Introduction
If there is a country who profits from
war, it is only the USA. I’ll explain with the parties involved and network of
money flow in Iraq.
First of all when the war started, the
defense companies made money as weapon sales increase, then the banks made
money as they the ones who financed the war through loans to defense companies
& US treasury bonds. Then once most of the war was done, Oil giants got
their drilling rights and started exploiting Iraq’s oil then after that the IMF
steps in and loans money to the government for rebuilding the country, now this
money is used to give American companies contracts to build unnecessary
infrastructure in the country they have destroyed.
So all this is a creative scheme in
which Oil giants, defense companies & the big banks end up making money.
The government increases its deficits to new highs and American taxpayers end
up paying for these unnecessary wars. That is why even during times of the Iraq
war in 2003 the stock market bull phase was strong. So the government itself
doesn’t gain anything much from war but the companies involved in the business
of war make tons of money and even lobby for such wars.
A Country does not profit from war but a
handful of individuals and they do so by providing things that are needed to
wage war. Down through history these people have often provided the funds
and/or war goods to wage war to countries.
A good example is Shell Oil. During WWII, Shell Oil sold products in both America and Nazi Germany. They went through
Switzerland in order to sell supplies to the Nazi’s.
The royal family of the United Kingdom
is setting on huge stock piles of gold provided by Hitler at the start of the
WWII. Switzerland is also holding on to huge stock piles of Nazi Gold and
accounts of people that died during WWII, because survivors did not have the
proper paperwork to claim what is rightfully their property.
Another good example, Halliburton
provides the vast majority of goods to the US Military and former V.P. Dick
Cheney owns a great deal of stock. The war on Saddam made Halliburton some $39
billion in profits and Cheney’s share was some $34 million! In other words
Cheney made a great deal of profit from war he helped to start.
Citizen Nixon broke up the peace talks
between America and North Vietnam which is treason. The Military Complex
rewarded him with several hundred million dollars. When Nixon became President
he thanked the Military Complex by ordering up huge bombing campaigns.
War has always been about making profits.
Person or organization that profits from
warfare or by selling weapons and other goods to parties at war. The term has
strong, negative connotations. General profiteering may also occur in peace
time. One example of war profiteers were the "shoddy" millionaires
who allegedly sold recycled wool and cardboard shoes to soldiers during the
American Civil War.
Others make their money by cooperating
with the authorities. Basil Zaharoff's Vickers Company sold weapons to all the
parties involved in the Chaco War. Companies like Opel and IBM have been
labeled war profiteers for their involvement with the Third Reich.
Scientific research
War provides demand for military
technology modernization. Technologies originally designed for the military
frequently also have non-military use. Both the state and corporations have
gains from scientific research. One famous example is Siri, the artificially
intelligent “personal assistant” that comes standard on all newer Apple
iPhones. Siri was a spin-off of CALO, a project funded by the government
military development group, DARPA. CALO is an acronym that stands for
“Cognitive Assistant that learns and Organizes”
Commodity dealers
War usually leads to a shortage in the
supply of commodities, which results in higher prices and higher revenues.
Prior to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, oil production was controlled by the
Iraqi government, and was off limits to western companies. As of 2014, foreign
owned private firms dominate Iraqi oil production.
Politicians
Taking bribes and favors from
corporations involved with war production have been called war profiteers.
Abraham Lincoln's first Secretary of War, Simon Cameron, was forced to resign
in early 1862 after charges of corruption relating to war contracts. In 1947,
Kentucky congressman Andrew J. May, Chairman of the powerful Committee on
Military Affairs, was convicted for taking bribes in exchange for war
contracts.
The state
Though war initially had the objective
of territorial expansion and resource gathering, the county may also profit
politically and strategically, replacing governments that do not fulfill its
interests by key allied governments.
More recently, companies involved with
supplying the coalition forces in the Iraq War, such as Bechtel, KBR, Academy
(formerly known as Black water) and Halliburton, have come under fire for
allegedly overcharging for their services. The modern private military company
is also offered as an example of sanctioned war profiteering. On the opposing
side, companies like Huawei Technologies, which upgraded Saddam's air-defense
system between the two Gulf Wars, face such accusations.
Black marketers
A distinction can be made between war
profiteers who gain by sapping military strength and those who gain by
contributing to the war. For instance, during and after World War II, enormous
profits were available by selling rationed goods like cigarettes, chocolate,
coffee and butter on the black market. Dishonest military personnel given
oversight over valuable property sometimes diverted rationed goods to the black
market. The charge could also be laid against medical and legal professionals
who accept money in exchange for helping young men evade a draft.
Ways in which governments benefits from
wars are as follows:
· Producing
weapons (including aircrafts, tanks, ships, and so on) and selling them.
This business doesn't actually need any war but just the idea of a war.
· Conquering new
territory. This was the main reason of a war in ancient time,
but minimal nowadays. Recently wars were mainly used to split (e.g. Ex-Yugoslavia)
that to unify.
· The business of
reconstruction. A war gives destructions but later you
need to rebuilt and this is a good business for countries who won the war and
can control the reconstruction.
· Improve
influence over other countries. Winning a war,
nowadays it means having the possibility to control its politic for several
years after. The main example is the power that still has US over Europe (also
URSS had in the east but already lost).
· To destroy the
power of someone that is against you. An example is the war
in Libya against Gheddafi, his main mistake was to be against US.
· Getting
popularity in own country. Especially in past, winning a war
politicians was getting approval from own people. An example can be the war in
Eritrea (a very poor country in Africa) by Mussolini that has just this aim.
· To show your
power to others. Even in recent years, we had wars with
mainly the goal to show to others countries (not directly involved in it) own
power.
· To test new
weapons (or even to use old ones getting obsolete).
When you have to understand if your investment in technology are good, the best
way is to use them in a conflict. Similarly when you have too many weapon and
somehow you need to destroy them in a "smart" way. These are the main
reasons why despite all war is still a good business.
In any case, to give an example of a country
who gain the maximum benefits from wars (at present days) we need to mention
United States.
Why in fact they are so strong and
politically powerful? Because they won 3 big wars in last century and they got
all profits from it. The war are the two so called world war plus the
"Cold War". They also participated to several others wars (Korea,
Vietnam, gulf war etc.) but main results were from the three mentioned.
U.S. got biggest advantage from the two
world war cause they were not fought in America but in others places. For this
reason US was able to sales weapons to all countries involved and later get the
maximum profit (both economic and political) from reconstruction. The effect of
Marshal Plan are still visible and it was the way how U.S. overpassed Europe.
Six Companies profiting the most from
wars
© Wikimedia Commons F-22 Raptor, Lockheed Martin
Arms
sales: $36.44 billion
Total sales: $46.13 billion
Profit: $3.61 billion
Employees: 126,000
Total sales: $46.13 billion
Profit: $3.61 billion
Employees: 126,000
Maintaining its position as the world’s
largest defense contractor, Lockheed Martin's revenue from arms sales totaled
$36.44 billion in 2015. The company’s reach into military and defense
technology is difficult to overstate. Lockheed and its subsidiaries manufacture
many of the U.S. military’s workhorses, including the F-16 and F-22 fighter
jets, the Black Hawk helicopter, and the Vector Hawk unmanned drone. The
company also designs and manufactures air-to-air missiles and missile defense
systems.
Like many other major defense
contractors, Lockheed’s biggest customer is the U.S. government -- accounting
for 78% of the company’s 2015 net sales, the vast majority of which came from
the Department of Defense.
(2) Boeing
© Mike Kane/Bloomberg/Getty Images An employee works on the nose of a Boeing Co. 777
airplane at the company's facility in Everett, Washington, on June 25, 2013.
Arms
sales: $27.96 billion
Total sales: $96.11 billion
Profit: $5.18 billion
Employees: 161,400
Chicago-based Boeing is not nearly as
dependent on federal spending as other major U.S. contractors. Less than
one-third of Boeing’s 2015 revenue of $96.11 billion came from its defense,
space, and security operations. The remainder was attributable to Boeing’s
commercial airplane business. Of the revenue generated from defense contracts,
62% came from sales to the U.S. Department of Defense.
Like many large U.S. manufacturing
companies, including top government contractors, widely expected higher
military spending under President Trump will certainly help Boeing. Favorable
outcomes under Trump are not guaranteed, however. While the Air Force signed
deals with Boeing last year to design parts of Air Force One, for example,
Trump, citing concerns over cost, called for the deal to be cancelled.
(3) BAE Systems
©
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ian_d/ BAE
Systems Typhoon FGR4
Arms
sales: $25.51 billion
Total
sales: $27.36 billion
Profit: $1.46 billion
Employees: 82,500
Profit: $1.46 billion
Employees: 82,500
Some 93% of BAE Systems’ $27.36 billion
in 2015 revenue came from defense contracts. The company manufactures a range
of military equipment, including war ships, munitions, amphibious combat
vehicles, and fighter jets. BAE is the company behind the Harrier jet, capable
of take-off with a short runway, as well as vertical landings. Cyber
security and intelligence services also comprise a small share of the
company’s business.
Though BAE Systems is headquartered in
the U.K., deals with the British government comprise less than a quarter of the
company’s annual revenue. BAE’s biggest clients are in the United States, with
corporate and government contracts comprising over a third of the company’s
total 2015 revenue. BAE’s other major markets include Australia and Saudi
Arabia.
(4) Raytheon
© Wikimedia Commons Raytheon Missiles
Arms
sales: $21.78 billion
Total sales: $23.25 billion
Profit: $2.07 billion
Employees: 61,000
Total sales: $23.25 billion
Profit: $2.07 billion
Employees: 61,000
Waltham, Massachusetts-based Raytheon is
known for its missiles and missile defense systems. According to the company,
13 countries use primarily Raytheon air and missile defense. This January, the
U.S. Navy awarded Raytheon a $235 million contract to supply missiles for Aegis
cruisers and destroyers.
Raytheon purchased cyber security
provider Websense in 2015 for $1.9 billion. The deal was an indication of the
growing threat of Cyber-attacks as well as Raytheon’s effort to diversify
and move into commercial markets and away from dependence on defense contracts.
(5) Northrop Grumman
© Wikimedia Commons Northrop Grumman, KQ-X
Arms
sales: $20.06
billion
Total sales: $23.26 billion
Profit: $2.0 billion
Employees: 65,000
Total sales: $23.26 billion
Profit: $2.0 billion
Employees: 65,000
Northrop Grumman was awarded in October 2015 the highly
coveted $80 billion contract to supply the U.S. military with 100 long-range strike
bombers. The deal is the biggest from the Pentagon in more than a decade. The
B-2 Spirit stealth bomber is the predecessor of the newly named B-21 Raider.
The company's 2015 arms sales, valued at $23.26 billion,
included $1.8 billion for the F-35 fighter jet program, $1.1 billion for the
E-2D Advanced Hawkeye early warning aircraft program, and $947 million for the
Saudi Arabian Ministry of National Guard Training Support program.
(6) General Dynamics
© Oscar Sosa/US
Navy/AP the US Navy's the littoral combat ship
Independence (LCS 2) which was produced by General Dynamics. Oscar Sosa/US
Navy/AP
Arms
sales: $19.24 billion
Total sales: $31.47 billion
Profit: $2.97 billion
Employees: 99,900
Total sales: $31.47 billion
Profit: $2.97 billion
Employees: 99,900
General Dynamics manufactures and sells
a range of military equipment, including ammunition, amphibious
vehicles, armored vehicles, and combat tanks. In addition, General
Dynamics owns Bath Iron Works, a naval shipyard that is currently under
contract to build the U.S. Navy’s new Zumwalt Class DDG-100 destroyer. The ship
costs approximately $4 billion.
Well over half of General Dynamics’
revenue comes from arms sales, the vast majority of which are through contracts
with the U.S. Department of Defense. Only 13% of the company’s 2015 revenue
came from contracts with foreign governments.
Definition of War
War is a state of armed conflict
between states, governments, societies and informal paramilitary groups,
such as mercenaries, insurgents and militias.
Features of War
Tangible/intangible aims:
Tangible war aims may involve (for
example) the acquisition of territory (as in the German goal of Lebensraum in
the first half of the 20th century) or the recognition of economic concessions
(as in the Anglo-Dutch Wars).
Intangible war aims – like the accumulation
of credibility or reputation – may have more tangible expression
("conquest restores prestige, annexation increases power").
Explicit/implicit aims:
Explicit war aims may involve published
policy decisions.
Implicit war aims can take the form
of minutes of discussion, memorandum and instructions.
Positive/negative aims:
"Positive war aims" cover
tangible outcomes.
"Negative war aims" forestall
or prevent undesired outcomes.
Types of War
Cold War
A cold war is a state of conflict
between nations that does not involve direct military action but
is pursued primarily through economic and political
actions, propaganda, acts of espionage or proxy
wars waged by surrogates. This term is most commonly used to refer to
the Soviet-American Cold War. The surrogates are typically states that are
"satellites" of the conflicting nations, i.e., nations allied to them
or under their political influence. Opponents in a cold war will often
provide economic or military aid, such as weapons, tactical support or military
advisors, to lesser nations involved in conflicts with the opposing country.
Colonial War
Colonial war (in some contexts
referred to as small war) is a blanket term relating to the various
conflicts that arose as the result of overseas territories being settled by
foreign powers creating a colony. The term especially refers to wars
fought during the nineteenth century between European armies
in Africa and Asia.
Insurgency
An insurgency is
a rebellion against authority (for example, an authority
recognized as such by the United Nations) when those taking part in the
rebellion are not recognized as belligerents (lawful combatants). An
insurgency can be fought via counter-insurgency warfare, and may also
be opposed by measures to protect the population, and by political and economic
actions of various kinds and propaganda aimed at undermining the insurgents'
claims against the incumbent regime. As a concept, insurgency's nature is
ambiguous.
War of Independence
A war of
independence or independence war is a conflict occurring over
a territory that has declared independence. Once
the state that previously held the territory sends in military forces
to assert its sovereignty or the native population clashes with the
former occupier, a separatist rebellion has begun. If a new state is
successfully established, the conflict is usually known as a 'War of
Independence'.
War of Liberation
Wars of national
liberation or national liberation revolutions are conflicts
fought by nations to gain independence. The term is used in
conjunction with wars against foreign powers (or at least those perceived as
foreign) to establish separate sovereign states for the rebelling
nationality. From a different point of view, these wars are
called insurgencies, rebellions, or wars of independence. Guerrilla
warfare or asymmetric warfare is often utilized by groups
labeled as national liberation movements, often with support from other
states.
Civil War
A civil war, also known as
an intrastate war in polemology, is a war between
organized groups within the same state or country. The aim of
one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve
independence for a region or to change government policies. The term is
a calque of the Latin bellum civile which was used to refer
to the various civil wars of the Roman Republic in the 1st century
BC.
Boarder War
Territorial disputes are often related
to the possession of natural resources such as rivers, fertile
farmland, mineral or oil resources although the disputes
can also be driven by culture, religion and ethnic
nationalism. Territorial disputes result often from vague and unclear language
in a treaty that set up the original boundary.
Fault line War
A fault line war is one that
takes place between two or more identity groups (usually religious or ethnic)
from different civilizations. It is a communal conflict between states or
groups from different civilizations that has become violent. These
wars may take place between states, between nongovernmental groups, or between
states and nongovernmental groups. Most often, the issue in a fault line war is
often over territory, but it could also be over the control of people. Such
wars within states may involve groups that are predominantly located in
different territories or groups that are intermixed. In the latter, violence
often erupts periodically.
Invasion
An invasion is a military
offensive in which large numbers of combatants of
one geopolitical entity aggressively
enter territory owned by another such entity, generally with the
objective of either conquering; liberating or re-establishing control or authority
over a territory; forcing the partition of a country; altering the
established government or gaining concessions from said government;
or a combination thereof. An invasion can be the cause of a war, be a part
of a larger strategy to end a war, or it can constitute an entire war in
itself. Due to the large scale of the operations associated with invasions,
they are usually strategic in planning and execution.
Proxy War
A proxy war is an armed
conflict between two states or non-state actors which act on the
instigation or on behalf of other parties that are not directly involved in the
hostilities. In order for a conflict to be considered a proxy war, there
must be a direct, long-term relationship between external actors and the
belligerents involved. The aforementioned relationship usually takes the
form of funding, military training, arms, or other forms of material assistance
which assist a belligerent party in sustaining its war effort
Range War
A range war is a type of
usually violent conflict, most commonly in the 19th and early 20th centuries in
the American West. The subject of these conflicts was control of
"open range", or range land freely used for cattle grazing, which
gave the conflict its name. Typically they were disputes over water rights or grazing
rights and cattle ownership.
Religious War
A religious war or holy
war is a war primarily caused or justified by differences
in religion. In the modern period, debates are common over the extent
to which religious, economic, or ethnic aspects of a conflict
predominate in a given war.
Undeclared War
An undeclared war is
a military conflict between two or more nations without either side
issuing a formal declaration of war. The term is sometimes used to include
any disagreement or conflict fought about without an official declaration.
Since the United Nations' police
action in Korea followed the example set by the United
Kingdom during the so-called Malayan Emergency, a number of
democratic governments have pursued disciplinary actions and limited warfare by
characterizing them as something else such as a military action or armed
response.
Police Action
Police action is
a euphemism for a military action undertaken without a
formal declaration of war.
Since World War II, formal
declarations of war have been rare, especially actions conducted by developed
nations in connection with the Cold War. Rather, nations involved in
military conflict (especially the major-power nations) sometimes describe the
conflict by fighting the war under the auspices of a "police action"
to show that it is a limited military operation different from total war.
Total War
Total war is warfare that
includes any and all civilian-associated resources and infrastructure
as legitimate military targets, mobilizes all of the resources of society
to fight the war, and gives priority to warfare
over non-combatant needs. The Oxford Living Dictionaries defines
"total war" as a war that is unrestricted in terms of the weapons
used, the territory or combatants involved, or the
objectives pursued, especially one in which the laws of war are
disregarded.
World War
A world
war is a large-scale war which affects the whole world directly
or indirectly. World wars span multiple countries on multiple continents or
just two countries, with battles fought in many theaters. While a variety
of global conflicts have been subjectively deemed "world wars", such
as the Cold War and the War on Terror, the term is widely and
usually accepted only as it is retrospectively applied to two major
international conflicts that occurred during the 20th century: World War
I (1914–18) and World War II.
Nuclear War
Nuclear
warfare (sometimes atomic warfare or thermonuclear warfare)
is a military conflict or political strategy in
which nuclear weaponry is used to inflict damage on the enemy.
Nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction; in contrast
to conventional warfare, nuclear warfare can produce destruction in a much
shorter time and can have a long-lasting radio-logical warfare result.
Principles of War
The principles of war serve as a guide
for our forces. The principles have withstood the tests of time, analysis, and
practice. The principles of war includes the following:
·
Objective
·
Offensive.
·
Mass.
·
Economy of
force.
·
Maneuver.
·
Unity of
command.
·
Security.
·
Surprise.
·
Simplicity
Categories of War
Those categories include but
are not limited to (in alphabetical order): Absolute War, Ideal War,
Limited War, Real War, Total War, and War to Disarm
the Enemy, War of Limited Objectives, and War to Overthrow
the Enemy. This may sound like a simple proposition- a matter of merely
cataloging definitions.
Advantages of War
·
War brings about
innovation which a period of peace cannot replicate.
·
War is also a good
economic stimulant.
·
War is also
profitable for big business as wartime consumption increases.
·
War can also be
a fight for the greater good.
Disadvantages of War
·
Effect on Human
life.
·
Economic effect.
·
Infrastructural
effect.
Conclusion
More soldiers and manufacturing leads to
lower unemployment and therefore cash to stimulate an economy.
There is a multiplier calculation used
(you'll have to Google it) so every $ spent is worth more to an economy. So
1.00 is injected into an economy that means when that spent .20c goes to taxes,
and a local business gets .80c that it can afford to spend on other
services/goods and so on. At the same time that .20c is used by the government
to provide services and improvements such as security or infrastructure. Thus
paying somebody else and the process repeats.
Whenever money is spent a country
profits, war creates demand (both for weapons and food/transport/etc.) and
lowers unemployment, thus stimulating the economy and reducing the amount of
dependents on the state. Loss of life leave job openings and fewer people to
take pension. Banks loan theoretical money and the list goes on.
No country in a war profits. They might
have in days past when wars were less expensive and there was a less powerful
world order, but now the expense is greater than any such possible events. And
even if you were able to seize something valuable, the world community would
not let you keep it.
Thank you.