Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Fighting the Greedy Defense Lobbyists: Our Schools vs. Their Worthless Weaponry

By Conn Hallinan, Foreign Policy in Focus. Posted December 22, 2008.


With less money to go around, why burn it on stupid projects for the defense industry?
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Over the next several months there will be a battle for hearts and minds, but not in Iraq or Afghanistan. The war will be here at home, waged mostly in the halls of Congress, where grim lobbyists for one of the top 15 economies in the world are digging in to preserve their stake in the massive U.S. military budget. With the country in deep recession and resources dwindling for the new administration's programs on health care, education, and the environment, the outcome of this battle may well end up defining the next four years.

But coming to grips with the issue, as one military analyst noted, is likely to resemble the worst of World War I trench warfare. "It will be like the British Army at the Somme," Winslow Wheeler of the Center for Defense Information (CDI) told the Boston Globe, "you will just get mowed down by the defense industry."

Up Against the Industry

For starters, there are 185,000 corporations behind those metaphorical machine guns, and a few are formidable indeed: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Alliant Techsystems, United Technologies, Textron, Teledyne, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, and Texas Instruments, just to name a few.

The World Policy Institute found that dozens of high Bush administration officials were former arms company executives, consultants, or shareholders, and that this network of influence reaches deep into Congress. The combination of lobbying and PAC money that pours into election coffers every two years gives the arms industry enormous influence over the actions of the executive and legislative branches.

The reason is simple: the money at stake is staggering, although nailing down exactly what this country spends on the military is extremely difficult. "Figures on defense spending are notoriously unreliable," defense expert Chalmers Johnson points out. "All numbers released by the Pentagon should be regarded as suspect."

While the "official" 2009 U.S. military budget is $516 billion, that figure bears little resemblance to what this country actually spends. According to CDI, if one pulls together all the various threads that make up the defense spending tapestry - including Home Security, secret "black budget" items, military-related programs outside of the Defense Department, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and such outlays as veterans' benefits - the figure is around $862 billion for the current fiscal year. Johnson says spending is closer to $1.1 trillion.

Even these figures are misleading, since it does not project future costs. According to Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, when the economic and social costs of the Iraq War are finally added up - including decades of treatment for veterans disabled by traumatic brain injury and post traumatic stress disorder - the final bill could reach $5 trillion.

Cuts in the Offing?

Given the current economic crisis, even the defense establishment recognizes that some cuts are inevitable. A recent study by a Pentagon advisory group, the Defense Business Board, says that current defense spending is "not sustainable" and recommends scaling back or eliminating some big-ticket weapon systems.

Canceling Lockheed Martin's F-22 stealth fighter and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Virginia Class submarine, the V-22 Osprey, the Zumwalt Class destroyer, and Boeing and Raytheon's missile defense system, combined with some judicious reductions in other budget items, would save $55 billion annually, according to FPIF's Unified Security Budget.

The problem with U.S. military spending isn't just expensive weapons, but the underlying philosophy that the use of force is a valid policy tool. And on that question, the incoming Obama administration has yet to break from the past.

While Obama has pledged to stress diplomacy over warfare, he has also promised to "maintain the most powerful military on the planet" and to increase the armed forces by some 90,000 soldiers. According to the Congressional Budget Office, that will cost at least $50 billion over five years.


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

See more stories tagged with: defense spending

Conn Hallinan is a Foreign Policy In Focus columnist.

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:
Just keep in mind,
Posted by: Honkie the Nihilist on Dec 22, 2008 12:23 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cuts in the defense industry mean job loss. The defense industry and the periphery companies offer a lot of Americans a comfortable middle class life. Papa Honky, a 30 year employee or Northrop Grumman comes to mind. The defense industry is the only one I can think of that does not fill the computer and engineering jobs with H1B visas. You are willing to keep the worthless American auto industry afloat. I’m not saying…I’m just saying…

Don’t Worry about Pops, B-HO wants to expanded the military be nearly 100,000 troops. That’s some change you can believe in.

Do you want more money for school? Expel illegal aliens. The Illegal Parents can enroll their illegal kids, which have no right to be in the US in public schools or the US for that matter, just by showing residency. The fact that they don’t speak English and have a much higher pregnancy rates then American students means more resources will have to be wasted on them.

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

» Typical rightwing bullshit Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Just keep in mind, Posted by: Shehova
» Two cultures entered one culture left. Posted by: Honkie the Nihilist
A Christmas Present for Obama
Posted by: AlexLawyer on Dec 22, 2008 2:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Honkie, I do agree with your concerns about job loss, but that's a problem that can be solved by forcing these companies to diversify and make some products that are good for people and the world. Wind turbines, solar power systems and mass transit come immediately to mind as worthwhile endeavors.

The real problem is our militaristic mindset, which holds that violence and domination are the best instruments of foreign policy. Obama, surely an intelligent, fundamentally decent and thoughtful person, is in the thrall of the inside-the-beltway conventional wisdom.

If I could give Obama and his advisers, and hence the entire world, one Christmas present, it would be copies of Barbara Tuchman's The March of Folly.

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

» RE: A Christmas Present for Obama Posted by: alternetrose
The scumbags will always try to tie reckless "defense" spending to jobs.
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 22, 2008 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And yet nothing could be farther from the truth. I have friends in relatives who have worked in various government agencies and they know damn well that unless it is DOD, there will always be intentional budget cuts. What the liars who claim that cutting the defense budget means job losses don't want to tell you is the fact that when you're working under Big Defense, you're already having to accept pay cuts and even benefit cuts and that even those jobs are not necessarily secure. Furthermore, the jobless reports are often fudged to make it look like only defense-related jobs are viable and that has been the case ever since 9/11. Let's say that 1 million jobs are lost as a result of cutting the defense budget. Well, chances are there will be greater opportunities for non-DOD related jobs with decent pay and benefits. Also, there is no reason that only anything DoD related must have the most up to date technologies while all other businesses suffer with outdated machinary.

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

Why shouldn't those who work in the defense industry be worried about...
Posted by: Quannah on Dec 22, 2008 5:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
job security? Why should they be protected when no one else is? It isn't like we've got a shortage of weapons in this country.

They have taken enough of our tax money. Almost $.60 of every tax dollar goes to defense. Don't tell me there isn't some FAT that could be cut!

Schools build the future. Weapons KILL it. Literally. I'll go with the schools.

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

» Schools build the future Posted by: Ayla87
» RE: Schools build the future Posted by: Quannah
» Uh, no. Posted by: Ayla87
» RE: Schools build the future Posted by: lively56
» RE: Schools build the future Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Schools build the future Posted by: Quannah
HEre is a Graph - information to keep in mind for this Discussion
Posted by: Phred42 on Dec 22, 2008 6:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do we REALLY need to do THIS?


http://www.djrserv.com/GMS2009.htm

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

» We're #1!!! Posted by: benzene
One of the Most Effective Tools
Posted by: madmac10 on Dec 22, 2008 7:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... of the Plutocrat is misdirection. Some of America's most prestigious universities have made a science out of misdirection: graduating economists and politicians that can dazzle with you with so much bullshit about neo-liberalism and whatnot. The consequences are that the planet's economy is flushing away and workers are being blamed for it; global world war escalates on third-world soil and "ethnic differences" are the cause!

Of course, there is nothing wrong with a strong defense. But when billions of dollars disappear behind walls of mercenaries, then by god people, something bad is forming. When guns are cheaper than food; then no one sleeps.

Don't let anyone tell you that massive regulation will result in disaster just needs to stop trusting the media and start trusting your own damed eyes. Anyone who rails against massive taxation is sure to be prestidigitating.

Look, George W. Bush may have emasculated all the nation's regulators, but no one is stopping you from following the money. Go ahead and follow it now. When you find where it leads, get out your whistles and blow!

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

LETS FACE IT....
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Dec 22, 2008 8:38 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THEY RUN AND OWN THIS FUCKING PLACE.. THEY DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, AND DONT CARE WHAT YOU ALTERNET POSTERS THINK .. WE SHALL HAVE WAR WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT.

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

» True . . Posted by: pete ess
Defense Primer
Posted by: PaulK on Dec 22, 2008 9:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America has maybe 20,000 hydrogen bombs and atomic bombs. 200 was once judged to be sufficient to destroy Russia, the world's largest country. We can bounce the rubble 100 times over. Has anyone wondered why the last 99 times are so important? From a Christian perspective, why is any holocaust of hundreds of millions of dumb civilians such a good thing that we'd spend billions or trillions on the task?

So, how does a country have a "better" weapon in a world full of nuclear weapons? Doesn't one side's new weapon just force the other country closer to the nuclear option? These better weapons cost money!

The U.S. Republicans are rumored to have given Pakistan the Bomb. How did this help make the U.S. more secure? For that matter, how did Reagan giving Saddam Hussein his nerve gas make us more secure?

Our troops are now going into battle with teddy bears, dolls, soccer balls and candy. Soldiers are sitting down and having tea with Iraqi and Afghani families. They say that it works. At last, new weapons we can use!

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

» Ah yes, of course Posted by: gellero1
US squanders trillions of dollars on phoney "defense" systems
Posted by: Garvagh on Dec 22, 2008 9:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bravo! Let us remember that Dick Cheney headed a study group that, in the wake of the collapse of the USSR, advocated that the insane levels of "defense" spending be continued even though the enemy had disappeared! Cheney was in effect the prostitute of the military-industrial complex which has fed off the innards of the American public for generations.
Now, the invented "threat" from Iran is used as a replacement for the USSR!

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

» Really?? Posted by: gellero1
here's a thought
Posted by: Levon on Dec 22, 2008 10:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
instead of having the defense industry building weapons, maybe we should have them build stuff for the space program. that should help keep those jobs and not build weapons that don't work for wars we'll never fight.

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

» RE: here's a thought Posted by: Quannah
» Ooh, you're so wrong . . Posted by: pete ess
Tell them to do that
Posted by: gellero1 on Dec 22, 2008 6:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sure the Messiah will give them the technology and resources to do just that. Place an order, and it shall be. Just like that !! Damn....you can make it happen...click your heel together.......there's no place like change....there's no place like hope, there's nothing like other people's money.

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

RE: Schools??
Posted by: gellero1 on Dec 22, 2008 6:48 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since when has throwing money at schools ever done anything?

If you want better schools, support the PTA. The Federal Government has done NOTHING to change the situation....and if you think they can, you are deluded.

Schools are a local problem...Washington and the Messiah can't help.

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

» RE: Schools?? Posted by: Quannah
F-22 and F-35
Posted by: fanny666 on Dec 23, 2008 11:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These are very flawed and wasteful programs. They cost too much and they are junk equipment that put our troops at risk.

F-22

F-35

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

But they really DO need the money . .
Posted by: pete ess on Dec 24, 2008 12:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . they have billions to make;
AND they have people to keep stupid. Spending on education will make it harder to fool people into marching singing to the gallows (as you ALL did to Iraq, remember, Americans?? Don't forget that). AND remember, too, they're an EXPORT industry, and that's good, right? They sell your weapons to the other side, too.

Now close your ears and eyes and repeat after me: "Welcome Armageddon! I will be blessed when that happens".
OK, listen now: Faintly you can hear "Allah uAkbar! Welcome jihad! I will be blessed when that happens".

And then VERY faintly you'll hear (and it will be ignored): "Um, can't we be adult and rational about this?"

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

  • 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