We Have the Money
If Only We Didn't Waste It on the Defense Budget
There has been much moaning, air-sucking, and outrage about the $700 billion that the U.S. government is thinking of throwing away on rich New York bankers who have been ripping us off for the past few years and then letting greed drive their businesses into a variety of ditches. In fact, we dole out similar amounts of money every year in the form of payoffs to the armed services, the military-industrial complex, and powerful senators and representatives allied with the Pentagon.
On Wednesday, September 24th, right in the middle of the fight over billions of taxpayer dollars slated to bail out Wall Street, the House of Representatives passed a $612 billion defense authorization bill for 2009 without a murmur of public protest or any meaningful press comment at all. (The New York Times gave the matter only three short paragraphs buried in a story about another appropriations measure.)
The defense bill includes $68.6 billion to pursue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which is only a down-payment on the full yearly cost of these wars. (The rest will be raised through future supplementary bills.) It also included a 3.9% pay raise for military personnel, and $5 billion in pork-barrel projects not even requested by the administration or the secretary of defense. It also fully funds the Pentagon's request for a radar site in the Czech Republic, a hare-brained scheme sure to infuriate the Russians just as much as a Russian missile base in Cuba once infuriated us. The whole bill passed by a vote of 392-39 and will fly through the Senate, where a similar bill has already been approved. And no one will even think to mention it in the same breath with the discussion of bailout funds for dying investment banks and the like.
This is pure waste. Our annual spending on "national security" -- meaning the defense budget plus all military expenditures hidden in the budgets for the departments of Energy, State, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, the CIA, and numerous other places in the executive branch -- already exceeds a trillion dollars, an amount larger than that of all other national defense budgets combined. Not only was there no significant media coverage of this latest appropriation, there have been no signs of even the slightest urge to inquire into the relationship between our bloated military, our staggering weapons expenditures, our extravagantly expensive failed wars abroad, and the financial catastrophe on Wall Street.
The only Congressional "commentary" on the size of our military outlay was the usual pompous drivel about how a failure to vote for the defense authorization bill would betray our troops. The aged Senator John Warner (R-Va), former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, implored his Republican colleagues to vote for the bill "out of respect for military personnel." He seems to be unaware that these troops are actually volunteers, not draftees, and that they joined the armed forces as a matter of career choice, rather than because the nation demanded such a sacrifice from them.
We would better respect our armed forces by bringing the futile and misbegotten wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to an end. A relative degree of peace and order has returned to Iraq not because of President Bush's belated reinforcement of our expeditionary army there (the so-called surge), but thanks to shifting internal dynamics within Iraq and in the Middle East region generally. Such shifts include a growing awareness among Iraq's Sunni population of the need to restore law and order, a growing confidence among Iraqi Shiites of their nearly unassailable position of political influence in the country, and a growing awareness among Sunni nations that the ill-informed war of aggression the Bush administration waged against Iraq has vastly increased the influence of Shiism and Iran in the region.
The continued presence of American troops and their heavily reinforced bases in Iraq threaten this return to relative stability. The refusal of the Shia government of Iraq to agree to an American Status of Forces Agreement -- much desired by the Bush administration -- that would exempt off-duty American troops from Iraqi law is actually a good sign for the future of Iraq.
In Afghanistan, our historically deaf generals and civilian strategists do not seem to understand that our defeat by the Afghan insurgents is inevitable. Since the time of Alexander the Great, no foreign intruder has ever prevailed over Afghan guerrillas defending their home turf. The first Anglo-Afghan War (1838-1842) marked a particularly humiliating defeat of British imperialism at the very height of English military power in the Victorian era. The Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989) resulted in a Russian defeat so demoralizing that it contributed significantly to the disintegration of the former Soviet Union in 1991. We are now on track to repeat virtually all the errors committed by previous invaders of Afghanistan over the centuries.
In the past year, perhaps most disastrously, we have carried our Afghan war into Pakistan, a relatively wealthy and sophisticated nuclear power that has long cooperated with us militarily. Our recent bungling brutality along the Afghan-Pakistan border threatens to radicalize the Pashtuns in both countries and advance the interests of radical Islam throughout the region. The United States is now identified in each country mainly with Hellfire missiles, unmanned drones, special operations raids, and repeated incidents of the killing of innocent bystanders.
The brutal bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Pakistan's capital, Islamabad, on September 20, 2008, was a powerful indicator of the spreading strength of virulent anti-American sentiment in the area. The hotel was a well-known watering hole for American Marines, Special Forces troops, and CIA agents. Our military activities in Pakistan have been as misguided as the Nixon-Kissinger invasion of Cambodia in 1970. The end result will almost surely be the same.
We should begin our disengagement from Afghanistan at once. We dislike the Taliban's fundamentalist religious values, but the Afghan public, with its desperate desire for a return of law and order and the curbing of corruption, knows that the Taliban is the only political force in the country that has ever brought the opium trade under control. The Pakistanis and their effective army can defend their country from Taliban domination so long as we abandon the activities that are causing both Afghans and Pakistanis to see the Taliban as a lesser evil.
One of America's greatest authorities on the defense budget, Winslow Wheeler, worked for 31 years for Republican members of the Senate and for the General Accounting Office on military expenditures. His conclusion, when it comes to the fiscal sanity of our military spending, is devastating:
"America's defense budget is now larger in inflation-adjusted dollars than at any point since the end of World War II, and yet our Army has fewer combat brigades than at any point in that period; our Navy has fewer combat ships; and the Air Force has fewer combat aircraft. Our major equipment inventories for these major forces are older on average than any point since 1946 -- or in some cases, in our entire history."
This in itself is a national disgrace. Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on present and future wars that have nothing to do with our national security is simply obscene. And yet Congress has been corrupted by the military-industrial complex into believing that, by voting for more defense spending, they are supplying "jobs" for the economy. In fact, they are only diverting scarce resources from the desperately needed rebuilding of the American infrastructure and other crucial spending necessities into utterly wasteful munitions. If we cannot cut back our longstanding, ever increasing military spending in a major way, then the bankruptcy of the United States is inevitable. As the current Wall Street meltdown has demonstrated, that is no longer an abstract possibility but a growing likelihood. We do not have much time left.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
25 Comments so far
Show AllDo you now how much oil product we ship out of the U.S. daily? It is the third leg of the bankruptcy game "we" are playing.
Saw an awesome bumper sticker the other day:
"The war isn't going to end, because those who are paying the politicians are making a killing on all the killing."
.
I’ll say it again…
We needed Ralph Nader as President in 2000.
We needed Ralph Nader as President in 2004.
We NEED Ralph Nader as President in 2008.
Never before as we do now
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
Thank you, Mr Chalmers.
This is the elephant in the room that almost no one is talking about. Both candidates would increase the defense budget. God help us all.
Listen to Chomsky. Let the people decide this with a binding referendum:
ni4d.us
We could have a real government:
--Twice the health care at 1/3 the cost.
--More jobs to go around, and 1/10 the prison population.
--People who understood that drugs were bad, instead of a drug war.
--A world with very few enemies to deal with, due to worldwide prevention of the underlying reasons for corrupt and inept dictatorships of all stripes.
--No coal burning, plus an effective program for extracting carbon from the atmosphere to under mountains where it belongs.
--Unbought elections where your one vote really counts, and you know it.
--A dedication to green invention and progress, not to the facade of green invention to greenwash for the public.
PS commondreams is slow as molassass. Their slowness often causes multiple posts of the same comment.
It should also be pointed out that both major candidates wish not to decrease but to increase the already bloated military budget which could certainly be spent on far better purposes in this country than for reasons of aggression.
My take on this has nothing to do with two lame narcissists. This is really about:
a. lack of a transparent, elected representation
b. Incompetent 4th estate, revealing meaningful information, allowing
c. Corrosive, manipulative Congressional, Executive behavior to further corporatist/militaristic expansion of labor cost reduction, control of energy resources, etc.
Did anyone notice how they tried to quietly get the vote on the Defense appropriations out of the way last week before this vote came up?
They just passed a Pentagon budget of over $600 billion dollars. Included in that is another $70 billion for the wars.
To me, they obviously had to do this to avoid the obvious problems that would arise if they did this after the bailout. To many people might ask the obvious question of "why don't we pay for the bailout by cutting all this 'defense' spending that we do?"
And that's certainly the question they don't want us asking.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
So true!
Samson
Can one assume that McCain and Obama once again voted to continue funding the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq?
"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato
Meaning those who have "died" to necrocratic paradigm - nothing more.
Excellent article by Chalmers Johnson on an issue that has been woefully neglected by the mainstream media. As he correctly notes, cut the military budget and get those troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq as quickly as possible. If not, the citizens of those countries will continue to [justifiably] foster resentment and hatred against the United States.
Erroll,
No argument. We funded and armed the Taliban and Al Quaida against the same colonialist stupidity of the Russians. Only cretins repeat, repeat, repeat..."
Wars are fought for a variety of reasons, none of which are justifiable to anyone but those who profit from them.
The main result of war is fear - fear keeps the ruling elite and their puppet government in control and makes for a complient population. Those who see through the con are cast as enemies of the state and are persecuted by those who are blinded by the brainwashing of the politicians and media.
War is wrong.
War is keeping us stuck in a mindset of Lowered-Expectations as an obscene money is spent on the research and manufacturing of weapons which only bring fear, death and destruction. The ruling elite, who control the military-industrial complex are the only people who are happy as they not only profit every time a soldier or terrorist fires a weapon or drops a bomb but they also have people living in fear. Does anyone else find these people are sick and the whole military-industrial complex a disease?
The only thing war creates is more hate which leads to more fear, death and destruction.
We have been lied to by the political tools of the ruling elite time and time again about everything yet so many of us are still hoping the next politican in line for President will be better - how dumb is this?
If we can stop war and the funding of the sick military-industrial-complex and put money and resources to the good of humanity just think of what can be achieved.
It's time to wake up and realise that we are not free but we can be if we just take control of our own lives and not rely on others. We have the power.
We are all one.
peace and love
all is reality...there is no government
Excellent post!
END THE WARS! Both Obama and McCain say "We can win!! Send more money!" They both agree on the bailout too.
We are broke. Don't they know that? We don't have any more money. A billion here, a billion there---pretty soon it is real money. But not in our case. When the Feds just start printing more money backed by a foul smell, it won't be real money. It will be worthless.
Damn it Americans!! Turn off that boob tube. They are lying to you!! Think for yourself and don't vote for either Democrats or Republicans. They are corrupt to the bone!!!
"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato
6% INCREASE in military spending! We need to cut military spending at least in half! And do we really feel any "safer"? Do we care at all about the lives lost, the families destroyed, the anger that will fuel terrorists to more desperate acts? Do we recognize that our imperial aggression IS terrorism?
Poet's outline for a great stump speech for anyone who would use it:
What could we do with 1 trillion dollars?
With one trillion dollars we could maintain social security's solvencyt into the indefinate future or at least until we readjusted the taxes to make the uber wealthy pay their fair share.
With one trillion dollars we could commence the repair of out crumbling infrastructure: safe bridges, effective water and waste treatment, rebuilding the Gulf Coast destruction in New Orleans, Galveston, Houston and everywehere else with such needs.
With one trillion dollars we could develope alternative energy technology, make sure all citizens had adaquate health care, and provide financial assistance for students to attend college.
The current administration has squandered one trillion dollars over the past 6 ye4ars to fight two pointless wars of agression in the middle east. We can and must do better.
Poet
First of all, we have no money period. Sure, we're borrowing it like crazy but we really don't have any of our own. Now don't get me wrong. I do believe that there's plenty of cutting down on the defense spendings to be done. However, there's no point in misusing that money to bail out Wall Street who is just as bad. As a matter of fact, what we're really doing is DOUBLE BORROWING altogether. There is no point in spending on Wall Street or excess defenses when there is no money to begin with. I believe in reasonable defense spending but I also believe that attention deserves to be paid to Main Street without which there would be no Wall Street. It used to be that Wall Street was stabilized by giving Main Street a chance to catch up and earn well which in turn provided a great opportunity for investing well. Unfortunately, Wall Street wanted to push things a bit too far but knew they couldn't win so they needed culture war distractions so they could sneak by. Well guess what? The liberals let this happen in the 1960s while some for good reasons such as civil rights but the conservatives took the idea further on up. For two decades, Main Street has been bait and switched into voting on personal issues such as guns and abortion which pollsters in deep red states including mine (TX) ask mainly about. In the meantime, the politicians sell out to Wall Street which is their real base.
FDR used to be honest about raising taxes to pay for the war. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan, and Bush II were dishonestly pushing for tax cuts for the wealthy and Wall Street while expecting the costs of Vietnam and Iraq to pay for themselves.
Let's call for a moratorium on bailing out both Wall Street and the war please.
Freedom Isn't Free...*wink*
It isn't dom, either.
No, it's on sale now at your local congressional office, and belongs to the highest bidder.
Actually, freedom is a state of mind that only the strength of the individual will allow any transgression. Pass all the un Constitutional laws you want, arrest all the people you want, tap all the phones, spy, search without warrants, blacklist deprive of life liberty, happiness, a job, a man his children and career, a woman her children and career, people their homes, when they realize there is no representation:
there will be no going back. Half of 320 million people is...160 million intelligent human beings who KNOW what freedom is in their minds, have witnessed what it is not, what has been taken from them, here. Human nature being what it is, I don't think Iraq would hold a candle to 160 million insurrectionists in this country. The barely 2 million man military would fold like soft cheese, out of respect. An aircraft war in a country this large would be next to meaningless, when compared to air power against Vietnam, Iraq, etc. if Americans had the will.
We all know they don't, so... Bush jacks off in the Oval Office because his wife reminds him of his mother while fantasizing conquering Disney Land.