America is rightly proud of its advancements in technology and innovation. In many fields it leads the world, providing it with opportunities and possibilities previous generations couldn't even dream of. Many of these endeavors provide benefits to people, such as for instance in the field of health, where previously incurable diseases can now be better diagnosed and treated, and in communications, where the use of satelites has made it possible for people to instantly communicate from anywhere to anywhere in the world.

Unfortunately, technological advancements are not solely used for such peaceful purposes as described above. In fact, frequently they are only a side benefit of systems that were first developed for military purposes, such as for instance the internet, which in its early stages was a military means of communications. And while it is understandable that technologies are implemented and used for the protection of the homeland, it remains questionable whether all the taxpayers money spent on military technology is money well spent.
The following table shows the top ten defense contractors in the United States for the year 2002. (1)

Of the above 67.4 billion dollars, 17 billion went to Lockheed-Martin Corp. The website of this corporation provides all kinds of information regarding the work they perform and the products they deliver. A brochure provides some insight wherin they: "...cover the contributions Lockheed Martin made to victory on the battlefield. From aircraft and munitions, to electronic warfare and communications systems; from satellites high above the Earth, to shoulder-launched anti-tank weapons on the ground, to surface combatants at sea, Lockheed Martin systems played a role in meeting our customers' mission."
Their direct contribution to the war in Iraq is evident from the following statement:
"The success of Operation Iraqi Freedom was critical to liberating the Iraqi people from tyranny and dealing a blow to the enemies of peace and freedom. The seriousness and urgency of the work the people of Lockheed Martin perform for the nation is keenly felt by each and every member of the team. At Lockheed Martin, we understand that our systems must have extraordinary reliability; the lives of men and women in uniform depend on it."

But can "Operation Iraqi Freedom" really be described as the success Lockheed Martin describes it to be? Perhaps from their technological viewpoint the weaponry they delivered performed as it was supposed to. Certainly the already much weakened Iraqi army was no match for the US troops that invaded the country, which, for Lockheed Martin proves their point. But for the US government and the American citizen that success pales considerably when compared to the conditions that prevail in Iraq following the military victory so arrogantly declared by George W. Bush on May 1, 2003. Now, one year later, more American soldiers are losing their lives than during the few weeks of the war, and all of the sophisticated weaponry the US troops possess are of little or no use in bringing "peace and freedom" to Iraq. So while Lockheed Martin's contributions of weaponry may have won the battle, America has lost the war. Exaggerated confidence and over-reliance on a technological advantage proves to be no match for the innovative resistance of a people humiliated and degraded by their so-called liberators. There really is only one answer now: Cut your losses and bring the troops home. In doing that, the whole world will support you and accept your belated recognition of a mistake made.

(1) http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/deffirm.html