Northrop Grumman Corp. (NOC)

All Comments on NOC

  • commenter
    thnku
    Aug 14 04:31 AM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Great article! I wish there would be more eye opening articles like this in the main stream media. Our main problem in this country like anywhere else is that there are so many uninformed citizens who are manipulated to feel proud of the follies that are commited in their name and with their money and blood. Thank you again for being an intelligent citizen. May people like you save this country and the world. Reply
  • commenter
    youhavenoide
    a
    Aug 14 04:18 AM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Based on these comments, most of you have no clue what is currently happening in your world. That goes for those for and against the author. The author himself is barely scratching the surface. America, the land of the chemically lobotomized and socially engineered.

    Lookup the Hegelian Dialectic and, if you have a thinking bone in your body, you may begin to research and truly understand our past, present and future as mankind. You won't like the future, but it may save you and those you love.     Reply
  • commenter
    azcaballer
    Aug 14 12:55 AM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Excellent article!

    Those on this post that defend the spending need to read another book written by a Marine corps Major General and 2 Medal of Honor winner
    Smedley Darlington Butler and his book "War is a Racket"

    I thought like many on this site do at one time, that read the newspapers and believed what they were told and felt that they were well informed. This is a short book and worth reading here it is for free: www.horstwisdom.com/wi...

    This is very relevant to an investment forum because we Americans are all being robbed by our government!
     Reply
  • commenter
    Jim C
    Aug 14 12:06 AM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    The men and women serving in the American armed forces comprise the the most righteous military in the world. They deserve the best tools to do their job.

    The world needs a righteous police force. We should have been in Rwanda, and we should be in Sudan right now.

    We were right to fight communism, and we're right to fight islamofacism now.

    The military spending as a percent of GDP has fallen from about 5.5% in 1992 to 3.1% in 2007. (Per Wikipedia Total Military 2007 Funding is $439.3 Billion, US 2007 GDP is 13.8 Trillion)

    In the Iraq and Afganistan conflicts more has been accomplished with fewer American lives lost than in any previous conflict.

    Smart weapons, sophisticated communication, command & control systems save lives, all with less money.

    I think we're doing pretty well, keep up the good work!



    Reply
  • commenter
    Just The
    Facts
    Aug 13 08:48 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Excellent article. Reply
  • commenter
    JGQ
    Aug 13 08:47 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    rhs101

    I have a few other articles on seeking alpha that will give you my view on the deficit and spending. Take a look at them and see if you agree.     Reply
  • commenter
    pype
    Aug 13 07:57 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Vik II - Comparing the Reichstag fire to 9/11 is absurd and offensive. Hitler himself set the fire in order to drum up support, are you saying that our gov't created 9/11 in order to increase defense spending?? As far as you saying that terrorism is an "invisible enemy", I'd like to know what planet your living on! Pick up a newspaper, theres global acts of terrorism taking place everyday, you'de have to be in denial to not see it. Reply
  • commenter
    Bugs
    Aug 13 06:25 PM
    Boeing May Withdraw from $35 Billion Air Force Contract Contest [view article]
    Illinois & Washington State are Obama strongholds. And Boeing country. He'd be best for our new President to end this Air Bus garbage. Reply
  • commenter
    Bugs
    Aug 13 05:58 PM
    Boeing May Withdraw from $35 Billion Air Force Contract Contest [view article]
    Glad to see Boeing playing hardball with the Bush administration and their desire to contract with Air Bus. Congress will probably not grant a contract to Air Bus with no other bids. This pushes it all off to The Obama or McCain Pentagon. Very Smart indeed as a new, SUPERIOR, Presidency begins. Reply
  • commenter
    pugmacy
    Aug 13 05:54 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    If any of you believe the numbers shown for how much China is spending on their defense you are total idiots. The truth is they are spending much more. One day, unfortunately, we will find out the truth about the depth and breadth of the Chinese Military Complex that has been developing for some years now. Of course, the liberal pukes on this site (will their namby-pamby logic) will say that the US is the one that has "forced" the Chinese to do this. Of course, in their eyes, the US is guilty creating all of the aggression around the world. Unbelievable. Reply
  • commenter
    rhs101
    Aug 13 05:44 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Jim,

    User242985 - Did you read the article or are you just spouting rhetoric.

    I changed my pseudonym after you read my post.

    You didn't mention social programs? You lead the article off with this quote form Eisenhower:

    "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hope of its children."

    I presume you agree with it. Then to close you have this:

    "If as a country we continue to allow our politicians and their military industrial complex corporate sponsors to spend $700+ billion per year on weapons, to the detriment of higher education, alternative energy projects, and national infrastructure needs, we will be paying an extremely high price.

    We are in a classic guns or butter scenario. The Bush Administration has decided to choose guns while borrowing from our grandchildren and the Chinese to pay for the butter. This can work for awhile, but as deficits accumulate, the dollar plummets, and inflation rears its ugly head, our great country will decline as other empires who overstepped their bounds declined."

    Guns OR butter????

    OR --- that is exactly the problem I am talking about. You are saying either we spend on guns or butter without a thought to not spending it at all.

    Unless I missed it you did not mention anyting about the national debt or the deficit.     Reply
  • commenter
    bbzz24
    Aug 13 05:33 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Machiavelli999,
    SocSec,Medicare,Medica... are not discretionary government expenditures: they are already paid for by dedicated tax.

    On the contrary, military spending is discretionary and along with other discretionary spending sucks about 500bn per annum in taxes which were collected for the sole purpose of paying future pension benefits.
    You are finding it normal that the gov't taxes you with SocSec tax and then spends half of it waging pointless wars?

    How will you (and everyone else) react to a new payroll tax of 3% called Misc War Miscarriages?     Reply
  • commenter
    VIK II
    Aug 13 05:11 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    This article speaks to an issue that is just one of many troubling this country today. The problem is that one can discuss statistics and charts etc., but until people take to the streets, the government will not listen. In a stroke of genius, the government did away with the draft. Thus it ensured that the general public will never be concerned enough with US' military engagements--not enough to go out and make their voices heard.
    The most dangerous thing about a society dominated by the "war merchants" is that inevitably there is a desire to create new markets for their goods. Thus the expansion of NATO to include countries that have no business being part of NATO and the twin towers were as the Reichstag fire was to the Nazi's-- the perfect platform upon which to hoist the wardrum. Terrorism was like a godsend for the war merchants. An invisible enemy, impossible to defeat and a victory never to be achieved.
    Combine that with a little dose of fearmongering and there is your perfect recipe. One of Hitler's henchmen once said-"To control a people, give them something to fear and anyone who does not tow the line accuse of being unpatriotic."
    In final analysis, I would argue this: to support the military i.e. our troops means supporting the military industrial complex. If the support from our troops is pulled the following will be achieved: Politicians will be less fearful to cut expenditures, the military will be a less attractive option--our boys' and girls' desire to "serve" the country will become less pronounced, a draft will be reinstituted to ensure proper staffing and wars will once again be open to public scrutiny.     Reply
  • commenter
    fatcat
    Aug 13 04:56 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Is it just me or is Ron Paul the only person in Washington with a brain.. Reply
  • commenter
    Al in Oregon
    Aug 13 04:17 PM
    The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex [view article]
    Jim:

    [The chart of expenditures starts in 1998. I believe it was 9/11/2001. The numbers speak for themselves.]

    No – you tortured them to say that. U.S. military spending didn’t start in 1998 or 2001. See Pype’s comment above.


    [Guess whose side the U.S. was on during the Iraq/Iran war. We supported Sadaam with weapons and money because we hated Iran, so I guess we are responsible for the 1 million deaths.]

    Actually it goes back further – when Jimmy Carter brought Khomeni back to Iran. It was similar to the Germans back in WWI shipping Lenin back to Russia. Your argument is like the gun control problem where people blame the guns and not the gunner. In England they’ve outlawed handguns and now they have a “knife problem“.


    [Russia just invaded a sovereign country this week. Should we launch the ICBMs towards Moscow?]

    No, would you? And neither would I invade Pakistan as Obama advocated. You can always tell a weak argument when someone tries to put words in your mouth.


    [The French supported our war of independence. They didn't start it. There was no conflict in Iraq when we invaded.]

    There was no conflict in Iraq before we invaded if you ignore the suppressions of the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs. However, putting that aside for the moment, the point of our efforts was to remove a serial aggressor who was a threat to his neighbors and world peace, collaborated with al Qaeda, had used WMD and was estimated by the CIA and all the leaders of his neighboring countries at the time to have WMD capability. We just finished removing 550 tons of yellow cake from Iraq and Saddam’s no 2 ranking Air Force General has said he shipped several truck and plane loads of WMD to Syria in the days leading up to the invasion.

    I’m glad we liberated Iraq. I’m thankful that GWB had the cahonas to do the right thing. Had the “Father of the Internet” won the 2000 election, we’d still be negotiating with the Taliban for extradition of Osama and have incurred a couple more 9/11’s. As it is, Osama is rotting in some cave in Pakistan, Saddam has been removed, Iraq is toddling toward democracy, we’ve had no more 9/11’s, and Qadafi coughed up his WMD.

    And I’m still glad the French didn’t use your logic back in the 1770’s. Instead of surging to Yorktown, they could have packed up and left.
    Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: