Tungsten, the A-10 and Vietnam

https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2019/08/22/Boeing-awarded-999M-contract-for-A-10-Warthog-wing-replacements/2891566482184/?sl=7

https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2018/05/14/air-force-debates-replacing-depleted-uranium-rounds-10.html

On one level this exemplifies how the military-industrial complex works. The military ends up stuck with programmes they don't want and wish to cancel. Congress argues they want to keep the A-10 because of its tactical importance. For those in the know it is the supreme tank-killer and has a stellar reputation as a tough almost indestructible killing machine. A strange plane, it's relatively slow and quiet and yet its sound is unique, its engines sound like nothing else. During my days of shame when I wore the uniform of the legions and participated in its murderous policies, I was around them on a daily basis. I knew it by sound as much as by sight.

I don't doubt there are those in the military who want to keep it and yet the real story is that they're willing to spend all this money to replace wings, rather than develop a new model. There's a lesson here with regard to technology. After all these years platforms like the B-52, A-10 and the C-130 remain reliable and functional. In the case of cargo aircraft I also recall the roll out of the C-17. The much larger and older C-5 (which is still in use) is at times impractical and constantly suffers mechanical failures. The C-130 is reliable and diverse, able to get into to tighter places and yet its cargo capacity is limited. The C-141 which I both worked with and flew on was a Vietnam era plane on its way out and the C-17 was supposed to be the answer to all these issues. Maybe so but in the case of fighter aircraft and bombers, while the F-22 has proven popular, the state of the art F-35 is a disaster. The B-1 was also by many estimations a boondoggle and the B-2 is too sensitive and expensive for all the workaday bombing the US wants to do. That leaves them with the Eisenhower era B-52. They've certainly updated their fleet but the aircraft are now decades old, the last being produced in 1962.

So it is with the A-10 and yet it's also interesting that while we're constantly told that Depleted Uranium (DU) rounds aren't harmful, the USAF is considering replacing them. While DU ammunition is used in other applications, the A-10 certainly bears a great deal of the guilt.  The DU shells are used to smash armour, something the low-flying A-10 was designed to do.

The tungsten alternative is interesting. Of course to no one's surprise it is also found in the Congo (DRC) and plays a part in the problems and proxy wars of the region. Vietnam's production capacity is also interesting because it presents Washington with the potential to kill two birds with one stone. It can eliminate DU rounds and take some of the activist pressure off, especially as they continue to lie about its use and effects. Switching to tungsten will prove a good PR move on the part of the Pentagon.

Additionally it could prove an important diplomatic and strategic move in further cementing the alliance with Vietnam in opposition to the common enemy of Beijing.

Once again the military plays a massive role in the US economy. It demonstrates both the failures and hype surrounding advanced technology and its needs and interests play a significant part in geopolitics. Given that Christians have no place or part in the military, its missions, goals or infrastructure, it leads us to constantly reconsider our own economic placement and how we should view the world and the state of the world. Additionally it ought to lead Christians to reconsider the collaborative and support roles they so often embrace with regard to the US government, its State Department, intelligence agencies and of course the Pentagon. US markets are intimately wed to military interests and almost every mutual fund and certainly ever variety of index fund relies on ties to and investments in this infrastructure. Corrupt and intrinsically anti-Christian in its morality, it is nevertheless an existential aspect of the American system. As a result we as Christians must largely divest ourselves from the mainstream of US economic and cultural life and bear witness against it.