5 Companies Making a Killing Off Wars Around the World

[Forever Sunshine]

Global military spending was down in 2012 for the first time since 1998. And for the second year in a row, arms sales from private industry to governments were down as well last year.

Despite the decline in military spending, the business of war remains a good one. The 100 largest arms producers and military services contractors recorded $395 billion in arms sales in 2012. Lockheed Martin, the largest arms seller, alone accounted for $36 billion in such sales during 2012. Based on figures compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), 24/7 Wall St. examined the 10 companies profiting most from war.

The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan is among the biggest reasons for the drop in military spending, according to SIPRI. Spending on these campaigns fell from $159 billion to $115 billion between 2011 and 2012.

time.com/24735/here-are-the-5-companies-making-a-killing-off-wars-around-the-world/?hpt=hp_t2

[safeharbor37]

You can easily observe how simple it is to project power across a border as Russia is doing in Ukraine and how hard (and expensive) it is to project power across an ocean or such as the US in Iraq and Afghanistan (a well as Ukraine). Of course you can take the Paul approach and hold that it really doesn't matter until "they" cross our borders, but if it does matter, the expense is unavoidable. That is: You get what you pay for. It is kind of sad though to see people watch while their country is invaded by another country while we sit twiddling our thumbs.
Hillary was right. This is a lot like pre-WWII Czechoslovakia. If you don't think so, please point out the differences.
Incidentally, don't bring up the Bush Administration and Georgia. The US did respond but the response wasn't maintained by the Obama Administration which took over within six months.
"U.S. president George W. Bush's statement to Russia was: "Bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century."[345] "Russia has invaded a sovereign neighbouring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people," said Mr Bush. "Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century." [346] The US Embassy in Georgia, describing the Matthew Bryza press-conference, called the war an "incursion by one of the world's strongest powers to destroy the democratically elected government of a smaller neighbor".[347]
Initially the Bush Administration considered a military response to defend Georgia, but such an intervention was ruled out due to the inevitable conflict it would lead to with Russia.[348][349] Instead, Bush opted for a softer option by sending humanitarian supplies to Georgia by military, rather than civilian, aircraft.[348][349] US sanctions against Russia, put in place by the Bush administration, were lifted by the Obama administration in May 2010. [350]"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Georgia