Spoken like a bunch of idiots who know little about how the defense industry works, and about the theories of capital investment and capital markets.

Defense companies can be highly profitable, but are also in cyclical businesses--good when they sell a lot of their wares, challenging when developing new weapons systems. Just look at the revenue and stock performance of RTX, NOC, GD and LMT compared to the SPX over the past five years. In some years they are crushing it, and in others under-performing the broader market.

Companies that build planes must be adjacent to airports. Such land, if available, is expensive, and buildings used to build planes are a challenge to build because of their size. Those which make munitions need places to test their wares, which means they have to trot them out to some place where test firings can take place, with military observers watching closely, to ensure the stuff works, flies where wanted, and blows up what it supposed to destroy. Not easy or cheap.

Investors seek a return on their investment, which for a stockholder means both dividend income and capital gain. Defense companies give out dividends--that's a reason investors buy their stock. When companies have no new investments that can reach or exceed their cost of capital, they typically disburse cash to stockholders in the form of special dividends or stock buy-backs. That's what stockholders expect, and they expect such because they have are residual claim to the company's profits.

The US military is going to avoid buying what it needs from foreign suppliers, which means they buy USA. If only one company builds the fighter planes wanted, well, that company has a bit of pricing power over the buyer (and the taxpayers covering the bill).

Der Dotard, Drinky Pete and the gang of fools need a little education before they open their mouths again on this topic...