December 2, 2023



Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are large contributors to US Federal Officials


The US war on Syria has been sold to the American public and the rest of the world as the most exceptional nation in history’s duty to protect the defenseless from a ruthless dictator. But could it be possible that the main goal of the war was not bringing exceptional democracy, but to raise corporate profits?

Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are some of the US government’s most important, if not the most important suppliers of military equipment and they are also large contributors of political campaign money to Washington’s politicians.

Although the idea of bringing peace and stability to a country or a region seems like a good step towards achieving world peace, the truth is that the war on Syria has mainly benefited the military industrial complex.

Military equipment providers such as Raytheon had announced that it would have to lay off tens of thousands of workers, but the company’s decision was reversed after the White House intervened. What exaclty did anyone in the White House say to the corporate heads of Raytheon to make them change their minds? No one knows, but the lay offs did not happen.

What everyone knows is that not too long after the talks between Raytheon’s representatives and government officials, the world was shocked to learn that innocent Syrians had been gassed to death and that the United States was ready to intervene with all its military might. Many of the bombs to be dropped over Syria are tomahawk missiles produced by no one else than Raytheon.

Before the announcement that the US was considering a limited attack on Syria, stocks from Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon had been sluggish to say the least, but after the announcement of potential military intervention everything changed.

From a total of 100 top military suppliers, 44 operate on American soil, and their sales of weapons accounted for 60 percent of the total world sales in 2010.

The top four US military suppliers include:

# 4: Northrop Grumman — $28.2 billion in arms sales in 2010.

# 3: Boeing — $31.4 billion in arms sales in 2010.

# 2: BAE Systems — $32.9 billion arms sales in 2010.

# 1: Lockheed Martin — $35.7 billion in arms sales in 2010.

Along with these four military suppliers, Raytheon comes on a close 6th place with total sales of$25.2 billion in 2010.

The United States spends more money on weapons than Russia, China, Britain, France, and Germany combined. Amazingly, most of the weapons bought by the US government from these and other weapons suppliers are not really used to protect Americans and the US soil, but to wage war against third world nations.

After taking a look at the stock value from Raytheon, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, it is clear that the war is not only being fought because of abuses committed from a ruthless thug, which is what the US government wants people to beleive. In just six months, all three companies have seen the value of their stocks rise exponentially. While Boeing and Lockheed Martin climbed from about $80 per share to over $115, Raytheon went from about $55 to almost $80 per share as of Monday.

Boeing-stocksLockheed-Martin-stocksRaytheonWhile the US rescues military suppliers with taxpayer money, the country’s debt and spending continues to rise faster than Obama can say WAR. US National Debt has risen steadily and now surpasses $17 trillion dollars. US Federal Spending is on the verge of hitting $3.5 trillion and the total US Debt now amounts to almost $59 trillion.

While cities around the country such as Detroit and Chicago are crumbling down to pieces, the Federal Government does nothing to help fix the budget crisis and instead spends billions of dollars a year in military equipment to secure countries in the Middle East.

In return for US fidelity to their businesses, three of the 6 largest weapons suppliers contribute the most money to Washington’s politicians. Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon have all given over 2 million dollars in campaign contributions to US representatives in the last few years. Contributions are given to politicians not only from weapons manufacturers or suppliers, but also through foundations, NGOs and Funds which receive money from large military suppliers to lobby Congress or to make direct donations to congressional candidates.

No wonder the US Congress and other Washington politicians almost always vote for or support war.