after you remove the clutter standing before their ears, this clutter is the terrorist.
 

medicineman

New Member
there's no high fives for playing monday morning quarterback unless you're a democrat, which i'm not.

i would certainly not have invaded Iraq. W's dad knew better and he's prob one of the smartest presidents to get elected. the CIA reports of WMD, 9/11, the UN failing to enforce resolution after resolution and the plot to kill his dad all intertwined to result in a bad move by W. he messed up but we're there and we have to leave it better than it was when we got there, that's what America should always do. we shouldn't leave it to Iran to take over and ruin no matter what. Iran is a weak country, they can't do to us what China did in Vietnam and Korea so we should make up our minds to get this job done, let the Iraqis control their fate by giving them a fresh start.

when those people come asking for death by taking a shot at one of our soldiers who is there trying to provide some order, helping people restore running water and power we need to answer them loud and clear. the spirit of love can overcome their love of death but only after you remove the clutter standing before their ears, this clutter is the terrorist.
You make it sound so comforting, geeze, we're just there to help, the right wing bullshit. We are there to further the corporations agendas and nothing more. It doesn't matter how many people die as long as it isn't the elites, we are there to secure the Iraqi oil and for Haliburton etc to get rich, haven't you been paying attention, or do you have your head stuffed so far up the Bush regimes ass, you can't really see the truth? Wake the fuck up, This war is about big business, war is business, it's just the dying has to be done by the proletariat, the poor, the disenfranchised. Always been that way, always will be. You are on the wrong side of this fight so be prepared when the Bush Idiots kill another 50 thousand Iraqis and a couple a thousand more poor GIs. I wonder how you assholes sleep at night, but then it's probably on satin sheets, fuck all you plutocratic assholes, enjoy your spoils while you can, the uprising is eminent!

 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
so, what are you saying, leave Iraq to be divided up by Iran?

you have been suckered into the conspiracy theory world too far med. are you still studying that pentagon clip and telling yourself it was a missile? did you confirm that "oddly shaped" part of the plane wasn't a shadow? did building #7 have secret documents that had to be concealed?

we are there to further the gvnmnt med, the gvnmnt, not corporations... if anything Bush is paving the way for this uprising you seek, the one where we all register and get stamped or whatever you hope for.
 

medicineman

New Member
so, what are you saying, leave Iraq to be divided up by Iran?

you have been suckered into the conspiracy theory world too far med. are you still studying that pentagon clip and telling yourself it was a missile? did you confirm that "oddly shaped" part of the plane wasn't a shadow? did building #7 have secret documents that had to be concealed?

we are there to further the gvnmnt med, the gvnmnt, not corporations... if anything Bush is paving the way for this uprising you seek, the one where we all register and get stamped or whatever you hope for.
No, what I Am saying is exactly what I said, Not your conspiracy bullshit, and by the way, prove to me exactly what Iraq had to do with 9-11. You right wing idiots always try and turn everything inside out. It's really very simple. The Christian right idiots elected Bush for Christ, (no abortions etc.) and got Cheney with the package. Cheney had privatized the war machine when he was sec. of defense (Bush1). Now they needed a war to reap the profits for their buddies. they couldn't attack the Saudis, Bushs' friends, and Afganistan only had the pipeline deal (Unocal), so they fabbed a reason to go after Iraq and the Oil. Simple and to the point. All this right wing bullshit about we're there to help the poor Iraqis is pure spin, and thats why I say you must be drinking the koolaid! Had we left Sadam in Iraq, we wouldn't have to worry about Iran, Sadam killed a lot less Iraqis than we have, and now we have unleashed the Sunni-Shiite war. You fucking right wing guys need to pull your heads out and look at the real world. And if you've read my posts, youve seen that I'm dead against the mark of the beast, that is something you will have so you can consume ever more!
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
great, monday morning QB hall of fame...

i think Iraq was a wildcard to Bush. he knew Sadam was using oil for food money to get stuff other than food. he was known to pursue WMD in the past. Bush did not know how "into" the whole militant islam scene Sadam was but he did know his violent past.






what would you do about Iraq? this is like the 10th time i've asked you since i first started posting on this board med.


also, since you mention it, what is wrong with being pro-life? that is the first question i ask before i consider a politician. it goes like this; i am alive, i like being alive. as long as i have been alive i have been a person. a human that is alive can not be anything other than a person. killing people is wrong.

that's my take on the whole thing...
 

medicineman

New Member
what would you do about Iraq? this is like the 10th time i've asked you since i first started posting on this board med.


also, since you mention it, what is wrong with being pro-life? that is the first question i ask before i consider a politician. it goes like this; i am alive, i like being alive. as long as i have been alive i have been a person. a human that is alive can not be anything other than a person. killing people is wrong.

that's my take on the whole thing...I thought I've made myself rather clear on the Iraq thing: Get every Plane, ship, train, all available transport, and get all the troops to Kuwait, get on board, and head for the good old USA, Don't look back, don't lament! And as far as Killing answer me this: you conservative right wing christian ---holes, want to preserve every piece of goo that might contain life, then turn around and are all for the death penalty. It's all about preserving life untill you're born, then it's kill those suckers, talk about hypocracy!
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
ok, so you would give Iraq to Iran and let them stabilize the region..some generation down the road would deal with the consequences.

when did i say i'm for the death penalty? i am for the death option. many criminals chose the death option when they carry out certain crimes...
 

TheresNoLuckLikeBudLuck

Well-Known Member
:spew:doesnt suck that the united states has an almost endless supply of money that burns holes in it's own pocket so badly, It refuses to turn to the mirror and look upon itself. I believe we need a president to come in and apologize for our arrogant actions, made possible by a a single man who is an excellent director of weak minded friends, who would rather put a dollar in their pocket, than try to benefit all of humanity. As far as Iraq is concerned, no matter who we kill, what government arises, who leads that government, that part of the world is FUCKED. Too many ragheads fighting the eternal fight, who's religion is better, who's property is who's. FUCK EM, in time when they are tired of being stuck in poverty and bloodshed, they'll learn to either get along, or move along down the road. I'm tired of constantly being shunned for the actions of our "retarded" government. If you destroy half of a country, then spend billions to rebuild what you blew up, your retarded. They should spend money on defenses,as you never want to let your gaurd down, back up your allies, make smart chioces, and stop lying to thier own people. Maybe then they would legalize weed and we can all just get high:joint:

:peace:
 
Top