Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (140371)

12/19/2013 2:04:49 PM

From: John Vosilla

2 Recommendations

Recommended By
ChinuSFO
R2O

Respond to of 149317

The New Military Industrial Congress Complex Over a Trillion dollars per year if one includes homeland security, intelligence agencies, nuclear weaponry and hidden items; more than spent at height of cold war with world communism which had nukes, half of Europe and vast Leftist support in the West.

Eisenhower originally called it the Military-Industrial-Congress Complex (MICC), but abbreviated the term. Canny weapons manufacturers have assembled sub-contractors in every state, e.g. the F-22 had a thousand of them in 42 states, the F-35 has 1300 suppliers in 45 states. Supporters now even advertise their weapons programs as a jobs program. (Just imagine if all those smart workers were rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure instead). On any war or bombing issue most establishment Republicans and Democrats vote in favor. Witness that most long term Republicans supported attacking Serbia, while most Freshman/Sophmore Republicans voted in opposition.
It's not just the cost. The Complex also prefers to continue producing high profit old weaponry. There is little of a money donating constituency for new weapons from new manufacturers, hence Washington goes on funding more old weaponry, e.g. too many subs, fighter planes and aircraft carriers (as some say, to refight the Second World War). Equally there is little constituency for civilian defense, e.g. shielding the civilian economy form electromagnetic pulse weapons. Instead the Complex focuses on offensive weaponry and then supports those who promote getting America into more, unending wars.
Washington's establishment -- journalists, think tanks, military, Congressmen, security bureaucracies nearly all thriveon war and conflict overseas. Pro-war Think Tank intellectuals, subsidized by the Complex, are a new, major force for promoting wars. Their trained, practiced, credentialed spokesmen with lifetimes as Washington insiders give authority and academic gravitas to War Party objectives. When Bush first came in, before 9/11, Neocons wanted confrontational policies towards Russia, then conflict with China was strongly promoted, now it's the Muslims, but, for them, most any war will do.
Earmarks, 15,000 of them brought to view in the '06 defense budget, have become a major new source of funding for the War Party. Billions of dollars are sent, without hearings, unquestioned because they are for "defense," to many Congressional districts, in return for which come support and donations to campaigns to insure incumbent re-election. Now also the new system of private contractors has created a whole new constituency for more wars. In Poland the plan for anti-missiles is not some grand strategy, it's purpose, rather, is just another way to send billions more money to the defense companies. Europeans won't pay for it, but Washington is eager to pay all its costs. If it then aggravates Russia to react, the complex benefits from then hyping Russia as a renewed threat. This then triggers more military spending and profits.
And why, when new weapons are so incredibly accurate, do we still need so many planes and submarines (57 nuclear ones), bombs and missiles? It's the profits in making them. American strategy violates Sun Tzu's most basic precept, a great general wins without war. For Washington, starting new wars means new profits for the MICC.

iraqwar.org