Why the US Will Do Nothing About Russia's New Missile Technology and Why It Makes Sense From Its Perspective

It comes across as lunacy but there is a good reason why the US wont do anything

Recently Russia did a new missile test that unveiled a new ballistic missile technology. This technology uses kinetic warheads and is capable of destroying strategic targets without needing nuclear warheads and causing the civilian life loss and contamination they cause. The missile is not stoppable with any air defense technology at the moment and it made nuclear warfare obsolete and opened a new era in strategic warfare.

But the US Won’t Do Anything

You read that right. The US is very unlikely to do anything about it despite having ended up getting outclassed.

Even further, the US and its allies don’t have any technology that could even come close not only to Russia’s new missile technology but also to the hypersonic or ballistic missile technologies of other countries like China, India and Iran.

And the Reason For That Is Simple…

Those missiles don’t make as much money for the private defense industry as other weapons.

Both ballistic and hypersonic missiles are manufactured once, and then they sit and wait until they are used, except for the occasional maintenance and overhaul. The private defense companies charge a lot of money for this, but they are still not as profitable as other defense equipment.

That is why ballistic weapons in the West have always been nonexistent up until now - only nuclear ballistic missiles exist because there is no better way to deliver nuclear warheads to strategic targets far away. But immense propaganda is done against ballistic missiles and other tactical missiles and they are ridiculed and ruled out.

Despite the actual reality:

https://x.com/bintmachgara/status/1863245233409884528

That’s a video of the Syrian government army doing a Tochka strike against the Islamists’ headquarters in Idlib, and the video of the destroyed headquarters. Missiles like Tochka are ridiculed profoundly in the West, they are called useless Cold War relics, pointless to use, easy to destroy, and ineffective.

This is to prevent anyone from getting any ideas about the military using ballistic missiles and reducing the obscene profits of the private defense contractors. Just like propaganda is done in every other facet of US policy and society to maximize profit, the ‘national defense’ also gets its share of corporate propaganda to allow those corporations to squeeze the American taxpayer dry.

And the resulting public opinion helps the private defense contractors to push the military to buy the weapons they want to sell them.

And the Cash Cows That Make the Most Money For The Defense Industry Are…

… aircraft and aircraft carriers.

They are endless money pits.

Each flight of an aircraft costs tens of thousands of dollars per hour. And aircraft carriers are literal floating cities that need to be maintained in every way like a small city would but with weapons on board.

So just one aircraft carrier becomes an endless black hole that sucks never-ending supplies of money that goes to all kinds of private corporations - from those that supply the aircraft carrier with food for the crew to the ones that supply the oil, missiles or spare parts that are being constantly burned.

Air bases are the land-based sisters to the aircraft carriers - not as big a money pit. If the defense industry could get the military to shut down all airbases and instead load all the aircraft on new aircraft carriers, they would do it. But they couldn’t do it just yet.

And if the specific aircraft that is used in the air bases and carriers is one that is especially expensive to own and operate, all the better - like the F-35:

Each flight of the F-35 costs between $33,000 and $42,000/hour. It suffers from so many issues that ~30-40% of the time it’s on the ground, needing maintenance instead of flying. It just keeps sucking away money to the benefit of defense corporation shareholders.

Then There Are the Aircraft Bombs and Missiles

No to cruise missiles, as they suffer from the same ‘does not make maximum profit’ issue as the ballistic ones, and yes to aircraft bombs and missiles.

They are regularly fired and need to be replenished. They can be fired in small conflicts against any target including 3-5 camel herders in a desert, so as long as you cause enough proxy wars against the ‘brown people’, you can just keep firing them nonstop and maximize profits. So many companies, foremost Raytheon, made so much money from supplying 70% of the bombs that the US sent to Israel to genocide Gazans that it defies description.

So as opposed to ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles and cruise missiles that need to stay boxed until there are serious targets to use them, you can use aircraft bombs and just keep bombing random people in some remote desert to profit. One reason why the US has never-ending proxy wars.

And the Worst: Anti-Ballistic Defense Systems Don’t Make As Much Money Either

If you build better Patriot systems or any new anti-ballistic missile system, they will suffer from the same problem - the majority of the time they will stay boxed and not used.

The only way they can be used would be for someone to fire an actual ballistic missile against the US or any of its military assets. And only certain global actors are able to do so. The local actors who can do that are fewer.

So if you make a shiny anti-ballistic defense system, it will not be a cash cow that you can milk either.

As You See, the US Has No Response To the New Russian Technology Nor It Wants to Have One

It doesn’t even want to produce defense systems to counter the new technologies of its rivals, because they don’t make enough money.

It’s much easier for it to use ‘if we are upset, we will burn the world down in a nuclear fire’ approach to strategic defense and allow the private defense sector to suck every cent the American taxpayer has to maximize its profit.

It does that because the very shareholders of those corporations want it to be so and buy the politicians who will make it so.

That’s how the US ends up with a president who “works tirelessly for a ceasefire” as it gives 70% of the bombs that Israel uses to genocide Gazans or a president who is “America first” but openly says that he is going to give everything it needs to Israel.

And it will remain the same until the American taxpayers stop it.

Remember to join my Substack (you can use the free option at the end) to not miss when I write an article next time:

…

Subscribe for free to hear when I post next time: