Almost all of the USAF's cargo and tanker jets are made/supported by Boeing. Big jets are not Lockheed's competency; the C-5's development was a mess, and Lockheed hasn't been in the airliner business since the Tristar failed. Almost seeming to mirror this, Boeing seems to be useless at making fighter jets.
Also, the US Government would be wise to preserve their domestic airliner industry. Suppose the US decided to invade Iraq a third time and the EU responded with sanctions, cutting off US airliners from Airbus. This is the sort of situation Russian airlines faces today, but who's to say it couldn't one day happen to America if Boeing no longer existed? It's not as though America is any stranger to waging unpopular wars.
Lockheed could probably still do it, but these days Boeing itself contracts out a lot of the manufacturing to companies like Spirit Aerosystems. The real capability Boeing has is in engineering and systems integration, and those capabilities are looking shakier than they used to.
One dark horse competitor to Boeing is Gulfstream. The G700 is a business jet, but it has a 53 ton takeoff weight, which is about as much as a 737-100. Gulfstream also delivers plenty of aircraft to the military and is part of General Dynamics. They pretty clearly have the capability to make largish jets.
Regarding Gulfstream, we saw how a similar thing played out with Bombardier and their C-Series. It had cost overruns and delays, but in the end resulted in a pretty good plane that would have been successful if not for US protectionism and Boeing being afraid of any competition. Instead Bombardier are ruined, had to do a fire sale, and Airbus got the C-Series programme for free.
> Suppose the US decided to invade Iraq a third time and the EU responded with sanctions, cutting off US airliners from Airbus.
Now why would they invade Iraq a third time? The second time was already unjustified, unlawful and borderline genocide..
> This is the sort of situation Russian airlines faces today, but who's to say it couldn't one day happen to America if Boeing no longer existed? It's not as though America is any stranger to waging unpopular wars.
Not at all. Russian airlines face that situation because Russia decided to nationalize planes that did not belong to them.
No, Russian airlines cannot service even the planes they legally own outright, insofar as those planes depend on parts made by western companies that are no longer allowed to sell plane parts to Russian airlines.
Also, the US Government would be wise to preserve their domestic airliner industry. Suppose the US decided to invade Iraq a third time and the EU responded with sanctions, cutting off US airliners from Airbus. This is the sort of situation Russian airlines faces today, but who's to say it couldn't one day happen to America if Boeing no longer existed? It's not as though America is any stranger to waging unpopular wars.