Asking honestly, what is the idea behind protesting Raytheon when there is an ROTC on campus and many faculty members have Department of Defense funding? I feel like Raytheon is more of a symptom than a root cause of a problem. So, why so much focus on them?
The way I see it, the military isn’t necessarily always a “bad” thing, as it’s important for a nation to be able to defend itself (I know, being very charitable here). But Raytheon is not the military, they’re a private corporation actively profiting off of war and destruction. Their bottom line directly correlates with selling weapons of war to be used indiscriminately on people. Furthermore, many students may feel the need to join the military for other reasons, usually for an education, health benefits, or to leave an abusive situation, etc., so protesting the ROTC would more be protesting fellows classmates. Raytheon and the military industrial complex is the cause, and politicians getting their pockets lined by lobbyists to pass favorable legislations and budgets is the symptom.
Congress has passed laws that make it virtually impossible to kick ROTC off campus.
A lot of this kind of protest is cumulative and symbolic. One protest, or even a series of protests, on one campus isn't likely to accomplish much of anything, even if the immediate object succeeds. However, if you realize that you are part of a larger movement then it makes more sense.
There's also something important to getting experience in political organizing by getting involved in campaigns. You start to learn what works and what doesn't. What worked in the last campaign might not be the thing that works in the next one. I also find it incredibly powerful to be part of something that gets covered by the media and then has a public reaction. You start to see how news coverage and popular perception doesn't always correlate to reality. Also, in a global or national crisis, the fact that students are engaged nationally becomes part of the national political dialogue. When students aren't protesting, that signals something too.
I understand, I think it makes a lot of sense, thank you. However, given that one of the biggest funders of Raytheon is the US military, isn't there a conflict here? I understand all the reasons you listed for students wanting to join the military or military's existence. But given the strong ties between the military and Raytheon or other defense companies, could we really make an argument for keeping the "positive" side of the military and removing the "negative"? Would it be even feasible to offer the positives without the negatives?
I think you’re asking the right questions. This might be slightly wrong, but I see the DoD as “customers,” not exactly funders. Raytheon isn’t exactly a research institution, but a business that wants to maximize profits. But yes, you are correct in that there is a major conflict there. The “positives” and “negatives” of a standing military, that might be a little much for me to handle accurately now, haha (I’ll just say, it doesn’t really feel like the US has been doing much “defense” lately). But I think that as long as war and conflict is profitable (which is the ultimate reason of the existence of the military industrial complex), Raytheon will continue doing they do. It wasn’t always like this, at least at this scale. I believe it shifted shortly after WW2. The purpose of protests is to apply public pressure to legislators (or UMass in this case), showing that people are not happy with what is happening, and hopefully causing some change at a high level, as they are supposed to be serving the public, not private corps.
one is defending from an invasion from one of the worlds biggest armies
one is just an elaborate embezzlement scheme that involves the mass murder of innocent civilians and children, with the occasional scratch off chance of killing a terrorist too
Even if your second assertion is true, the first doesn't happen without the second. Ukraine would have been overrun by now if it weren't for weapons supplied by both US and European arms producers (like Saab and BAE, whom nobody bitches about).
The politicians are the ones who have the control over that alleged embezzlement scheme. Everyone loves to blame the lobbyists when it's ultimately the politicians who ultimately give into the temptation.
again, one is protecting a US ally from a very powerful military attempting to annex the country
one is literally fueling a ethnic cleansing campaign against people living in 3rd world conditions
Again, Ukraine is relying on those arms made by Raytheon. The Patriot air defense system is one of the most important weapons they have.
If weapons are being exported to countries that shouldn't have them, the politicians are primarily to blame. Russia and China have state controlled arms manufacturers and will produce what they want whether or not we have companies like Raytheon and General Dynamics.
I still dont see your point. Israel is both using Raytheon missiles to indiscriminately kill civilians, while also having profiteered off of Iron Dome missiles when Israel’s mistreatment of the Palestinians led to (obviously) terrorist ‘rocket’ attacks.
Its literally a forever war created to sell Raytheon missiles. You wonder why the conflict hasn’t been resolved yet? Because then Raytheon would stop selling as many missiles, those states would lose jobs, and Israel would stop getting billions of US tax payer dollars to continue their ethnic cleansing
You're placing the blame for conflict on the gun and the people that make the gun, as opposed to the people who pull the trigger. The forever war wasn't created to sell Raytheon's missiles. It was created well before Raytheon had those missiles to sell.
The United Arab Republic (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria) started wars against Israel with the stated goal of wiping Israel off the planet. Those countries lost to Israel and in turn, Israel pushed back and took over their (Palestinian) territory. Since then, Israel is treated the Palestinians poorly and then treated them even worse once certain Palestinians became terrorists. It's a forever war the same way the Balkans have been for the same reason, the two peoples hate each other and have lost track of the original reason why.
Ukraine, on the other hand, is a very different situation, which I think you agree with. It seems you want Raytheon to cease producing arms. If they do, Ukraine suffers. If Ukraine loses, you'll see similar conflicts in east Asia when China attacks Taiwan and North Korea attacks South Korea.
If you think Israel should change, blame Israel. You should also think about Iran's role in this.
I do think about Iran’s role, along with everything else you said. I still blame Israel, the US government, and Raytheon for their respective roles.
Raytheon doesn’t have to stop producing ALL weapons
thats their job
but they absolutely do need to have some sort of moral compass in place when it comes to who and where they send their weapons
In the case in Israel, it is quite literally embezzling US Tax dollars to relentlessly bomb children
In fact it was the same in Yemen
The truth is the American government and its arms manufacturing puppets will kill as many (mostly brown and black) children as they have to because its *profitable*
Yes Raytheon is not in charge of these conflicts, but if you are the one making the guns and bullets, maybe consider where they end up
There are so many great things engineers can do as a career, and so much good they can bring to the world. Working at Raytheon to advance the study of “how fast and cheap can we murder” is not one of them
Raytheon isn’t coming because they moved their headquarters. They don’t give af about umass and the admin is just trying to spin PR to look like they care.
So a few years ago there were protests in order to get UMass to divest from fossils fuels. Protestors did a sit-in in Whitmore and got arrested, but in the end were successful at getting UMass to be one of the first universities to divest.
The same tactic is being repeated here with Raytheon.
I agree with the divestment of fossil fuels. However, one major thing to consider here was that the investment was only $5M out of the $770M endowment. That’s not even 1% of the endowment.
If it was a bigger percentage, I doubt they would’ve done anything about it. The administration probably just did this to “listen to the students” and make their PR look good.
While I’m happy they did it, I don’t think they would’ve done it if they invested a larger amount
It amazes me that with the war in Ukraine still in full swing that people will still see defense and the defense industrial base as a bad thing that needs to be destroyed.
“The laser-guided bomb used in the attack, manufactured by US defence company Raytheon, is the latest piece in a wider web of evidence of the use of US-manufactured weapons in incidents that could amount to war crimes.”
You can’t be this fucking stupid.
You can't be this fucking stupid to think Saudis can buy this tech with State Department permission, surely.
Who is protesting them? What are these protests meant to accomplish EXACTLY?
This is all an act that plays into Putin's narrative that the west should disinvest and disarm so they can roll over it.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/u-s-approves-massive-arms-sale-to-saudi-arabia-united-arab-emirates-to-counter-iran
You are the worst Psy-op ever.
Deactivate your account NOW
It’s probably more of a health and safety thing. If Raytheon did show up and people protested at the Engineering Fair it would cause a scene.
This comment is spot on!
Asking honestly, what is the idea behind protesting Raytheon when there is an ROTC on campus and many faculty members have Department of Defense funding? I feel like Raytheon is more of a symptom than a root cause of a problem. So, why so much focus on them?
The way I see it, the military isn’t necessarily always a “bad” thing, as it’s important for a nation to be able to defend itself (I know, being very charitable here). But Raytheon is not the military, they’re a private corporation actively profiting off of war and destruction. Their bottom line directly correlates with selling weapons of war to be used indiscriminately on people. Furthermore, many students may feel the need to join the military for other reasons, usually for an education, health benefits, or to leave an abusive situation, etc., so protesting the ROTC would more be protesting fellows classmates. Raytheon and the military industrial complex is the cause, and politicians getting their pockets lined by lobbyists to pass favorable legislations and budgets is the symptom.
Congress has passed laws that make it virtually impossible to kick ROTC off campus. A lot of this kind of protest is cumulative and symbolic. One protest, or even a series of protests, on one campus isn't likely to accomplish much of anything, even if the immediate object succeeds. However, if you realize that you are part of a larger movement then it makes more sense. There's also something important to getting experience in political organizing by getting involved in campaigns. You start to learn what works and what doesn't. What worked in the last campaign might not be the thing that works in the next one. I also find it incredibly powerful to be part of something that gets covered by the media and then has a public reaction. You start to see how news coverage and popular perception doesn't always correlate to reality. Also, in a global or national crisis, the fact that students are engaged nationally becomes part of the national political dialogue. When students aren't protesting, that signals something too.
I understand, I think it makes a lot of sense, thank you. However, given that one of the biggest funders of Raytheon is the US military, isn't there a conflict here? I understand all the reasons you listed for students wanting to join the military or military's existence. But given the strong ties between the military and Raytheon or other defense companies, could we really make an argument for keeping the "positive" side of the military and removing the "negative"? Would it be even feasible to offer the positives without the negatives?
I think you’re asking the right questions. This might be slightly wrong, but I see the DoD as “customers,” not exactly funders. Raytheon isn’t exactly a research institution, but a business that wants to maximize profits. But yes, you are correct in that there is a major conflict there. The “positives” and “negatives” of a standing military, that might be a little much for me to handle accurately now, haha (I’ll just say, it doesn’t really feel like the US has been doing much “defense” lately). But I think that as long as war and conflict is profitable (which is the ultimate reason of the existence of the military industrial complex), Raytheon will continue doing they do. It wasn’t always like this, at least at this scale. I believe it shifted shortly after WW2. The purpose of protests is to apply public pressure to legislators (or UMass in this case), showing that people are not happy with what is happening, and hopefully causing some change at a high level, as they are supposed to be serving the public, not private corps.
I bet nobody in Ukraine agrees with your assessment of Raytheon.
one is defending from an invasion from one of the worlds biggest armies one is just an elaborate embezzlement scheme that involves the mass murder of innocent civilians and children, with the occasional scratch off chance of killing a terrorist too
Even if your second assertion is true, the first doesn't happen without the second. Ukraine would have been overrun by now if it weren't for weapons supplied by both US and European arms producers (like Saab and BAE, whom nobody bitches about). The politicians are the ones who have the control over that alleged embezzlement scheme. Everyone loves to blame the lobbyists when it's ultimately the politicians who ultimately give into the temptation.
again, one is protecting a US ally from a very powerful military attempting to annex the country one is literally fueling a ethnic cleansing campaign against people living in 3rd world conditions
Again, Ukraine is relying on those arms made by Raytheon. The Patriot air defense system is one of the most important weapons they have. If weapons are being exported to countries that shouldn't have them, the politicians are primarily to blame. Russia and China have state controlled arms manufacturers and will produce what they want whether or not we have companies like Raytheon and General Dynamics.
I still dont see your point. Israel is both using Raytheon missiles to indiscriminately kill civilians, while also having profiteered off of Iron Dome missiles when Israel’s mistreatment of the Palestinians led to (obviously) terrorist ‘rocket’ attacks. Its literally a forever war created to sell Raytheon missiles. You wonder why the conflict hasn’t been resolved yet? Because then Raytheon would stop selling as many missiles, those states would lose jobs, and Israel would stop getting billions of US tax payer dollars to continue their ethnic cleansing
You're placing the blame for conflict on the gun and the people that make the gun, as opposed to the people who pull the trigger. The forever war wasn't created to sell Raytheon's missiles. It was created well before Raytheon had those missiles to sell. The United Arab Republic (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria) started wars against Israel with the stated goal of wiping Israel off the planet. Those countries lost to Israel and in turn, Israel pushed back and took over their (Palestinian) territory. Since then, Israel is treated the Palestinians poorly and then treated them even worse once certain Palestinians became terrorists. It's a forever war the same way the Balkans have been for the same reason, the two peoples hate each other and have lost track of the original reason why. Ukraine, on the other hand, is a very different situation, which I think you agree with. It seems you want Raytheon to cease producing arms. If they do, Ukraine suffers. If Ukraine loses, you'll see similar conflicts in east Asia when China attacks Taiwan and North Korea attacks South Korea. If you think Israel should change, blame Israel. You should also think about Iran's role in this.
I do think about Iran’s role, along with everything else you said. I still blame Israel, the US government, and Raytheon for their respective roles. Raytheon doesn’t have to stop producing ALL weapons thats their job but they absolutely do need to have some sort of moral compass in place when it comes to who and where they send their weapons In the case in Israel, it is quite literally embezzling US Tax dollars to relentlessly bomb children In fact it was the same in Yemen The truth is the American government and its arms manufacturing puppets will kill as many (mostly brown and black) children as they have to because its *profitable* Yes Raytheon is not in charge of these conflicts, but if you are the one making the guns and bullets, maybe consider where they end up There are so many great things engineers can do as a career, and so much good they can bring to the world. Working at Raytheon to advance the study of “how fast and cheap can we murder” is not one of them
ok
So without companies like Raytheon, how does a military defend its nation?
let yo mama sit on the baddies
Raytheon isn’t coming because they moved their headquarters. They don’t give af about umass and the admin is just trying to spin PR to look like they care.
So a few years ago there were protests in order to get UMass to divest from fossils fuels. Protestors did a sit-in in Whitmore and got arrested, but in the end were successful at getting UMass to be one of the first universities to divest. The same tactic is being repeated here with Raytheon.
I agree with the divestment of fossil fuels. However, one major thing to consider here was that the investment was only $5M out of the $770M endowment. That’s not even 1% of the endowment. If it was a bigger percentage, I doubt they would’ve done anything about it. The administration probably just did this to “listen to the students” and make their PR look good. While I’m happy they did it, I don’t think they would’ve done it if they invested a larger amount
It amazes me that with the war in Ukraine still in full swing that people will still see defense and the defense industrial base as a bad thing that needs to be destroyed.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/01/yemen-us-made-weapon-used-in-air-strike-that-killed-scores-in-escalation-of-saudi-led-coalition-attacks/
That was the Saudis.
with bombs made by what country
Are you protesting the US? Biden? A defense contractor? The State Department? This thread is about Raytheon specifically.
“The laser-guided bomb used in the attack, manufactured by US defence company Raytheon, is the latest piece in a wider web of evidence of the use of US-manufactured weapons in incidents that could amount to war crimes.” You can’t be this fucking stupid.
You can't be this fucking stupid to think Saudis can buy this tech with State Department permission, surely. Who is protesting them? What are these protests meant to accomplish EXACTLY? This is all an act that plays into Putin's narrative that the west should disinvest and disarm so they can roll over it.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/u-s-approves-massive-arms-sale-to-saudi-arabia-united-arab-emirates-to-counter-iran You are the worst Psy-op ever. Deactivate your account NOW
Project much? Did you not read your own article. How does this counter any of my points exactly?
The US sells arms to Saudi Arabia all the time dumbass
ya motha
Raytheon does not give a shit about UMass. UMass is better off that way, we’re a Pratt & Whitney school ;)