America: Arms Dealer to the Stars!
Who's the number one weapons broker in the world, again? Take a guess
And then along comes one of those stories that makes you cringe down to your very core, that makes you see our semi-fine nation and the world around it through a bleak and unforgiving lens indeed. No matter how hard you try and how you spin the story and flip it around and try to forcibly shape it into something less slightly nauseating, all you can do is realize that sometimes ugliness and violence win the day, the year, the planet.
So it is that a new report has just emerged, announcing with a sort of drab and bitter capitalistic glee that America is once again the number one weapons dealer in the world. It's true: We sell more guns, more major weaponry, tanks and rocket launchers, fighters and Gatling guns and all sorts of brutal devices specifically designed to destroy human life and induce fear and dread and all manner of sadistic horror, than any other developed nation on the planet. By a long shot.
But that's not all. Despite the bleak economy, despite what you might expect to be a major downturn in such transactions, sales of American-made guns and weapons of mass annihilation worldwide are actually way up. As far as U.S.-made weapons are concerned, it appears to be a boom time for war and death and conflict. Isn't that fun to swallow with your hopes and dreams for a peaceful and calmly evolving future?
So far ahead in weapons sales to the world are we, it's not even a contest. We own the game. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, while overall weapons sales were indeed down due to global economic blight, sales of U.S. weaponry rose more than 50 percent in a single year, totaling about $37 billion, up from $25 billion the year before.
Translation: the U.S. now owns a whopping 68 percent of the arms games worldwide. We're just like Wal-Mart, if Wal-Mart sold Browning M2s and Stingers and flamethrowers. Isn't that reassuring?
Sure, you can water it down a bit, maybe propose to your exhausted soul that we only sell said weapons to our friendly, peace-seeking allies so they may protect themselves from various evildoers and swarthy terrorists whom we also detest and wish death and hate upon, or you could tell yourself that most of said weaponry is really for defense and for shielding babies and puppies and virgins from the darker nature of man.
You can even go so far as to suggest that our arms deals are not promoting war, per se, but actually promoting peace, in that inverse, bad-is-good, multiple-wrongs-make-a-right sort of way. It's the classic, ridiculous NRA argument: if everyone owns a few thousand warheads, no one will shoot anyone simply because they don't want to get shot themselves. It's pathetic nonsense, but hey, whatever gets you through, right?
Sad fact is, capitalism trumps all rational arguments, all notions that we are out only to promote good in the world, and we will sell weapons to just about anyone anywhere short of Al Qaeda itself. Guerrillas? Dictators? Drug lords? If they somehow serve our global agenda, hell yes. We sell billions in arms to our pals in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, for example, regimes second only in oppression and totalitarianism to the Taliban. We buy their oil, we turn around and sell them fighter jets and grenades and sniper rifles. It's a win-win, where everybody loses.
Of course, it's all nothing new. America has always been the world's foremost arms dealer. Who can forget one of the classic hypocrisies of all time, Bush's pathetic wail that we must stop the development of weapons of mass destruction in countries we do not like, when of course the United States owns more WMD than any developed nation on the planet? We argue it's all about intent, all about protecting our vital interests. Which may be partly true. The other truth is, it's also all about profit, ethics and morals bedamned.
I can't help but recall that cute little scene in Iron Man, when Robert Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark character, a cocky, heartless arms dealer, finally realizes the horrible human consequences of his trade, what sort of mayhem and death he has helped promote, and decides to turn his life around and fight for justice and help save the world.
Isn't that a charming little cartoon fable? Isn't that just ridiculous, ultraviolent fantasy? Don't we nevertheless love to rub such childish ideological balm all over ourselves and think that's really what America is all about, that selling death to oppressive regimes is merely a necessary evil and, gosh golly, if we could, we'd put a stop to all such sales tomorrow in favor of ensuring a peaceful and utopian future? Sure we do. In many ways, such a mass delusion is the only way we can really get out of bed in the morning.
I'm not exactly certain how you counterbalance such bleak data. I'm not sure where to look for an equally powerful story to battle the dour fact that we are, at heart, a rather ruthless capitalist military juggernaut that will gladly sell a sharpening stone to an axe murderer if it serves our purposes and makes Lockheed Martin a tidy profit.
Where do you look for proof that $37 billion in weapons sales does not, in fact, exert a simply massive downward thrust on the desire to imagine humanity is moving in an ultimately positive, hopeful, nonviolent direction? The green movement? Solar power? Hybrid cars? As if.
Maybe you don't look at all. Maybe there is no such story, no way to offset the fact that war and violence are a major engine of capitalism, and always will be. Maybe you only swallow it whole, hope it doesn't tear a permanent gash in your spirit, and eagerly await Iron Man 2.

Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
13 Comments so far
Show AllClassic prosecutorial brilliance, Pudepoh. Yet this is no singular case - the gush from "progressives" over the Obama con filled cocktail parties, alumni gatherings, blogs, newspaper columns, books - but at least they are being semi-awakened now.
VERY unlikely taht the US will actually fight the rest of the world. Why kill people when you can have hegemony while being the "GOOD GUY"
Conservatives fighting global overpopulation by pre-emptively killing would-be immigrants of color while making big profits. What's not to like?
"I wish someone with the capacity for economic research would look into arms sales and see how much benefit the rest of the country gets from it. Does it really provide lots of job? Do the earnings filter out into the communities?" -- Paranoid Pessimist
I, too, have asked the same questions!
I know there are arms manufacturing factories in northern NY state, which keeps NY senators voting for military defense spending bills/creating new weapons systems, etc. -- NY representatives, too, for the most part. Military bases in the U.S. are also kept open for the same reason -- jobs. Or, so they say.
Your suspicions are well founded.
People do believe that these make for jobs, but they do not count the jobs that they destroy. In very broad strokes, it works like this.
Let's recall a few familiar points first.
1. Rich Americans invest in slave labor and near-slave labor abroad.
2. When workers abroad organize, American force crushes them.
3. The crushed accept substandard wages and conditions.
Familiar, right?
Now, at the same time, American workers are supposed to be spoiled because they "can't compete with foreign labor."
Gee, what does that mean?
Americans do not (yet!) mimic the servility of those we torture or whose economies we explode.
So, a job producing arms in the US is one American job, granted. However, it arms the folks who break the strikes to lower the wages abroad to undercut American workers. So, to do the job well clearly costs more than one American job - not to mention the people murdered, the mysteriously resentful families and so forth.
So, we're told that if we stop such production, we will lose our "prosperity." But that's hype. Economic dominance (by the rich; not by everyone!) does make all kinds of gimcrack, Pollyanna plastic trinkets cheap for Americans. So Americans get to trash trinkets. Mexicans, for example, pay for plastic bags at the grocery store.
However, this same process makes things that cannot be imported higher than they would otherwise be. So Americans work too many hours to raise their children, yet fail their mortgages and cannot pay for healthcare.
Is this prosperity?
My Mexican relatives own their homes - by which I do not mean that they have mortgages, but that once they purchased materials and paid labor, they had homes. The children do not have trunks of plastic gewgaws, but play as happily as American children.
For the most part, their mothers raise them. I grant that American women - and men! - often decline to raise their own children for other reasons, reasons outside of economics. But many, many Americans would like to raise their children and cannot.
This is a poor deal for workers on both sides.
And did you all hear the NPR news this morning? Here's the summary:
"NASA's current plan to return astronauts to the moon by 2020 isn't going to happen without a lot more money. A White House panel of independent space experts estimated it would cost about $3 three billion a year beyond NASA's current $18 billion annual budget. The panel says there are other ways people could explore space without landing on the moon."
In the interview with a NASA official, the 'other way' NASA can get more money was ....
Are you ready?
PRIVATIZE THE SPACE STATION AND THE SPACE SHUTTLES!!!
I kid you not.
The Blackwater Space Station. The idea just brings peace to the heart, doesn't it?
Outsourcing of hi tech and manufacturing jobs from the US has been going on for a long time. The weapons and spy business is one of the few (somewhat) safe sources of jobs in these fields. However, it is an inefficient way to develop technology.
Excellent - heartfelt writing by Morford.
However, he missed the most important point of all. This 37 billion...where did it come from? Do you think that other countries just came up with this money? Not at all. The US Tax payers did! That's right, you and me.
Here's how it has always worked. The President asks Congress to approve say...5 billion for "Foreign Aid/Military Assistance to some country out there, say Pakistan or...Israel. So, this tax money from Our Treasury is then "transferred" to said country, which they then use to pay for the Weapons. Nice scheme, isn't it. The Military Industrial Complex then pockets your tax dollars to sell weapons to the world.
Immoral to the Core. Actually us US taxpayers get screwed multiple times. First, we pay for the development of such weapons. Then we buy them from the MIC for a while. Then we pay for the US Military to operate and deploy them in service of Corporate America. Then we sell them outside the country (when the technology is older and we have developed the "next generation" replacements for them) using tax dollars as "Aid". Then, to rub salt into the deep wound of this amoral Corporate welfare, the same MIC Corporations then bilk us taxpayers further by fraudulently overcharging on the "cost plus" contracts. The capper is, these very same corporations effectively pay No TAX!!!
How's that for getting royally f@#$ed !?!?! Guess who's running the Government folks - it sure ain't you.
Been going on for a long time - Americans, how stupid can you be. Even General and President Eisenhower warned us directly. And, if anybody really knew what he was talking about militarily, it was Ike.
Tax Revolt Now - National Strike Soon.
Gotta give morford credit for finally writing an article of substance...
He has yet to peel back the layers of onion to recognize how the US has or continues to covertly fund Al Qaeda and the Taliban... But to his credit, he is further along than most weekly writers in his foreign policy analysis...
How can this be an article of substance when Morford refuses to connect the dots to Obama?
Obama receives an in explicable pass.
Morford:
"Is Obama an enlightened being?"
"Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/06/06/notes060608.DTL
AND:
"A troubling lack of pure evil
Where to find a refreshing dose of vileness in the Age of Obama?
"The Age of Obama has brought both a terrific upswelling of general positivism and a concomitant grand lightening up/toning down of outrageous verbiage and ranting extremism among the hotheaded-dictator set, and with it the strangest thing of all: an apparent global decline in overt, easily identifiable flameballs of tangible evil. "
"And the evil tyrants? Struggling for relevance, mostly. Saddam's long gone, Kim Jong-Il is a batty coot, Iran's Ahmenijhad's bark is far worse than his bite, and even harmless thugs like Castro and Hugo Chavez are stunned to humble reverence by an American president who abides no such childish bulls--t and exudes actual integrity and preternatural calm."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2009/06/12/notes061209.DTL
Someone please tell me how Morford can write the above statements, and then write today's column, without being hugely hypocritical?
As some pointed out of SFGate ""Mark, what took you so long to figure this out?" It's not news, we've been the world's largest arms dealer for many decades now.
And let's be honest. US Arms no doubt DO make it into Al Qaeda hands, and into the hands of most of US enemies.
I wish someone with the capacity for economic research would look into arms sales and see how much benefit the rest of the country gets from it. Does it really provide lots of job? Do the earnings filter out into the communities?
I'd love to see a study that checked all that out.
paranoid: chalmers johnson has discussed the mic and its affect on the economy - you should check out his books, especially the blowback trilogy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalmers_Johnson#The_Blowback_trilogy
the answer is - on the whole - arms and military expenditures are not only a negative factor in the economy as a whole they are a black pit of wasted time and capitol
the us wants to fight and kill the entire planet - 1 and a half billion muslims, 1 and a half billion chinese, 300 million russians and around 1 billion south americans
i am reminded of the saying: when all you got is a hammer - everything begins to look like a nail
finally, just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean that no one is looking
cheers