You make them for 10 million, sell them for 50. 

That isn't much of a consolation when you want to count the missile in your inventory of weapons to be used as an adversary.  It costs money to maintain an army that you want to control.

Yeah... I don't think it works that way.

Notice how when Reagan restarted the cold war the US went from being the worlds largest creditor to the worlds largest debitor.

This whole Crisis is totally Reagan's fault, his vodoo economics still live on today to some degree.

When you sell weapons you rarely get a lot of money up front.  Even less so when you want them to have weapons to counteract your arch rival. 

Are you telling me that the United states pays more for the military industry that it gains? Do you mean that the net income is negative?

For the Military sector? Well yeah.   I don't think any country makes a profit when it comes to military.

 Notice the wording, miltary industry not sector. I didn't ask about the maintanence and recruiting ... .  

I don't understand why you are makign a wording difference, the cold war forced Russia to further recruit and maintain more weapons.

Had the cold war not be restarted it's likely Russia would of just suffered a fate like cuba, where brain drain is a big problem.

Why stay here making scale when you can leave the country and make more?  That's why Communism had to be a world wide revolution. 

 Nah, it's because they're economy is heavily tied to the US Dollar.  If it's own currency goes too high or two low below the dollar it screws up.

Can anyone explain why Bush gets the blame for the war when the congress approved it including democrats, and why is the economy his and republican's fault when the congress has been in the hands of the democrats for the last 3 years? Seriously you guys should all be up on capital hill making decisions for the country because you all know everything it seems. This is too amusing to read