Defense News<\/a>, est tr\u00e8s significatif de l’\u00e9tat d’esprit actuel du complexe militaro-industriel. On expose \u00e0 visage d\u00e9couvert ses int\u00e9r\u00eats, on en est presque \u00e0 se r\u00e9jouir hautement quoiqu’en col-cravate des destructions subies par l’U.S. Army en Irak, de l’aggravation de la situation sur la fronti\u00e8re. C’est une excellente le\u00e7on qui nous est donn\u00e9e sur le fonctionnement du complexe\/du syst\u00e8me, pouss\u00e9 d\u00e9sormais \u00e0 l’extr\u00eame de l’avantage et de la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de la production militaire et du gain qui va avec. La pr\u00e9sentation directe est faite de la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 des conflits, des destructions et de tout ce qui va avec. On ne peut qu’\u00eatre d’accord avec Stevens. (Applaudissements dans la salle.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00ab We don’t sense a very near-term contraction in the (U.S.) defense budget, said Stevens at a Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. investor conference. The operational tempo has been very high, he said, referring to operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are consuming the useful life of a good number of military assets that will require replacement.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bb With ballooning budget deficits, many industry-watchers last year predicted the beginning of a slow-down in military spending last year, accompanied by cuts to major programs. That did not happen, as the Bush administration in February proposed a record $439 billion for defense in 2007 a 5 percent increase on this year and signaled that it would ask for a further $120 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget has yet to be passed by Congress.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bb The global security environment is not getting any simpler with regard to threats, warned Stevens, mentioning uncertainty surrounding North Korea, Iran and the aspirations of China. There’s some motivation to want to assure that we (the United States) are not underinvesting in the nation’s security, he said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bb Stevens cited border security and federal information technology as two areas where U.S. defense spending would grow. Lockheed, which has been diversifying away from military hardware toward civilian and technology services over the past few years, is focusing on both. In March it won a $305 million contract to upgrade the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s antiquated computer system. It is also leading a team bidding on SBInet, the government’s six-year, $2 billion program aimed at securing U.S. borders.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 2 juin 2006 \u00e0 09H49<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Robert Stevens, patron de Lockheed Martin, a tenu \u00e0 rassurer ses investisseurs et soutiens de Wall Street. Il ne voit pas de r\u00e9duction budg\u00e9taire au Pentagone \u00e0 l’horizon, bien au contraire, les gars. La destruction de mat\u00e9riels (US) en Irak et en Afghanistan est telle qu’on peut esp\u00e9rer beaucoup de commandes. Question menaces et th\u00e9\u00e2tre… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3127,3012,3501,3502,3123],"class_list":["post-67616","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-budget","tag-complexe","tag-lockheed","tag-martin","tag-militaro-industriel"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67616","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67616"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67616\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67616"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67616"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67616"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}