Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Hawks Urge Boosting Military Spending
WASHINGTON - Despite a shrinking national economy and a record defense budget, U.S. neo-conservatives and other right-wing hawks are mounting a spirited - if misleading - campaign to persuade Congress that the military should get a bigger slice.
They are calling on Congress and President Barack Obama to boost military spending next year even beyond the projections made by the administration of former President George W. Bush as to what would be needed.
They are also arguing for devoting tens of billions of dollars of the nearly one-trillion-dollar economic stimulus package that Obama is trying to push through Congress by mid-February to defense spending, insisting that increased orders from largely U.S.-based military contractors should translate quickly into more jobs at a time when official unemployment rate is moving quickly toward two digits.
"These kinds of expenditures not only make economic good sense, but would help close the large and long-standing gap between U.S. strategy and military resources," wrote Tom Donnelly, a military analyst at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a predominantly neo-conservative think tank, last month.
"If bridges need fixing, so too do the tools with which our military fights," he argued, adding that Congress should increase defense spending by at least 20 billion dollars a year. "A critical element in any recovery will be strengthening the foundations of a global economy, built upon U.S. worldwide security guarantees."
The campaign, which coincides with increased spending by major defense contractors for lobbying activities, comes at a critical moment for the new administration, which is focused more on getting the stimulus package passed quickly than on its precise content and on getting its key appointees confirmed and in place in the sprawling bureaucracies that make up the government.
The administration is also still putting together its fiscal year (FY) 2010 budget and is not expected to release details until next month, less than seven months before the fiscal year begins.
For now, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is insisting that the Pentagon's budget's be set at 527 billion dollars for next year, consistent with the Bush administration's estimates as to its needs for FY 2010, an eight percent increase over the current year's military budget.
That amount, which does not include the roughly 170 billion dollars Washington is spending this year on ongoing military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in what the Bush administration called the "global war on terror", already makes up more than 40 percent of the world's total military expenditures.
But, as pointed out this week by the influential Congressional Quarterly, the Pentagon's bureaucracy and hawks in think tanks and Congress are insisting that OMB's request actually amounts to a 10-percent cut in a 584-billion-dollar recommendation submitted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff last fall in an apparent attempt to pressure the incoming president into a major increase.
On Jan. 30, the far-right broadcast outlet, Fox News, quoted what it called a senior Defence official as saying that the administration was demanding a 55-billion-dollar cut in defense spending.
At that point, other voices jumped in. Max Boot, a neo-conservative military analyst at the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), asserted that Pentagon chief Robert Gates had opposed the OMB's ceiling and warned that if Obama did not overrule it, "he could be doing terrible damage not only to our armed forces but also to his carefully cultivated image of moderation."
The following day, Robert Kagan, a leading neo-conservative ideologue at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, joined the outcry in his monthly column in the Washington Post, offering five reasons why "a ten percent cut in defense spending" could have disastrous geo-political implications by signaling to U.S. enemies that "the American retreat has begun".
"At a time when people talk of trillion-dollar stimulus packages, cutting 10 percent from the defense budget is a pittance, especially given the high price we will pay in America's global position," he wrote. "...(T)his is not the time to start weakening the armed forces."
"It's pretty remarkable," said William Hartung, director of the Arms and Security Initiative at the New America Foundation (NAF). "Obama agrees to Bush's (defense budget) increase, and the neo-cons are running around saying, 'Oh, he's gutting the military'."
Hartung and other defense analysts see this latest maneuver as part of a larger campaign by the Pentagon bureaucracy and the defense industry, which anticipated growing pressure on the defense budget even before the outbreak of the current financial crisis in September, to protect their interests even at a time when the Pentagon's political leadership recognizes that huge increases in military spending they enjoyed during the Bush era are not sustainable.
Overall, military spending increased by about 60 percent since Bush took office in 2001, not including the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In addition to the apparent disinformation about the alleged "cut" in defense spending, the Pentagon's allies in the media have been pushing hard for increased military spending to be made a part of the stimulus package.
That campaign was launched in late December when Martin Feldstein, former President Ronald Reagan's chief economic adviser and an AEI fellow, argued in the Wall Street Journal for at least 30 billion dollars to expand military procurement, research, and recruitment. Such an expansion could create some 330,000 jobs, he estimated in an article entitled "Defense Spending Would Be Great Stimulus".
"Military procurement has the further advantage that almost all of the equipment and supplies that the military buys is made in the United States..." he noted. "...Because of the current very high and rising unemployment rates among young men and women," he added, "...now is also a good time for the military to increase recruiting and training."
Frank Gaffney, Jr., president of the far-right Center for Security Policy (CSP), quickly echoed that message in his weekly Washington Times column. "I have long believed it is mistake to use the defense budget as a jobs program. We should buy military hardware because it is needed for our security, not to boost employment," he wrote.
"That said, where increased employment follows from making necessary investments in our armed forces' capabilities to fight today's wars - and, no less important, tomorrow's - it would be absurd not to include the Pentagon in an economic stimulus package."
Meanwhile, the major military contractors have stepped up their lobbying efforts. According to the Wall Street Journal, three of the biggest companies - Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, and Northrop-Grumman - boosted their multi-million-dollar lobbying budgets by between 54 percent and 90 percent beginning in 2008 as it became clear that the Bush spending binge was nearing an end.
According to Hartung and other Pentagon critics, now is the critical moment for a reformist administration to begin cutting the defense budget, notably by canceling expensive conventional-weapons systems, such as the F-22 fighter jets and the V-22 Osprey aircraft that have proved both hugely expensive and of dubious utility.
"They have a chance to stop the train and start moving back in the right direction," he told IPS. "If they don't take it now, it'll just get harder down the road."
"The problem they're not getting huge public pressure to cut, whereas they are getting a lot of pressure to spend more," he said.
Jim Lobe's blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.
- Posted in
101 Comments so far
Show All"The problem [is] they're not getting huge public pressure to cut, whereas they are getting a lot of pressure to spend more," he said.
To those who sit and opine that nothing comes from speaking up, writing, or calling - here is your answer.
This is not about national security - it is about a shadow government that feeds off taxpayers for their own agendas and greed. They mock not only the ignorance of most Americans who buy into the bogus system, now they openly mock the government that was created to control them. Corporations (profit/imperialism/monopolization) tied to the ever-more-corrupt military (force/propaganda/nationalism), and the religious right (prosyletization / bigotry/)have created their own empire at the expense of the American sheeple. How many times has the "Religious Right" been caught trying to "christianize" the Iraqis and Afgans since 2003 - read about it! Or the violations of separation of church and state with Christian Zionist organizations in the military openly flouting the rule of law - AND GETTING AWAY WITH IT. (See Military Religious Freedom Foundation website, or go to AfterDowningStreet and read article entitled "Prosyletizing in the military to continue under Obama).
The amount of money the US spends on the military is obscene and in no way can be justified, unless, of course, you believe in the aims of the Project for a New American Century and the Neocon agenda. Of course, if you believe that then you also have to believe that Israel has the right to steal whatever land they want, kill as many innocents as they please, all the while thumbing their nose at international law, and with their other hand thus unencumbered, taking more and more US tax dollars behind their backs to enable them to continue with the carnage. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was more about Israeli security than US security - study who was in the Office of Special Plans in the Defense Department - and how they were tied to the Likud Party in Israel.
I watched the h.s. football signing day ceremonies yesterday - each "recruit" was given a jersey with "ARMY" Emblazoned across the front of it - WHY? Another attempt to get the masses to fall in line behind the militarization of our complete society - as if it were natural or neeeded - and exactly what the Federalist Papers and especially Jefferson in another venue warned us about - an ever-present military that will, eventually and inevitably, turn upon the very people who feed it through their blood and taxes.
The conclusion: no one that runs the shadow government has ever been held accountable for their crimes. Bush and Cheney run free. Rumsfeld still at large. The bankers who stole all your money are told they can only make a half million dollars a year while the rest of the country is dying because of their malfeasance and criminal activities. Bernie Madoff still living in a penthouse with servants after stealing $50 billion and bankrupting thousands in the process (explain that to some 18 year-old that gets caught with more than an ounce of pot and gets 5 to 10 in most southern states), 4.2 million Iraqi refugees, probably close to a million dead - life in a security state - continued war in Afghanistan - and Obama fills his cabinet with the same idiots who got all of us in this horrendous mess to begin with.
I don't believe this lie anymore; I don't believe the zealots who would send my son off to die for their greed while their child resides in leisure; I don't believe in the American dream because it doesn't exist for most - the structure of the system is rigged, the propaganda machine running full tilt, the conscience of the country dead.
Read the words of our Founding Fathers. They foresaw this centuries ago. They warned us this would happen - as it happened to them while under their form of colonialism. We are now a colony within a country - devoid of true political power, being financially raped to provide the ruling class their pleasures, and most are too ignornat to even understand their lives have no inherent worth to those now in control.
That was an excellent post, odoco. Thank you.
You wrote:
I don't believe this lie anymore; I don't believe the zealots who would send my son off to die for their greed while their child resides in leisure; I don't believe in the American dream because it doesn't exist for most - the structure of the system is rigged, the propaganda machine running full tilt, the conscience of the country dead.
It seems that sometime in the 20th Century the corpo-plutocrats managed to completely game the system, and anyone who wished to achieve any position of influence or power over the direction of the country had to first convince the corpo-plutocrats that he/she understood that it was all a racket (Smedley Butler's term), and that only fools and suckers were concerned with the welfare of the country, the common good, or the nation's security or future, even though such concerns must be repeatedly mentioned by any politician to keep the fools and suckers in the game, willing to "sacrifice for the nation."
"We are now a colony within a country - devoid of true political power, being financially raped to provide the ruling class their pleasures, and most are too ignornat to even understand their lives have no inherent worth to those now in control."
Good points and good post, odoco.
So, I wonder what we can do. It's great to understand this - and some do - but what is to be done about it?
Well, our founders had one solution - revolt. And, sometimes it works. But many times it doesn't. Often, revolts are put down with extra brutality just so we get the message. Today, the masters are well trained at putting us down. They have the money, the guns, the lawyers, and the technology to sniff us out and put us down before the embers have a chance to catch fire. Maybe we can surprise them, but we would have to be much more organized and smarter than we are.
So, again, I wonder what we can do.
...And I get back to one point: We can stop. We can refuse to play the game and pay the money that fuels all this.
The Right is very well organized, and they have done it over years with a lot of hard work and a lot of networking. We on the Left say that we are in favor of community, but how many of us work to build and strengthen community? How many are willing to work for years at building up the networks that will hold us together when the system finally fails? How many of us can simplify our lives and target our purchases to local and sustainable entities?
How many of us are willing to stop living as the colonized?
Ted: First and foremost - confront the ideologues in your own areas. It is not easy and it is not pretty, but you will be surprised at how many will come to support you if you first initiate it; Second, get the military the hell out of our schools; third, don't buy anything except essentials; fourth, begin 'community' gardens with those you know, learn to put away food, become a self-sustaining community, buy land if at all possible, and save as much money as possible, for debt equals imprisonment by the system as it now exists; fifth, EDUCATE YOUR CHILDREN. Amazingly kids understand the truth and most have not yet been jaundiced by the Extreme Right - although that is their plan - that is why they are trying so desperately to destroy and underfund (guarantee of failure)our public schools; it is also why the Right wants to replace public schools with charter schools and private schools - not for efficiency - that is complete bullshit - they want to do it so they can control the message - the curriculum - then they control what is taught and learned.
In a nutshell - citizen education is the key. That is what the Right has done for the last 30 years - either keep the citizenry ignorant, or propagandize them into believing falsehoods. Clear Channel did this at the beginning of the war. The military is now doing it by including propaganda with actual reports; Bush got caught several times putting out propaganda to the American public - which is totally illegal - and nothing happened.
BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY - NEVER, NEVER GIVE UP!
Great answers, and I agree.
I asked the questions because they need to be asked. Most Americans, even most progressive Americans, are still in a stew of denial and paralysis. They fail to make the connection between how things are and what they can personally do to change their own lives.
To address your challenges, this is what I do:
1. I challenge ideologues by writing letters and op-eds to newspapers. I have done this more times than I can count, and have been published most times. People who don't believe this does anything don't understand human behavior nor how memes change.
2. Getting the military out of schools is a good step, but not one that I'm inclined to work on. My kids are out of school, and were mostly home-schooled to boot. This is a great point, however, and I may address it in the future via #1.
3. I am working on significantly slimming down my consumptions and purchases. And, what I am buying, I'm buying as locally as possible. This is not easy, but it is doable - and, the more people do it, the more effect it will have on stopping this insane corporate system.
4. I have started a permaculture group in my town and am in the process of turning much of my yard into sustaining growth. I am also in touch with many others who see the future coming and are doing likewise. We aren't doing this in a vacuum, but are working interdependently to create a social network of folks who can rely on each other. Also, the Transition Towns movement is picking up steam, and we have started one in our town. As for debt: I was fortunate enough to be able to have a small mortgage which I was able to pay off. No debt.
5. We did the best we could to educate our kids to live right. Though our example they will hopefully be able to live in a new way. This is a key part, though, so good point.
Good posts - keep 'em coming!
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
527 billion dollars. That would sure buy a lot of homes for people.
Not only does the United States spend 50 percent of all the worlds Military spending...BUT.
West Europe spends an additional 20 percent. This means that the NATO Block is spending close to 70 percent. Throw in big time spenders like Israle and the Saudis and you have one bloc with over 80 percent of the worlds spending on arms.
(Russia spends around 5 percent and China 8 percent)
Military spending can be slashed to 80 billion and the US will be fine. The Military is the beast that keeps on taking and taking.
The US Government and by extension the people that elect them there are IRRATIONAL.
Our military spending should and must be cut. It is an absurd position for anyone to take that we need to spend more. What we do spend needs to be cut and redirected to what the military really needs and wants. Not what most of the Generals want, but what the career military want.
The V-22 Osprey aircraft is a boondoggle and I can say that from personal knowledge. Its been a contractors dream!
Ted
"The Right is very well organized, and they have done it over years with a lot of hard work and a lot of networking."
To you and others...don't make the mistake of thinking this is a right or left proposition, a Republican or Democrat fight, there are plenty of all these folks involved in this, yes even from the left. Its about money, always has been, always will be. Its the Corporations that are the problem. And the legislators that can be bought by them.
And let me agree with odoco this is not about National Security. If anything this excess spending hurts National Security. Though I of course disagree that the American Dream is no more, Even Bush and his boys couldn't kill it.
Don't count on it. Already, Gates and Petreaus (better known as Betrayus) are already working on forcing Obama to prolong the occupation in Iraq. I understand you supported the two and I sympathize with that decision because who knew what mischief those Bush plants were up to. What do you make of the idea of replacing those two?
I'd not miss Gates at all. David Petreaus I know to be a good and honorable man. A soldier that will do what he thinks is right for his country, his troops and foer the Iraqi.
If you check out what he did in 2003 with the 101st. Airbourne in Mousul, you'll understand that he is not a force first guy. Look at what he was doing there, restarting the economy, utilities, working with local leaders....I believe if he had been in charge in 2001, we would all have been better off. The Iraqui's would have been for sure.
As you can tell, I still think the little short guy is the best we've got for the job in Afganistan and I firmly believe he'll get us out sooner than anyone else. He knows there is no win in Afganistan and he is very pragmatic.
"David Petreaus I know to be a good and honorable man. A soldier that will do what he thinks is right for his country, his troops and foer the Iraqi."
I wouldn't be so sure and I think Dennis referred to this article:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/02/02-3
Of course, Petreaus looks like potatoes these days compared to the appointments of Daschle and Gregg (big time pushguy for "free" trade though I wonder how NH stands to benefit from it).
JWVerez
I don't see that as a bad thing. For all I know Obamas timeline is a bad idea. I would rather put my trust in Petreaus here than Obama. At least I know he's no tax cheat.
In fact I believe no one expected what we seem to be getting from Obama so far. There may be a bunch of folks sayimg "I told you so" here soon. And I'll answer every one of them as they deserve with "my bad" if he keeps his present course.
I expected nothing more from these Democratic slimeballs in Congress. I expected them to betray us. At least the Republicans are more honest about being crooked.
"I don't see that as a bad thing."
Petreus prolonging the timeline indefinitely not a bad idea? Whoa !
"I would rather put my trust in Petreaus here than Obama. At least I know he's no tax cheat."
I commend him on not being a tax cheat but first off, this guy was installed by Dubya as a mere yesman puppet after the previous general stood up for the truth and looking at his performance, I can't blame others for calling him BETRAYUS.
"For all I know Obamas timeline is a bad idea."
I'd say the same. 16 months to 3 years is no doubt suspicious. And as election season came closer, he kept prolonging the delay. Then again, maybe Obama and Petreus are perfect matches as those two seem hell bent on prolonging the occupation with the troops alone and don't get me started on the military contractors.
Lets see now.....
"Petreus prolonging the timeline indefinitely not a bad idea? Whoa !"
Didn't say that. And he isn't saying that either anywhere I've seen.
"this guy was installed by Dubya as a mere yesman puppet after the previous general stood up for the truth"
He is anything but a yes man and he was brought in to pull Dubya's cherstnuts out of the fire. Which he did.
"looking at his performance, I can't blame others for calling him BETRAYUS."
I don't know what you are looking at, but his performance has been outstanding as far as I can tell. Moveon's slimey protrayal was a lie.
I think they both want us out of there ASAP.
"don't get me started on the military contractors."
Be my guest! Those slimedogs deserve anything you might mention. And their corporate masters more so. (by the way, Petreus has the same opinion of contractors in a war zone )
Thomas - thanks. No, I really don't believe the dream is dead; it still obviously resides in my heart and mind with each breath I draw. Otherwise - I wouldn't be here, would I?
Got me there!!!! Point made!
If it can't happen in reality, it's a dream. Once it happens, it's no longer a dream but reality. Never give up turning a good dream into a successful reality no matter how far out of reach it may look.
"To you and others...don't make the mistake of thinking this is a right or left proposition, a Republican or Democrat fight, there are plenty of all these folks involved in this, yes even from the left."
Good point, Thomas.
The point I was trying to make is that nothing happens in a vacuum. If we (progressives, the left, whatever) want things to change for the better, we had better get to work. The Right has been hard at work filling universities and think tanks and Congress and the media for many years and what we are seeing now is the fruit of that labor.
Yes, indeed, corporations are the problem, but their voice is the Right and they have worked hard getting where they are.
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
Thanks Ted....though I'd say the Corporations are speaking fairly loudly thru some Congressmen and Senators that are supposedly left right now.
In fact, I'd say its beginning to look like the American people, left and right have few friends in Washington these days.
True, and that's what I rail about...which always brings me back to myself and these questions: How am I responsible and how can I change myself so I support this corporate/military system as little as possible?
All the great teachers have told us that change starts with ourselves.
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
If you find out....let me know! Maybe a real third party will become possible if Obama and the Congress follow their present path.
See my post above.
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
Odoco, RIGHT ON! Couldn't have said it better myself!
Can we all chip in to test a MOAB in the courtyard of the Pentagram?
That way, intelligent life on this planet might have a chance.
Sick greedy bastards. As if we need more raw military power. Screw 'em. We need smarts, not brutality...
The very rich can only continue to plunder the resources of the world through military means. Only when the rich are done away with, ie. through socialism, will this madness end.
-----------------------------------------
Remember the butchery in Gaza by the IDF.
In some ways boosting military spending ways would actually be good. Wait, hear me out. The uncontroled expense of the military is what helped to bring down many empires in history, from the sov's to the romans when the price of the army rises too high, the empire falls. So to prevent the further expansion of the american empire, a sharp rise in buying useless products would be a good thing.
Spending more money on the contractors than the soldiers would also have an effect on people who realise that the continuing favour that the rich recieve in society is detrimental to the rest of us. After all, not everyone can get away with scamming (only major corporations).
Sorry Sat, but that would be like feeding a cancer and believing it might die because of your generosity. The only possibility that it might work would be if the general population was informed enough to understand the ultimate consequences - and right now we are definitely losing that battle.
Saturnalia
I'm with odoco here. The contractors are carefully blended with the military in public reports. And spending more won't even be noticed in the current disaster of our economy. It might even be presented as job stimulas. And actually it would be compared to a lot of the spending in the Pork Pie bill now pending.
I do see your points, but still take note of what happens to nations that spend so much on the military. The states has long used the military for a Kenseyian jobs/economic stymulus - corporate welfare plan - many other courntries have done this in the past. The countries that spend too much on keeping up a 'strong' military find that the 'strength' of that military is too brittle when it's actually asked to fight a major war. (not minor colonial conflicts like Afghanistan, anything in the mid east or south east asia). While some spending on arms can have positive effects on the general economy - radar development also led to the microwave oven and better TV's for example - spending too much gets you expensive dinosaurs like the Dreadnought (the most expensive and powerful ship of its day, too bad that it was built after - cheaper - aircraft and submarines had rendered the ships obsolete).
Your carriers look awesome, but for a few hundred k's you can have missles that will sink - or damage beyond repair - something worth billions. How much has already been spent on ICBMs that are nearly useless in a war (only the side that's losing would actually launch them in a major conflict). Those fancy Hummers are too pricey for the job they're expected to accomplish.
The major reason the USSR collapsed wasn't because Reagan asked them to tear down a wall, it was because after WWII the USSR never stopped spending most of its time building more weapons at the expense of the civilian economy.
I totally agree.
"The countries that spend too much on keeping up a 'strong' military find that the 'strength' of that military is too brittle when it's actually asked to fight a major war."
This is us...and I'd include Iraq and Afganistan., We spend far to much on "junk" rather than our actual military and to the detriment of all concerned except the profiteers.
I firmly believe, would almost say I know we could cut our military budget by 40-45% and field a military force 40-45% stronger than we have now.
Uh no, military spending was unnecessary in the 1980s as USSR was already collapsing in the 1970s. Buying useless products is bad for both the buyer and the seller. Just ask the slave laborers in China and India and take a look at your mounting expenses of having to buy too often when you could have settled for long term quality albeit a bit more expensive at first.
As for contractor spending, there are more US military contractors in Iraq than there are US troops as someone pointed out on this site a while back. That's sharp contrast to Vietnam which is why despite Iraq proving to be just as bad if not worse than Vietnam, you'd never know from first glance. And don't forget that contractors are not beholden to a lot of the federal rules and often go in for big money, madness, blind "patriotism", etc ... and a lot of them grew up amoral and will even call you "unpatriotic" or even "terrorist" for standing up to these bad companies.
Eisenhower, the last GOOD republican, warned us all about the military industrial complex, and told us that this is exactly how they would act. They have been true to form. We didn't pay any attention to him, and look where it has gotten us.
We now spend more than the rest of the world combined on our "security". We involve ourselves in wars in places against countries that haven't attacked us or even threatened us. We torture people to get "information" about how they might attack us, even though the people involved are cab drivers and chefs. Our leaders lie to us to get us behind their illegal activities. And we bankrupt our children's futures so that we can feel "safe". This is disgraceful.
America is nothing but a childish place with fear mongering as it's goal. We don't make anything anymore, we have allowed ourselves to be screwed out of our lives, our self sufficiency, our futures. We USED to be interested in making things for each other, now we just go buy things made by those in other countries. Things we USED to make. Now our jobs are gone, and our factories followed them. We have more food grown in other countries, leaving ourselves vulnerable for our very existences. All so that the few and the greedy can profit.
The MI complex is just another part of this, and it's one part that MUST be shut down for us to have a life that we can sustain. So must the corporate farming sector, and the tax breaks for those who move our jobs offshore. Imagine what we could do with that $500+ Billion every year. Education for a REAL future, health care for humans instead of for profit, infrastructure repairs, it could ALL be taken care of. What is so wrong about caring about OUR country instead of wasting billions to invade and then have to rebuild other countries?
By the way , Kagan and others claiming there a proposed defense spending cut are LYING outright. Obama has not proposed ANY sort of cut. Indeed he has proposed an increase of spending of some 50 billion dollars (almost as much as the next biggest spender spends in total).
Kagan LIAR that he is refers to the Pentagon REQUEST for more spending. The Pentagon has requested some 10's of billions more and because the US Government will not spend as much as the pentagon wants, Kagan claims it a cut.
The Pentagon. A 4th branch of Government. Not only its most expensive, but its most wasteful and USELESS.
Now there's real wasteful spending the corporate media and both parties never ever want to talk about !
I think most people would rather get some money to go back to school to get a job in, say, healthcare as opposed to, say, shooting people.
But then maybe my priorities are wacked.
Hartung's comment is blatantly not true:
"The problem they're not getting huge public pressure to cut, whereas they are getting a lot of pressure to spend more," he said.
Congressmans' offices have been bombarded with cutting requests. The trouble is that $$$$ are not accompanying these requests so ergo, they ain't listening.
But I could be wrong !
527 billion dollars for next year? That is not an equitable number for a sane or healthy society. And only because I just finished reading it, Colorado Department of Child Protective Services faces a $29 million dollar budget shortage next year resulting in a hiring freeze. This country is so deranged.
And by the time you add in "Homeland Security," the CIA, the NSA, the wars funded separately from the military budget, and various "black" budgets the true figure for the military complex is like 700+ billion a year. And they say we can't "afford" high speed rail for a couple billion one time expense. :(
GWNorth any idea of a source I could check for EU defense spending please? Also, Israeli and Saudi figures if convenient. Most reliable and accurate place to go to research this please ok? And Odocco great post. Thanks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
This may be a dumb analogy but this situation reminds me of when I worked for hospice. There comes a time in the dying process, when all attempts to heal are exhausted, that the patient does whatever he/she wants, even if it means smoking or eating junk foods, whatever they wanted we gave it to them since the end was near anyway.
Let the dying empire have what it wants, maybe it will hasten it's demise and we can rebuild a sane and humane society from the ashes. I'm having my doubts as to whether we can really turn this sick patient around.
Most patients don't have nuclear weapons and supersonic jets to lash out in their tantrums with so sadly I don't think your metaphor holds water. :(
Yes, it's lucky the Soviets didn't go with a bang.
An interesting analogy, and one I'm inclined to agree with in my darkest moments.
I certainly don't think we should feed this dying patient, as it is wont to kill so many others. However, neither do I think we should indulge it in its every whim.
How's about we take another tack: Let's help this sucker die. Let's stop being its life-blood. This system needs us like the Matrix needs its human batteries. Let's band together with others and stop producing and consuming so much, and target what we do produce and consume so that it goes to each other - locally.
I wonder what a giant sounds like when it falls...
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
Okay progressives they are worried about US prestige and Ameirican jobs. Let's give them their money provided that the spending be directed to the following ends:
Navy Seabees and Army Corps of Engineers:
Tasked to build water and eco-friendly sewage treatment systems to covert polluted springs, lakes, and rivers into sources of potable water for the thirsty of the world.
Develope a system of instant interservice cooperation in the deployment of emergency shelter and storage systems for places dcvastated by floods, earthquakes, or tsunamis. Conditions are that the structures are for civillian use only and are desconstructed for redeployment once the situation is stabilized.
Army, Navy, Air Force medical personnel--
Hospital ships, MASH field hospitals, and Med-Evac personnel to be tasked to staff public health clinics and specialized care facilities treating the sick and injured of the world.
Like in the Peace Corps, we only go where we are welcome, we only do what can be agreed on by all parties involved, and once we are done we move on. Sure beats killing people and destroying things to make the world safe for multi-national corporations and our "non-negotiable way of life".
Poet
Great thought...unfortunately...we don't get to target our tax dollars, Congress does. And, as we all know, Congress is part of the MIC now.
What we do have control over is how we target our spending and consumption and who we band together with.
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
This is an idea that should be in letters to the editor all over the country, in variations every week, on placards bumper stickers... great ideas in my opinion!