Still, it doesn’t answer my question. Who disburses the “spending” to the vendors who provide weapons in exchange for that money? And how do they choose who gets it?

I think what irks me is that while I understand the benefits of this system when it comes to supplying the US military (rapid mobilization), I question the ethics of redirecting the output of this system to another country, who is ultimately an additional end customer for the arms companies.

I can’t articulate the precise source of my discomfort, but I know it feels wrong for this artificial market to exist according primarily to the whims of politicians and those who pay them.

One argument in favor of the military industrial complex is that it keeps the wheels greased for when a real war happens. And we’re seeing the benefits of that in Ukraine right now. But to be honest, I get the sense that the MIC, i.e. the power structure controlled by executives at the top US arms manufacturers, has a vested interest in prolonging this war, any war, so long as the weapons need replacing.