War Is GREAT For Business

Just further proof our America has become nothing more than a tool for the Military-Industrial Complex.

"The U.S. government is paying private contractors billions of dollars to support secretive military units with drones, surveillance technology, and “psychological operations,” according to new research.

A detailed report, published last week by the London-based Remote Control Project, shines a light on the murky activities of the U.S. Special Operations Command by analyzing publicly available procurement contracts dated between 2009 and 2013.

USSOCOM encompasses four commands – from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps – and plays a key role in orchestrating clandestine U.S. military missions overseas."* The Young Turks hosts Cenk Uygur breaks it down.

Read more: MURKY SPECIAL OPS HAVE BECOME CORPORATE BONANZA, SAYS REPORT

a reply to: Swills

And business is appearently good!

a reply to: Swills

That's because both parties are part of the same neoliberal oligarchy.

WAR has pulled the u.s.a. out of depression a few times

a reply to: Swills

Everytime I see Cenk Uygur's face, I throw up in my mouth a little. Yeah, war is good for weapon manufacturers. But, is it good for the government for any other reason than national security? I don't think so.

Here's a list of who profits from war and a brief description of how:

International arms dealers[edit]
Others make their money by cooperating with the authorities. Basil Zaharoff's Vickers Company sold weapons to all the parties involved in the Chaco War. Companies like Opel and IBM have been labeled war profiteers for their involvement with the Third Reich.

Scientific research[edit]
War provides demand for military technology modernization. Technologies originally designed for the military frequently also have non-military use. Both the state and corporations have gains from scientific research.

Commodity dealers[edit]
War usually leads to a shortage in the supply of commodities, which results in higher prices and higher revenues.

Politicians[edit]
Political figures taking bribes and favors from corporations involved with war production have been called war profiteers. Abraham Lincoln's first Secretary of War, Simon Cameron, was forced to resign in early 1862 after charges of corruption relating to war contracts. In 1947, Kentucky congressman Andrew J. May, Chairman of the powerful Committee on Military Affairs, was convicted for taking bribes in exchange for war contracts.

The state[edit]
Though war initially had the objective of territorial expansion and resource gathering, the county may also profit politically and strategically, replacing governments that do not fulfill its interests by key allied governments.

Civilian contractors[edit]
More recently, companies involved with supplying the coalition forces in the Iraq War, such as Bechtel, KBR, Blackwater and Halliburton, have come under fire for allegedly overcharging for their services.[1] The modern private military company is also offered as an example of sanctioned war profiteering.[2] [3] On the opposing side, companies like Huawei Technologies, which upgraded Saddam's air-defense system between the two Gulf Wars, face such accusations.[4] [5]

Military contractors[edit]
Groups that potentially profit from war, or the threat of war, are military contractors like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics, to name a few. Old military material has to be discarded due to age or is lost due to fighting and new and different military material is needed by the military to maintain strategic advantages over the military technologies of foreign nations which are hostile or may become hostile.

Black marketeers[edit]
A distinction can be made between war profiteers who gain by sapping military strength and those who gain by contributing to the war. For instance, during and after World War II, enormous profits were available by selling rationed goods like cigarettes, chocolate, coffee and butter on the black market. Dishonest military personnel given oversight over valuable property sometimes diverted rationed goods to the black market. The charge could also be laid against medical and legal professionals who accept money in exchange for helping young men evade a draft.

As for politicians profiting from war directly, it only happens through bribes. If the left could prove that a candidate on the right was receiving bribes, they would and vice versa. Opposite political parties look for every opportunity to incriminate someone from the other party, and that's about as cunning as they get.

As for the state profiting from war directly, I believe we definitely are profiting strategically, and I'm okay with that. It helps all of us. People wrongly believe there is a single evil entity out there reaping the benefits of all the lost lives and becoming filthy rich. It's just not true and there is no proof of it. None.

War is great for certain people, but those people don't have the power to actually go to war. The only way they can have that power is if corruption is found at the top levels, and like I said, there's no proof of that.

We are at war because terrorists flew a plane into the twin towers 13 years ago and our leaders saw that the threat of terrorism abroad was a great enough national security risk for our country to go to war. So, they devised a strategy that would most efficiently destroy the threat and they took action. Everything we do in the Middle East helps to insure that what happened on 9/11 can't happen again. They're not revealing their strategies to everyone, so it leaves the mind to wander what they're up to. But, for those who don't just jump to the youtube conspiracy conclusion, its clear that there is a real threat and that the task we entrust to our commander in chief has been done as it should.

America always was a tool for TPTB, like every other country. The title of this thread reminds me of Doom's song "Obscenity" first line of the song is "War is big business!". They're probably serving their purpose like everyother group but the line is true. I'm so programmed.

a reply to: smithjustinb

Commodity dealers[edit] 
War usually leads to a shortage in the supply of commodities, which results in higher prices and higher revenues. 

There you have it. With resources and money being spent on the war effort, war is terrible for business.
Look how weak the dollar is right now. If all the trillions being spent on defence were invested in public services, you would have much stronger dollar, and none of that debt.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Swills

And business is appearently good!

war is good for business as long as you keep attacking the weak and keep winning

attack China and Russia or their interests and you make less money than you lose