Yeah, but you're barking up the wrong tree. The military will get the weaponry it wants regardless, likely at a higher cost to the taxpayer and/or more side effects (pollution, for example) if they're forced to do it in-house because all powerful private sector companies somehow agree to 'boycott' and leave the money on the table. It is in everyone's best interest for their military to be the most superior -- the real issue is in military leadership and civilian policy-makers causing the problems. It dilutes the message when you spend energy on issues that should be primarily reserved for commander-in-chief discussions.