Talk:Hypersonic missile

When the Soviet Union fell, its military industrial complex was not privatized. Only today are we beginning to see the advantages and disadvantages of a for-profit military industrial complex over a central command-and-control system.

Good point: both advantages and disadvantages of a privatized approach.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:47, July 5, 2025 (EDT)

As Israel is learning right now: it costs a $10 million missile to shoot down a $200,000 missile (and fails for the most part). At least two defensive missiles have to be shot at an incoming missile.

Ultimately, the advantages of capitalism & privatization in the sphere of defense spending is left-over Cold War rhetoric. Look at the corruption in the stock portfolios of members of Congress. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 13:03, July 5, 2025 (EDT)

Another example of the waste in American military production: the (now retired) M1 Abrams main battle tank with a turbo jet engine, someone had the brilliant idea of running it on airline fuel, which means special fuel has to be flown in and stored in special storage tanks, making the fuel storage facilities prime targets. For all the glories and advantages of the profit motive and capitalist system, it seems to benefit stockholders in the military industrial complex more than American taxpayers.

And the special jet fuel storage tanks make about as much sense as electric tanks which the Biden admin proposed.

There has long been thinking in DC that money solves all problems. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 05:56, July 7, 2025 (EDT)

The point here is, the post-1945 US military industrial complex is driven by the profit motive (largely for ideological purposes); most other countries military industrial complex is driven by national security needs. As WWIII escalates, the understanding of this difference will become more pronounced. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 05:33, July 16, 2025 (EDT)