Wednesday, September 13, 2017

A Record Year For U.S. Arms Sales

(Click on Image to Enlarge)
A map showing the fiscal year 2017 total DSCA weapon sales announcements, by region. (Dollar figures are rounded and do not represent guaranteed sales. Data by Aaron Mehta/staff, image by Devan Feeney/staff)

Defense News: US clears record total for arms sales in FY17

WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department has set a new one-year record for clearing weapon sales, with $75.9 billion cleared by the department and announced by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency in fiscal 2017.

That total covers all announced cleared weapons packages from Oct. 1, 2016, through Sept. 12, 2017, leaving two more weeks for that number to increase before the end of the fiscal year.

The previous record for the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, or DSCA, sales announcements was $68.6 billion, set in fiscal 2012 following the approval of a series of massive weapons packages for Saudi Arabia. In comparison, in fiscal 2016, DSCA cleared $33.6 billion in potential weapon sales.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: This increase in arms sales are driven by the Middle East. For fiscal 2017, arms sales are going to be driven by Asia. I expect massive purchases from both South Korea and Japan .... followed by all the other smaller countries. Case in point .... Australia Investing Billions to Modernize its Army (National Defense).


B.Poster said...

We're selling these weapons to other nations to bolster their defense and their interests. So Australia wants to modernize it's armed forces. Who modernized America's armed forces?

zampathar said...

You did B.Poster,you did.

B.Poster said...


I modernized America's armed forces? I'm confused. When did I do this? More importantly I suppose, how did I do this when I don't have the power to allocate how America utilizes its resources towards military readiness or national defense? I appreciate you thinking I have power to do this.:-)

Anonymous said...

Dear Poster:
you pay taxes? then you helped the industrial military complex
Dwight E.

B.Poster said...


You pay taxes? I pay quite a bit actually but that was not the point being made.

Very respectfully it helps to read the editor's pots and the links he provides when possible, read the comments carefully, and then submit your reply.

The point is the US military needs to be modernized to be a competitive fighting force with the world's major powers. If we are manufacturing weapons to be sold to others, then those personnel and manufacturing plants cannot be used to make weapons for the US military so strictly speaking I did not pay to modernize the US military. The question is valid in light of other countries modernizing their militaries. Who modernizes America's military?

You bring up the "industrial complex." Actually how much a country spends on its military is the least important metric when measuring relative power. To use an analogy, it is a bit like "time of possession" in American football which experts have called "the least important statistic" except military spending is even less relevant than time of possession in American football. So again, who modernizes America's armed forces to make it a relevant fighting force for the modern challenges it faces and keeps it competitive with the major powers?

Actually I am somewhat thrilled someone actually wants to buy something we make. The problem is, if resources are being diverted to make these things for others, they are not available to be used to upgrade America's armed forces. Additionally, huge cost savings could be found by eliminating the aircraft fleet. These are floating death traps and cannot be useful against pretty much any adversary we currently face the most danger from.

Also, changes in approach need to be done as well. Getting off topic, yesterday the editor posted about the 5 military projects Russia is working on that no one believes. Rather than respond to these the idiots who pass for American policy makers chose to ignore these. The most disturbing is Russia now has nuclear weapons referred to as "moles" buried off the US coasts waiting to be activated at a time of Russia's choosing. When launched, our response time is reduced from maybe 15 minutes to probably less than 2. (Do the math on how close these things would be if off of US coasts.) Essentially we are now defenseless and would not have time to respond even if we wanted to. Essentially America and Americans are no in a large open air prison to be conquered, destroyed, or blackmailed anytime the Russians wish to do so.

The stated Russian reason for this is the expansion of US/NATO forces to countries bordering Russia. Since this is in violation of the agreements to end Cold War I not to mention common sense, removing these forces and expelling former Eastern Bloc and Soviet countries from NATO costs nothing and has huge upside potential for America I would suggest a negotiated settlement.

The US removes all forces from the nations from the nations bordering Russia. All eastern bloc and former Soviet countries can no longer be part of NATO, especially the chumps from Poland. In exchange Russia removes the "moles." Given the dire nature of the threat, the US will supervise the process and the removal of these will be done publically, we need to know exactly how these things work, we will need the specs and access to the people who made these, and we will need assurances that all "moles" are removed and will never be deployed again.

Failure to do so means America has no choice but to initiate WW3. The only other option would be to unconditionally surrender. Having our people essentially subject to destruction, conquest, or forms of blackmail any time the Russians choose to do so is not acceptable.

So, no I did not modernize America's armed forces or bring them up to speed to meet today's challenges nor did I change America's policies to saner ones. I appreciate you thinking I have the power to do so.:-)