Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

It's Time for a Trillion-Dollar Tag Sale at the Pentagon

By Nick Turse, Tomdispatch.com. Posted October 29, 2008.


When we want to get serious about a long-term bailout strategy, we'll start dismantling the American empire and Pentagon programs.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Nick Turse

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Wars, bases, and money. The three are inextricably tied together.

In the 1980s, for example, American support for jihadis like Osama bin Laden waging war on (Soviet) infidels who invaded and constructed bases in Afghanistan, a Muslim land, led to rage by many of the same jihadis at the bases (U.S.) infidels built in the Muslim holy land of Saudi Arabia in the 1990s. That, in turn, led to jihadis like bin Laden declaring war on those infidels, which, after September 11, 2001, led the Bush administration to launch, and then prosecute, a Global War on Terror, often from newly built bases in Muslim lands. Over the last seven years, the results of that war have been particularly disastrous for Iraqis and Afghans. Sizable numbers of Americans, however, are now beginning to suffer as well. After all, their hard-earned taxpayer dollars have been poured into wars without end, leaving the country deeply in debt and in a state of economic turmoil.

In his 1988 State of the Union message, President Ronald Reagan called the jihadis in Afghanistan "freedom fighters." They were, of course, fighting the Soviet Union then. He, too, pledged eternal enmity against the Soviet Union, which he termed an "evil empire." For years, conservatives have claimed that Reagan not only won his Afghan War, but by launching an all-out arms race, which the economically weaker Soviet Union couldn't match, bankrupted the Soviets and so brought their empire down.

While that version of history may be disputed, today, it is entirely possible that one of Reagan's freedom fighters, Osama bin Laden, actually returned the favor by perfecting the art of financially felling a superpower. While Reagan ran up a superpower-sized tab to outspend the Soviets, bin Laden has done it on the cheap. Essentially for the cost of box cutters and flight training, he got the Bush administration to spend itself into penury, without a superpower in sight.

Since bin Laden's supreme act of economic judo in 2001, the U.S. military has spent multi-billions of tax dollars on a string of bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, failed wars in both countries, and a failed effort to make good on George W. Bush's promise to bring in bin Laden "dead or alive." Despite this record, the Pentagon still has a success option in its back pocket that might help bail out the American people in this perilous economic moment. It could immediately begin to auction off its overseas empire posthaste. To head down this road, however, U.S. military leaders would first have to take a brutally honest look at the real costs, and the real utility, of their massively expensive weapons systems and, above all, those bases.

Today, the Pentagon acknowledges 761 active military "sites" in foreign countries -- and that's without bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, and certain other countries even being counted. This "empire of bases," as Chalmers Johnson has noted, "began as the leftover residue of World War II," later evolving into a Cold War and post-Cold War garrisoning of the planet.

With those bases came a series of costly wars in Korea in the 1950s, Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s, and the Persian Gulf in the early 1990s. An extremely conservative estimate of their cost by the Congressional Research Service -- $1 trillion (in 2008 dollars) -- tops the present economic bailout. Add in brief cut-and-run flops like Lebanon in 1983 and Somalia, from 1992-1995, as well as now-forgotten hollow victories in places like the island of Grenada and Panama, and you tack on billions more with little to show for it.

Since 2001, the Bush administration's Global War on Terror (including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) has cost taxpayers more than the recent bailout -- more than $800 billion and still climbing by at least $3.5 billion each week. And the full bill has yet to come due. According to Noble Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University professor Linda Bilmes, the total costs of those two wars could top out between $3 trillion and $7 trillion.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: defense spending, bailout

Nick Turse is the associate editor and research director of Tomdispatch.com. His first book, The Complex: How the Military Invades Our Everyday Lives, an exploration of the new military-corporate complex in America, was recently published by Metropolitan Books. His website is Nick Turse.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The best there is on Defense Spending : Nick Turse
Posted by: mmckinl on Oct 29, 2008 12:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And if Obama has any brains he will invite Nick to a sitdown even before he sits in the Oval Office.But I don't see this happening, and as was pointed out in the article Obama has already committed to even more troops.

What all thinking Americans need to do is keep the pressure on the Democrats to reduce military spending by at least 10% a year for at least 5 years. We must reduce spending by at least 50% or go bankrupt.

Maybe some good will come out of this financial crisis and that is that we will commit to dismantling our empire of bases while junking cold war and space weapons programs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kellogg, Brown and Root, LOGCAP, etc... more of the same.
Posted by: gunboat diplomat on Oct 29, 2008 2:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
KBR is the no-bid Army contractor, sometimes called "Kill, Burn and Loot" (hey, it rhymes) and they made the news recently...
KBR in Iraq

"The Defense Contract Management Agency, the Pentagon agency in charge of supervising contractors in Iraq, determined that KBR, the firm based in Houston that provides virtually all basic services for the U.S. military in both Iraq and Afghanistan, has been guilty of "serious, contractual noncompliance" in Iraq, the officials said..."

"KBR, previously a subsidiary of Halliburton, the oil company once run by Dick Cheney before he became vice president, has had a virtual monopoly on military services contracts in Iraq since the 2003 invasion and has received nearly $25 billion in business in the war zone."

That article is a bit sanitized, as it leaves out the real details:

During just one six-month period - August 2006 through January 2007 - at least 283 electrical fires destroyed or damaged American military facilities in Iraq, including the military's largest dining hall in the country, documents obtained by The New York Times show. Two soldiers died in an electrical fire at their base near Tikrit in 2006, the records note, while another was injured while jumping from a burning guard tower in May 2007.

The problem is not so much with "the Pentagon" as it is with various career military officers, Senators, White House and State officials, and defense contractors, who collaborate together to continue the cycle of ridiculous military expenditures.

The career military officers get paid off with lucrative corporate board positions after they retire, the Senators and Representatives get juicy military contracts for their home states and hefty campaign contributions, and the defense contractors get guaranteed profits on their no-bid, cost-plus contracts.

Lieberman is a great example - he's the pet of United Technologies, of missile shield defense fame ($183,000 in contributions), who was his top sponsor from 2003-2008 (opensecrets.org). Thus, Lieberman tries to get permission to sell these bogus systems to Poland, etc. Incidentally, his next biggest donor is Purdue Pharma, makers of hillbilly heroin (oxycontin). And so it goes: legalized bribery in action.

That's why the U.S. military budget is $500 billion per year, while the next nearest national military has a budget of around $50 billion. The money certainly isn't going to the grunts, who make hardly enough to survive. Instead, it goes to bogus missile defense programs and other cash hogs for Lockheed, Boeing, etc.

This doesn't make us safer or stronger. It ensures grotesque profits for a few, so it's been maintained by the politicians in Congress and the White House for decades now - and it leads to rampant abuse in the Senate - Stevens and the other publicly identified crooks are just the tip of a vast iceberg of corruption in the U.S. government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Death, Inc. Posted by: socialpsych
Never again allow an Israeli
Posted by: weathered on Oct 29, 2008 3:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to run the books at the biggest cash pot on the Planet.
Who signed off on that should be jailed for collusion/fraud and breech of trust.

Thank you Nick Turse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Do You Mean...... Posted by: gellero1
» What Israel hates most? Posted by: weathered
Sounds Like a Plan
Posted by: Tom Degan on Oct 29, 2008 4:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America could have been a paradise. But for all of the cash we have thrown at the military industrial complex.

The Twentieth was the American Century. Contrary to anything the assholes at PNAC might think, this will not be the "NEW" American Century. Get used to the idea. We cannot continue to waste so huge a portion of our national treasure in the military.

Our national pupose, from this day forward, should not to be number one in the world. Our national purpose should be to survive. To function.

Tom Degan
DEGAN LOVES AMERICA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» National Purpose Posted by: socialpsych
» RE: National Purpose Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: National Purpose Posted by: john mont
» Please stop making sense Posted by: weathered
» RE: Sounds Like a Plan Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: Sounds Like a Plan Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Sounds Like a Plan Posted by: mjglow
» RE: Sounds Like a Plan Posted by: Lauren
Stop The WAR MACHINE! Bring the TROOPS Home!
Posted by: Ottomatic on Oct 29, 2008 5:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Shut down all the Foreign Military Bases.
Close the Propaganda arm of the NSA.
Stop all Nuclear Development and Testing.
Sell all the armaments in Iraq to the Iraqis.
Put the Armed services into a purely defensive posture.
Reverse all Privatization of our Government and Military.
Stop the revolving door int he Pentagon and Legislature.
No Arms in Space.
Stop the: Military Media Banking Complex!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Messiah Posted by: gellero1
» RE: The Messiah Posted by: maxpayne
Pathetic
Posted by: RedFoxOne on Oct 29, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think its pretty pathetic when it boils right down to it. Pathetic indeed. Way to go there Dictator Bush!

Jiff
Privacy Center

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pentagon has stolen trillions
Posted by: 911FalseFlag on Oct 29, 2008 6:08 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
congressional hearings at which congressperson Cynthia McKinney questioned a Pentagon representative about the missing trillions of dollars, she was given no answer. If she cannot get an answer, you when I will never get a straight answer from the people who have taken over his government. Namely, the military-industrial oil private central banking complex.

There is a small piece from one of the articles on my website which is www.911inside job.net. there is a Google function on my website. Just plug in "Pentagon trillions" and it will find this article and many other articles regarding this on my website.


Dov Zakheim, former Bush appointee was Pentagon Comptroller from May 4, 2001 to March 10, 2004. At that time he was unable to explain the disappearance of $1 trillion dollars. Actually, nearly three years earlier, Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10, 2001 that an audit discovered $2.3 trillion was also missing from the Pentagon books. That story, as I mentioned, was buried under 9-11’s rubble. The two sums disappeared on Zakheim’s watch.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Systems Planning Corp site Posted by: dustdevil
» Right....... Posted by: gellero1
» Who's looking for them? . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» SPC???? Posted by: gellero1
» The pentagon didn't steal shit Posted by: hurricane hugo
Investigate 9/11!!!
Posted by: drhibbart on Oct 29, 2008 6:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Below is the F.B.I. most wanted poster for Usama Bin Laden. Notice how there is no mention of 9/11 anywhere? THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH EVINDENCE TO CHARGE HIM, BUT THEY HAVE ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO INVADE 2 SOVEREIGN COUNTRIES? This was taken from the FBI's own website www.fbi.gov if you want to take a look for yourself. The War on Terror is based on lies, 100% lies. Millions are dead or displaced, wars are being fought, our personal liberty is under attack from our own government, and the man they say is responsible for it all is not even wanted in connection with September 11. INVESTIGATE 9/11!!!


MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; CONSPIRACY TO MURDER U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH

USAMA BIN LADEN




Aliases: Usama Bin Muhammad Bin Ladin, Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin, The Prince, The Emir, Abu Abdallah, Mujahid Shaykh, Hajj, The Director


DESCRIPTION

Date of Birth Used: 1957 Hair: Brown
Place of Birth: Saudi Arabia Eyes: Brown
Height: 6'4" to 6'6" Sex: Male
Weight: Approximately 160 pounds Complexion: Olive
Build: Thin Citizenship: Saudi Arabian
Language: Arabic (probably Pashtu)
Scars and Marks: None known
Remarks: Bin Laden is left-handed and walks with a cane.


CAUTION

Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world.


REWARD

The Rewards For Justice Program, United States Department of State, is offering a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to the apprehension or conviction of Usama Bin Laden. An additional $2 million is being offered through a program developed and funded by the Airline Pilots Association and the Air Transport Association.


SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ARMED AND DANGEROUS

IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS PERSON, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI OFFICE OR THE NEAREST AMERICAN EMBASSY OR CONSULATE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WHO CARES ABOUT THE "EVIDENCE" Posted by: gellero1
awesome illustration (outline of the nation filled with weapons)
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Oct 29, 2008 6:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
awesome illustration (outline of the nation filled with weapons)!
can you guys upload a full page high res copy of that so i can download it ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a waste of funds that could go to PEOPLE
Posted by: solitarysherlockian on Oct 29, 2008 6:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Without a doubt the pissing away of monies that should go to the people of America via the Pentagon's spending bit by bit makes America less secure day by day. And then the desire to USE the toys the Pentagon gets--in real war, secret war and any war- is just too tempting for the boys and girls in uniform. Dismantle the whole thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"over my dead body!"
Posted by: zooeyhall on Oct 29, 2008 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"we'll start dismantling the American empire and Pentagon programs"

Yeah...sure

Just try to close down some of these bases and listen to the screaming and the political maneuvering. First, you have to deal with the uproar from the local yokels and businesses who make money from having a nearby military base. Then from the people who have good-paying Federal civilian jobs in support of these bases.

Then you got the congressmen who got these bases in their constituentcy in return for some politcal favor.

I've seen it happen. I live in Nebraska and there was an attempt some years ago to close a couple of National Guard supply depots. Two of them were located in towns of less then 20,000 out in the friggin' middle of nowhere. Bless my soul you should have seen the uproar and the fuss that was made--mostly by the locals. The depots are still here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "over my dead body!" Posted by: Lauren
» RE: "over my dead body!" Posted by: socialpsych
Not Funny
Posted by: madmac10 on Oct 29, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some of the suggestions in here did cause a chuckle, but most raised an eyebrow at best. Maybe it is the tenor of the times that keep these jokes from being funny.

Perhaps the grisly irony that the price of armaments is kept prohibitively high by the American defense budget keeps me from appreciating this. Perhaps the knowledge that certain corners of the world deserve and beg for our security reminds me that nobody in their right mind is going to consider draconian cutbacks. In the end, however, since much of the economy (including my profession) depends on contracts that are not extremely greedy or corrupt, I dearly hope that this article is a joke.

Not a joke? Consider how entrenched is the belief that war's good for the economy. While I pray that the coming bad times will test that outmoded superstition out, I also hope that the equally fallacious ideal of an pacifist, isolationist U.S. will too. I, for one will forever cling to the notion that American power can be a force for positive planetary change merely out of respect for my grandparents.

Then again, all in all, perhaps it has been the past eight years of surreal foreign and military policy that sees this discussion as extreme. I admit I might not be used to the sound of moderation. After all, if we approach this issue with intelligence and experience, then we can make more reasonable decisions. If intellectually curious, dedicated professionals attend to it with transparency and diligence, we can weather the challenges ahead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not Funny Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Not Funny Posted by: madmac10
Remember the Peace Dividend?
Posted by: curiousdwk on Oct 29, 2008 7:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even staunch Republicans have to admit that the performance of the Budget under Clinton was amazing. And the reason? Remember the Peace Dividend? We found out we didn't have to spend billions for defense. We still don't. Why are so many countries that spend so little on defense just as secure (and yet wealthier) than we are? The defense budge doesn't need to be as expensive as it is.

How can we handle the financial problem and still provide more benefits to those who really need it? Cut the defense budget.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: emember the Peace Dividend? Posted by: tdterry1999
» You make a good point but ... Posted by: tommy_slothrop
At our own peril.......
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Oct 29, 2008 7:44 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Way back when Eisenhower was leaving office, he warned against the military industrial complex! We as a nation have forgotten that at our own peril! The leaders of this country over the last 30 years, from both sides of the isle appear to have no problem whipping this country into the positions that they want by claims of "nationalism, country, honor"! The truth is that no one wants to touch the Military-Industrial-Complex, which has grown to such proportions-no one even knows!

While we are fighting two wars (badly, and with no plans) with "high tech" equipment, the people that we are fighting are using "low tech" weapons! What we really need in this moment is someone that is willing to realistically tackle the Pentagon budget! While the "Pentagon" gets dramatic increases year after year, for weapons that still haven't proven their worth (Star Wars anyone), our domestic programs continue to be slashed! And yet that is separate funding from our troops!

What's needed, as we need to rethink and start to retool our energy, environmental, and job infrastructure, maybe some of that "DOD" money desperately needs to be diverted and those companies need to transition to those areas that their technology can really be useful! If the last 8 years have not convinced us that war really isn't the answer, than what have we learned! I'm just as willing to fight for the right cause as the next person; what I am unwilling to do is: (1)fight based on lies, (2)fight because some corporation feels the need to steal some other countries resources, (3)fight because the idiots in charge have supported another brutal dictator and the people of that country are now rising up and demanding their rights, (4)fight because of someone elses ideology based on hubris!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reagan's Puppet masters gave birth to Bin Laden
Posted by: Purple Girl on Oct 29, 2008 8:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and so did John McCain. In Fact both nurtured Saddam also.
And Now they are trying to put their 'Plagues' back in Pandora's box.Wash the Blood of their hands, by spilling more blood.
John McCain still clung to the Term '80's Afghani Freedom fighters ' when talking in retrosepct to how Americans Help other around the World....AT the 2nd Debate!!!!
9/11 Was a Direct result of the Policies of the Reagan Adminsitration- yet no one in the Media has the Balls to Say it!Our Oil Crisis, Our economic meltdown and our loss of Constittuional rights lead straight back to Ronny and His Puppet masters. Who are those blood soaked footprints from...You can follow them right to Cheney's Office!
Those Of US who were alive, conscious and have refused to drink the laced Koolaid since,KNOW WHO's 'Chicken came Home to Roost' on 9/11. WE Knew it in the '80's. Infact many of US were concerned Reagan would spark WW3- He was sure Trying hard (increased military spending,'Star Wars'!!!)
We needn't hunt down Bin laden his makers are within our grasps. He is just a product of their TREASON, and they are making more like him every day...Once again funneling money to radical groups, supplying them not only with arms but Glory Stories for their Resumes andrecuritment efforts.
And all this Started when those Oil corps who fly our flag,but have no Allegience to US made contracts with Saudi's et al to eliminate the competiton.And Now they are eyeing Iran, Venzula, African nations....It is not th eCave Dwelling 6 ft dialysis Patient who Threatens Our national and international Secruity it is CheneyCorp!Why did th eIranians take our cititzens Hostage 30 yrs ago, becasue they knew WHO had seized control of the US.
Bin laden did not Target the citizens of this country he hit the Military Industrial Complex!Money, Might and Policy.
If you wanted to truely Terrorize Americans you'd go to where they frequent...Malls, amusement parks, Night clubs...If you 'hated US for our freedoms' wouldn't you target the symbol of it? Like Our Lady Liberty?
I'm not afraid of the 'Monster' I'm afraid of it's creator and he is still sitting in the VP office, the Real Terroist of The United States of America!He's breathing life into More 'Bin Ladens'and 'Saddams' everyday!Adn through the Destruciton of th e'Village' this madman has Seized the Country, our freedoms, Our rights, our economic stability and Our future.
Dick Cheney and his 'Igors' must be prosecuted to the full extent of the Law for Treason, War crimes and Crimes against Humanity!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pentagon is requesting a record-breaking budget
Posted by: fanny666 on Oct 29, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The U.S. military wants an increase of $57 billion in the 2010 budget, a 13.5 percent increase over this year’s $514.3 billion budget.


It should be noted that Obama is not good on the issue of cutting military spending.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» LOL Posted by: gellero1
» RE: LOL Posted by: fanny666
Saving Trillions and adding Democracy and National Security
Posted by: Pop on Oct 29, 2008 10:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good writing. I wish that you would consider doing an artical on the CIA which is allowed to operate in the dark where there is absolutely no meaningful oversight. I personally feel that the CIA should be totally disbanded and not replaced with another world's largest and most feared terrorist organization.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pentagon spending was moderated under Clinton I'll admit unlike Raygun and Bush II.
Posted by: maxpayne on Oct 29, 2008 11:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interestingly, the Pentagon did not fare so badly under Clinton's 8 years when it spent less compared to Raygun and Bush II. I hope Obama wakes up and moderates Pentagon spending even if he has to risk his life to do so and he better be armed and bulletproof while at it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Clinton cowardice Posted by: gellero1
America's Weakness is it's economy!
Posted by: Doyle Wheeler on Oct 29, 2008 11:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally someone is saying what I've been saying since 9/11 Bin Laden missed his chance to bring the country down in 2001 when he paralyzed the American economy on 9/11 and the two weeks following it.

A trillion dollars went down the drain. If he'd followed his first attack with even small attacks every few weeks for several months the American economy would have collapsed.

Now we have let Bush spend our economy into near total collapse. We are one big disaster away from a never ending nightmare.

Bush has with McCain's help conducted the largest distribution of wealth in the shortest amount of time in the worlds history.
Where has most of that money gone?

To Bush cronies and big supports! Chaney's former company alone will receive before the end o this year is over 300 billion dollars!

Here is an idea lets elect Obama and give him a filabuster proof Senate and house of Representatives. If he has not vastly improved the situation within four years, I don't mean fix everything. Because it will take ten to twelve years to fix the damage Bush has done. But if he doesn't get us headed in the right way then we can toss them out.

But we need to stop this grid lock in Washington and work hard toward bring this country back from the brink of economic melt down!
Vote a straight Democratic ticket frankly its our only chance!

Bush and Chaney should be indited prosecuted as War Criminals an War profiteers!
But hey these are just my thoughts and I've been prodicting where we were headed since 9/11 2001 and friends I'm very said to say I've been spot on!
Now I'm sounding the alarm that if we elect McCain we will be involved in a war with either Iran, North Korea, or Russia within one year. Frankly one more war will spell a total defeat of this country and it's economy will never recover.

We need to put money into our crumbling infrastructure which will employ hundreds of thousands of people generating hundreds of billion of dollars in new tax revenue plus it will stimulate our economy and that leads to more jobs more taxes and an America that can recover.

Keep pouring billion into wars we'll never win and we'll lose this country! Think about it people!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» DUH !! Posted by: gellero1
» RE: DUH !! Posted by: maxpayne
» Bush murdered Posted by: jon B
Cost-plus contracts versus fixed management price contracts
Posted by: PaulK on Oct 29, 2008 11:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
California stopped selling cost-plus electricity in the 1970s. The state's total electric use, compared to the rest of the country, has dropped 30% or more since then.

Cost-plus electricity means that if the utility builds solid gold poles to put the wires on, it can charge ratepayers 114% of the cost of those poles. So why not gouge the ratepayers? The more you spend, the more you make!

Cost-plus weapons contracts mean that if you run 100% over budget, you double the company's profits!

The California solution is to pay a weapons manufacturer a fixed management price. They can run over budget, but they can't make any money.

I can say more, but one gold brick at a time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Cost Plus is Socialism Posted by: gellero1
Monaco needs seven aircraft carriers to feel safe
Posted by: PaulK on Oct 29, 2008 11:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Monaco is surrounded by powerful neighbors, is it not? The solution for Monaco is seven carrier groups.

Monaco may require this extra measure of absolute safety, but Monaco is not about to get what it needs to feel terribly secure, is it?

Perhaps we need to properly redefine safety in this world. In practice, Monaco doesn't give a hoot about its national defense, except for occasionally hauling a few drunken French and Italian tourists back over the national border.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wrong about Monaco Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Wrong about Monaco Posted by: maxpayne
» Pas Moi Posted by: gellero1
What's not mentioned in the article
Posted by: Levon on Oct 29, 2008 11:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's not mentioned is that conventional war is obsolete. No country is going to invade the US. what the Iraq war proved is that even with a well trained, modern equipped military the outcome in Iraq is still not certain and will probably not end in favor of the US. The events in Iraq prove that military force is no guarantee of success. the Russians and Chinese may well declare war upon the US but it will not be a military war but an economic and social war. By wisely using their financial power and cultivating their citizens by providing education and maintaining the health of their populations these countries could very well prove that the American model of government/business is outdated. Armies are expensive and as history has shown when empires spend too much on them they tend too have an opposite effect - which is to weaken the country and increase insecurity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Arrogant bastards
Posted by: willymack on Oct 29, 2008 2:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bushco, including its militaty cadre, are nothing but an all-powerful mob, similar to the cosa nostra in its heyday. How else can you explain the in-your-face distain displayed by turdblossom who's repeadely refused to appear before Congress,even when subpoenaed to do so, and the Pentagon breezily refusing to explain the disappearance of billions of dollars of taxpayer money? The bushies need to be slapped down for many reasons, including these.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Messiah Posted by: gellero1
» RE: The Messiah Posted by: maxpayne
» Mr. Nader Posted by: gellero1
It's called STREAMLINING, Stupid!
Posted by: larryfhilton on Oct 29, 2008 2:42 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again our author argues extremist absurdities and shows his total disconnect from reality. His positions are those of total isolationism, a doctrine that was shown to be naively wrongheaded by WWII.
What can be done, and MUST be done if we are to survive economically, is to have a bipartisan commission go through that list of 700+ overseas bases and designate 20-30% of them as redundant and close them, then do it again in 8 years, all in the name of STREAMLINING. We did it with bases here at home, and we can do it with all those far more expensive overseas bases. Do the same with all the new programs for more General's Toys (it is far too late to stop the F-22) and we might tame the military-industrial complex without endangering our security.
As far as Iraq goes, we owe it to the tens of thousands of Iraqis we have displaced to turn over all our bases to them for housing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Housing?? Posted by: gellero1
nvannes
Posted by: nvannes on Oct 29, 2008 4:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I was in the military (late 60's) we were told by our seniors to grossly under-estimate inventory as a guarantee that we would have an ever increasing budget for the following year. Not particularly patriotic I would say. Another expression we got a big kick out of back then, "Vietnam might not be the best war but it's the ONLY war we got." In other words, the only opportunity for more chest medals and promotion. Leave it to the military to figure out a way to keep making and fighting more wars. Well, I gotta tell you, seems to me the rest of the world (not to mention our own country)is getting wise to our fear mongering. This War for Peace just doesn't get it anymore, plus it's taking us down the toilet, plus it's always the poor, never the rich, who end up fighting. And you can't hardly say it's for democracy anymore, unless you want to clarify it, the new Bush type democracy, with torture, wire tapping and no habeus corpus. Best oxymoron ever: "military intelligence." Tell your reps no more war. No more pre-emptive strikes that only provoke and cause war. No more clandestine raids as in Syria where, like terrorists we can't admit to our aggressiveness. Bush has created enough hatred on this planet for the next five generations. In the words of the great John Lennon, "GIVE PEACE A CHANCE."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Should we Intervene?? Posted by: gellero1
» Nah..........let them die Posted by: gellero1
» Thank you for your Honesty Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Should we Intervene?? Posted by: aussidawg
(6) MORE DAYS
Posted by: stopthemaddness2 on Oct 29, 2008 4:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just (6) more days.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Collective insanity of US "defense" spending
Posted by: Garvagh on Oct 29, 2008 7:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bravo! What possible sense does it make, for 4% of the world's population to spend nearly as much on armaments as the other 96% combined? This is collective insanity, brought to us by the military-industrial complex.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No Power, No Justice.
Posted by: douglashoyt on Oct 29, 2008 8:11 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article assumes that the American citizen has political power through it's operational systems.

That the system is little influenced by the citizen, is never seriously questioned.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The MIC is socialist
Posted by: jon B on Oct 30, 2008 8:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Military Industrial Complex is just one huge socialist program. With all the presidential race talk of socialism, we can see that the mass of dollars going to the MIC is nothing but pro-war politicians version of socialism. Redistribution of wealth to the corporations that feed off the government teat. And so much of it is nothing but busy work or used to build weapons for losing wars.

Consider Bush trying to place missile defense into a few Eastern European countries. The "rationale" is that they need to defend themselves from Iran! That unusual scenario is the excuse?

No, what it really is...is a payback to the corporations that built the missile defense systems. And to think, the systems are not even reliable.

What we got going in the US is crony socialism. Pay off with tax dollars the defense contractors to build useless weapons and then our government pays off other nations to put them in their country. The cronyism of course comes from the politicians (the ones on the armed service committees predominantly) that get their campaign contributions and support from the defense industry. Can anyone say Duke Cunningham?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

edgeofnowhere
Posted by: edgeofnowhere on Oct 30, 2008 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is called fascism. We are presently ruled by a cabal of neocon/defense industry fascist warmongers. The American experiment with democracy is finished. As with all empires, we will collapse as the fiat paper currency fails to hold value and the costs of maintaining our worldwide war on anything and everything bankrupts the economy and sends the entire corrupt system sliding inevitably into chaos.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

edgeofnowhere
Posted by: edgeofnowhere on Nov 1, 2008 8:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"While Reagan ran up a superpower-sized tab to outspend the Soviets, bin Laden has done it on the cheap. Essentially for the cost of box cutters and flight training, he got the Bush administration to spend itself into penury, without a superpower in sight."

Please, surely Mr. Turse cannot believe the flimsy fiction of Bin Laden and the Boxcutter Boys? The "official" version of 9/11 -- that 19 CIA run patsies sailed through the entire security apparatus of the world's most sophisticated military machine while being directed by a man with kidney trouble in a cave in the Afghani mountains -- is beyond preposterous.

Of course Mr. Turse is correct in positing that severe reduction in US military spending would be a good thing for America, but he fails to realize that the rulers of the empire are making big money from all this waste. They really do not care how many die in whatever battles in whichever country just as long as the American wage slave pays for their profitable war machine. The rulers of this emerging global empire thrive on war and waste, and they are not about to go gently into the dark night.

Why is it so difficult for the American public to accept the truth of 9/11? Instead of ignoring it, as does Mr. Turse, why doesn't ALTERNET publish some articles by David Ray Griffin, Peter Dale Scott, Webster Tarpley and Michael Ruppert? America will not survive if it does not face the reality of this incident and put the blame at the feet of the true perpetrators.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]