The Russian-Ukrainian conflict has lasted for more than 20 days and shows no sign of ending. NATO member states continuously provide Ukraine with a variety of anti-tank missiles and mobile anti-aircraft missiles. This caused the Russian military to suffer more losses in Ukraine.
Comments inside and outside China mostly say that in this Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US is the big winner.
Ukraine received a batch of anti-tank missiles from Britain. Photo: The Drive
US military-industrial corporations benefit
According to the Sohu news site, the US did not win, but the US military-industrial corporations won. It is difficult for ordinary people and most American companies to gain benefits before and after the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and even suffer losses. In the end, only the military-industrial conglomerates benefited.
The Russia-Ukraine conflict will certainly increase Europe’s defense spending significantly. Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine will certainly make many European countries feel very threatened. To prevent a future Russian military confrontation with Europe, the continent will have to strengthen its defense potential. Europe needs to buy stealth fighters and anti-missile weapons from the US, creating an opportunity for US military corporations to make a lot of money.
The US itself also has a reason to upgrade its weapons and equipment, which is to fulfill NATO’s collective defense clause and prevent Russia’s military threat against NATO countries in Europe. The US is separated from Europe by the Atlantic Ocean, does not face any threat on the ground from Russia, so US military corporations can safely manufacture weapons and export to Europe.
The American people and other industries face difficulties
According to Sohu, the US military-industrial corporations are the winners, and the other industries of this country become the losers.
From an economic point of view, weapons today are purely consumables, not means of production. Weapons cannot be used to create new economic value. This means that the production of weapons by military enterprises will ultimately not improve the production levels of other industries, and cannot form a healthy economic cycle. If a high-tech weapon was made in the US but not used, it would be a pile of scrap metal.
Economically, the value of the F-35 fighter jet is far less than that of a shotgun. Hunting guns can be used to hunt animals such as wild boar; Meat and animal fur are the economic value created by hunting guns. What role could the F-35 fighter play in production? Unfortunately no! Instead, the fuel for one F-35 flight could be enough for several cars a year. From a purely economic standpoint, the F-35 is a debt.
F-35 fighter jet. Photo: Sohu
From the perspective of weapons manufacturing, when US military enterprises produce weapons, they can actually promote the development of upstream suppliers. But after weapons are manufactured, their daily use will consume a lot of America’s resources.
Today’s weapons are all fuel suction machines. For example, the Hummer is the most fuel-efficient military vehicle, but it also consumes several times more fuel than a conventional car, not to mention fighter jets and tanks.
The US military using these weapons during training will consume a lot of fuel. This will certainly increase fuel prices. When ordinary Americans have to fill up with high gas prices, the cost of living will inevitably only increase, not decrease.
When the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is still tense, the world oil price also continuously escalates, reaching 140 USD/barrel, which will be a big crisis for the US economy. However, the US continued to sanction Russia, making many types of oil produced by Russia unable to trade normally, further increasing the world oil price.
According to Sohu, with sanctions against Russia, the US seems to be “making it difficult” for itself.
at Blogtuan.info – Source: Soha.vn – Read the original article here
