DC Tom Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 It's a good point(s), and one of the things that makes the discussion an interesting one. But isn't that only true if you're talking about the profitability of nation states? (I'm asking because I don't know.) What happens when you look at the profit margins of the Raytheons, Lockheeds, et. al of history instead? The companies responsible for selling the arms and munitions are the ones that make up the "military industrial complex", not the nation states themselves. The nation states are just their shells. Those companies bottom lines are built around the fact their products are, by and large, one use only kinda items, aren't they? Gave it some thought, looked through some books...and I'd actually guess that military contractors don't do well in "wartime," per se. Looking at the corporations in Edwardian England, Nazi Germany, and the US in wartime, I'd have to say that profits were, at best, stagnant. In wartime, preservation of capital assets seems to be more of a concern that profitability, government price controls are stricter, and wages tend to become markedly inflated (in no small part because of a shortage of labor). There are exceptions - Krupp in the Wars of German Unification, for example (those wars are an exception in their entirety, really.) But mostly, corporations themselves don't profit from wars. Now, if you want to consider "peacetime" like Victorian England (little known fact: under the Pax Victoria, England was fighting a war somewhere in the world for all but three years of her reign) or the post-war US...then yes, there's a boatload of cash to be made. Most companies, though, would make their brand in war (e.g. North American Aviation, Convair, Colt, Armstrong Whitworth, Vickers, Fokker, Kaiser Permanente - yes, you read that right), but make their money off the brand in peace. Or sometimes not - Lockheed's almost gone into bankruptcy twice through their own idiocy. Ditto Chrysler and Northrop (Chrysler managed to almost destroy themselves while working on one of the "Big 5" programs in the 1970's-80's - the M1 Abrams). How much influence they have on policy though... that's the real question. Probably not much. The checks and balances against such things are so ridiculous they're downright oppressive in normal situations. The real influence is in acquisitions, where the cross-pollenization between industry, DoD, and Congress allows people to exert undue and damaging influence on procurement (witness McCain's over-the-top hatred of Boeing's KC-767 tanker, driven in no small part by his ties to Airbus). Which was the real effect of the "military-industrial-Congressional complex" Ike was warning us about. Oh my. What an unmitigated moron. You'll have to be more specific. JtSP is going to think you're talking about everyone BUT him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Thanks for that. Good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Thanks for that. Good stuff. I'd provide more detail, but it's late on this coast. I've got a couple books on British "battleship" ("armored cruiser," "dreadnought," etc.) builders. It's notable how much money they raked in during peace, and how broke they went during wars. And the axis of British shipbuilding - Admiralty - Parliment is the prototypical "military industrial complex." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 24, 2014 Author Share Posted September 24, 2014 You're a !@#$ing idiot. Germany and Japan gained no economic benefit from getting the **** kicked out of them in wars they started. They gained an economic benefit a decade later from being allied with the most powerful economy on the planet. Are you actually arguing that German and Japan foresaw the Cold War policies that benefited them twenty years in advance of the Cold War? Lol so after your statement was objectively trounced now you try to introduce other factors. Your entire post said nothing about how the initiator's economy benefitted post-war, only that it didn't. Wrongo in multiple instances. Why don't you just go cry to your mommy about being made a fool again, cuz your posts are just making it worse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Lol so after your statement was objectively trounced now you try to introduce other factors. Your entire post said nothing about how the initiator's economy benefitted post-war, only that it didn't. Wrongo in multiple instances. Why don't you just go cry to your mommy about being made a fool again, cuz your posts are just making it worse Ok, for further clarification. You're an unmitigated idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Lol so after your statement was objectively trounced now you try to introduce other factors. Your entire post said nothing about how the initiator's economy benefitted post-war, only that it didn't. Wrongo in multiple instances. Why don't you just go cry to your mommy about being made a fool again, cuz your posts are just making it worse Thank god for the French and Indian War, we would've never had the Roaring 20's without it. Quick question Joe, have you ever heard of correlation vs. causation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2014 Author Share Posted September 25, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 http://youtu.be/rK28iXJJwgw You know, it's a good thing most of your opinions come from youtube videos made by other people. Because your original thoughts blow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 What. The. !@#$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Doesn't that video belong in Bob's Marijuana Wonder Drug thread?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 "narrowitivization"... 4:40 mark. I'm totally using that word from now on. Also, if anyone's curious, here's the plug: http://www.thevenusproject.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2014 Author Share Posted September 25, 2014 (edited) "narrowitivization"... 4:40 mark. I'm totally using that word from now on. Also, if anyone's curious, here's the plug: http://www.thevenusproject.com/ it's a good, productive theme of people organizing on their own away from government. Because the international system of states is locked in some sick game they can't escape. If Obama were the savior he was billed he would be promoting such activity (remember he promised to be the most open administration ever?), instead of actively participating in the collective madness like he has Edited September 25, 2014 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Maybe the Obamanator will declare a Caliphate. Well, not that he has any sympathies with the whole Moslem thingy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 http://youtu.be/rK28iXJJwgw How cool it must be to literally roll out of bed, turn on a camera, start talking to it, record it, post it, and find people stupid enough to actually watch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2014 Author Share Posted September 25, 2014 How cool it must be to literally roll out of bed, turn on a camera, start talking to it, record it, post it, and find people stupid enough to actually watch it. a bed that's included the likes of Kate Moss and Katy Perry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 a bed that's included the likes of Kate Moss and Katy Perry. So you base credibility on who someone's been !@#$ing? It all make sense now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 So you base credibility on who someone's been !@#$ing? It all make sense now. If anything gets the ladies going, it's talking about US policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 That actually illustrates quite well how Obama snows people. If he'd said "mission accomplished," he'd be roundly laughed at now. But since he uses big words in big sentences, his acolytes are never quite certain about what he said, since they lack the attention span. So they let him skate by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 That actually illustrates quite well how Obama snows people. If he'd said "mission accomplished," he'd be roundly laughed at now. But since he uses big words in big sentences, his acolytes are never quite certain about what he said, since they lack the attention span. So they let him skate by. Except for the whole "JV team" thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts