By Kitty Donaldson – Oct 19, 2010. See original online at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-18/u-k-said-to-cut-lockheed-f-35s-on-one-carrier-put-helicopters-on-another.html.
Prime Minister David Cameron will say today that the U.K. will order fewer, cheaper planes for one new aircraft carrier and station only helicopters on another to cut costs, two people familiar with the plans said.
By CHRISTOPHER DREW See original at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/business/20arms.html?ref=christopher_drew .
Lockheed Martin on Tuesday cut its earnings forecast for 2010, and said delays in the award of Pentagon programs would hurt its sales growth and leave profits flat in 2011.
The company, the world’s largest military contractor, said the percentage growth rate in its sales would slow to the “low single-digit range” next year as a long surge in Pentagon spending comes to an end.
As published originally at http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2010/10/defence_review, Oct 19th 2010, 18:36 by M.S. | LONDON
“PAIN all around, but nothing fatal” appears to have been the guiding principle of Britain’s strategic defence and security review (SDSR), the results of which were announced by David Cameron today. The budget cuts – 8{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} in real terms over the next four years – were not as swingeing as they might have been nor nearly as deep as the Treasury was hoping for. But the cash squeeze is nevertheless intense.
As we watch our country fight preemptive wars that we are told will be generational wars, we experience more fear than ever. We see our constitutional rights being signed away in the name of defense. We watch our neighbors unable to afford health care, our infrastructure collapse, our schools go begging; yet the military is exempt from the government’s spending freeze.
As originally posted on Seven Days at http://7dvt.com/2010roger-bourassa-f-35 By Kevin J. Kelley.
Vermonters favoring the deployment of a new generation of war planes at the Burlington airport will have trouble depicting one of their chief opponents as an unpatriotic wimp.
Vermont’s Pentagon payout: What’s our bang for the buck? | Seven Days | By Ken Picard [11.10.04]
Rutland Herald/Barre Times Argus | Oct 10, 2010 | By Haviland Smith
During the endless deliberations that took place on U.S. policy toward Afghanistan during the summer and fall 2009, it became clear that the U.S. military establishment — as personified by Adm. Mullin and Gen. Petraeus — was vitally interested in proving that it could reach a successful conclusion in Afghanistan. The military seemed disinclined to consider any of the other factors involved in our Afghan commitment.
Here are some suggestions that have substantial potential for achieving a desirable outcome.
-Take a petition and fact sheets and talk with your friends, neighbors and co-workers to gather petition signatures and raise awareness.
-Write a letter-to-the-editor of the Burlington Free Press and also your local newspaper.
-Write a letter to your local, state and federal legislators.
-Sign the on-line petition available at petitionbuzz.com/petitions/stopthef35.
–
-Consider donating money to help finance expenses such as flyers, yard signs, printing, etc.
“It loads up like a bomb truck.” For defense? No. The F-35 is designed to be a first strike weapon capable of carrying 2,000 lb bombs and cruise missiles. Watch this 3 minute F-35 promotion video to learn more.
Depending on how you look at it this chart either is good in that it says we are keeping our troops safe (which is debatable!) or bad in that we are allocating too much money to too much hegemony, while lining the pockets of folks like Lockheed Martin the maker of the F-35 and others on the Spade Defense Index I discussed earlier. I say this money would be better spent domestically. We are currently spending $698.14 per active-duty US military enlistee.