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

Bush Administration Wastes Trillions in Worthless Weapons

By Robert Scheer, Truthdig. Posted April 3, 2008.


The government has invested trillions in weapons that are completely useless in the fight against stateless terrorists.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

A trillion dollars here, a trillion dollars there, and soon you're talking real money. But when it comes to reporting on what the Bush war legacy has cost American taxpayers, the media have been shockingly indifferent to the highest run-up in military spending since World War II. Even the devastating defense spending audit released Monday by the Government Accountability Office documenting the enormous waste in every single U.S. advanced weapons system failed to provoke the outrage it, and five equally scathing previous annual audits, deserved.

This is not about the waste of taxpayer dollars -- already pushing a trillion -- in funding the Iraq war, which, while reprehensible enough, pales in comparison to the big-ticket military systems purchased in the wake of 9/11. In the horror of that moment, the floodgates were lifted and the peace dividend promised with the end of the Cold War was washed away by a doubling of spending on ultra-complex military equipment originally designed to defeat a Soviet enemy that no longer exists, equipment that has no plausible connection with fighting stateless terrorists. Example: the $81-billion submarine pushed by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, presumably to fight al-Qaida's navy.

That's the huge scandal the media and politicians from both parties have studiously avoided. But as the GAO's authoritative audit details, the costs are astronomical. The explosion of spending on expensive weaponry after 9/11 had nothing whatsoever to do with the attacks of that day. The high-tech planes and ships commissioned for trillions of dollars to defeat an enemy with no navy, air force or army, and using $3 knives as its weapons arsenal, were gifts to the military-industrial complex that will go on giving for decades to come.

The Iraq war may end someday, but rest assured that major weapons systems, once commissioned, have a life-support system unmatched in any other sector of public spending. Rarely does the plug get pulled on even the most irrelevant and expensive war toy. Not while both Democratic and Republican politicians feed at the same trough, and when so much is at stake in the way of jobs and profit.

Just how expensive and wasteful this is was marked in the GAO's audit: "Since 2000, the Department of Defense (DOD) has roughly doubled its planned investment in new systems from $790 billion to $1.6 trillion in 2007, but acquisition outcomes in terms of cost and schedule have not improved." Pentagon cost overruns, always a huge problem, have mushroomed. As the GAO reported, "Total acquisition costs for major defense programs in the fiscal year 2007 portfolio have increased 26 percent from first estimates, compared with 6 percent in 2000."

I know eyes glaze when government budgets are discussed, but keep in mind that defense spending accounts for more than half of all the federal government's discretionary spending. In short, funding for all the other stuff we argue about -- science research, education, Arabic translators, insuring uninsured children -- is minor compared to the waste on these military boondoggles that go unexamined.

Yet nothing else the federal government does involves such waste because we are talking about weapons systems shrouded in secrecy and protected from unwelcome scrutiny by the Teflon coating of "national defense." Credit the GAO for providing a rare glimpse into the most egregious waste of taxpayer dollars, concluding in its exhaustive, 205-page report:

"Of the 72 programs GAO assessed this year, none of them had proceeded through system development meeting the best-practice standards for mature technologies, stable design, or mature production processes by critical junctures of the program, each of which are essential for achieving planned cost, schedule, and performance outcomes."

That's a grade of zero for every major weapons system. Let's take just one, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a program estimated to be worth $300 billion in sales to its manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, the nation's biggest defense contractor and most generous donor to lobbyists and politicians' campaigns. The program to build what Lockheed boasts is "the most complex fighter ever built" is also the most expensive, with estimated acquisition costs having increased a whopping $55 billion in just the last three years.

Lockheed need not worry about future profits, because the procurement schedule on this troubled plane has been stretched out to the year 2034. As the GAO says, "currently unproven processes and a lack of flight testing could mean future changes to design and manufacturing processes." Hey, no problem, Lockheed will just add that to the taxpayer tab. Maybe by 2034, the plane will be ready to go take out Osama bin Laden. Or not.

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

See more stories tagged with: iraq, terrorism, weapons, al-qaida, war spending, taxpayers

Robert Scheer is the co-author of The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq. See more of Robert Scheer at TruthDig.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! 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:
A Triilion Dollar Defense Budget ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 3, 2008 12:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And just about every representative in Congress is in cahoots. Lieberman wants his sub, the company that builds subs is in Conneticut. He is not unique. The Arms manufacturers make sure parts and supplies are spread over many Congressional Districts, especially those districts whose elected members are in the right Committees and have the seniority to push agendas. Even staunch liberal Democrats get into the act.

But, Bush has out done even the self serving Congress by pushing weapons systems into space and relauching the nuclear arms race with reformed atomic weapons.

"The supplementary budget to pay for the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not part of the official defense budget, is itself larger than the combined military budgets of Russia and China. Defense-related spending for fiscal 2008 will exceed $1 trillion for the first time in history. The United States has become the largest single salesman of arms and munitions to other nations on Earth. Leaving out of account President Bush's two on-going wars, defense spending has doubled since the mid-1990s. The defense budget for fiscal 2008 is the largest since World War II." ~ Chalmers Johnson

Chalmers Johnson, How to Sink America

What's the answer? How can we get to a rational defense budget, say half of what we now spend? It's the trillion dollar question and we had better find an answer quick.

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

Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Apr 3, 2008 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A trillion dollars here, a trillion dollars there, and soon you have the perfect excuse to smash the Social Security cookie jar.


Direct Democracy

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

» We need this war Posted by: Artkansas
It is science research
Posted by: g50 on Apr 3, 2008 2:25 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All of this research and development of weaponry is also scientific research. Commercial and industrial application of this technology is endless. As one example of defense R&D shows - the internet - it ain't all bad.

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

» RE: It is science research Posted by: Lector
» RE: It is science research Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: It is science research Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: It is science research Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: It is science research Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: It is science research Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: It is science research Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: It is science research Posted by: Crazy H
Intent and serendipity
Posted by: QCao009 on Apr 3, 2008 3:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Internet was anything but planned. Agent Orange and other "science" R&D were, with very minimal attention to the human costs involved.

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

» Direct results Posted by: marid
Military Complex 1, Rumsfeld 0
Posted by: QCao009 on Apr 3, 2008 3:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As with most Bush bold plans, the Stooges always win the day. The bold plan to build a meaner and leaner military has resulted squarely in an exhausted and disspirited force. As with our national budget, he has taken us from the black deep into the red.

The principal concern we should all exercise as citizens lies in the definition of a terrorist martyr: the willingness to blow one self up in the name of God. Observe our Commander-in-chief closely: he fits the mold. FCor those of us who love our country dearly, we should be very much forewarned. This lame duck is not to be underestimated. He will stop at nothing to satisfy his delusions of grandeur and his legacy. He WILL fiddle as Rome burns. Reread the last days of the Roman Empire and study Nero and Caligula and weep.

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

Meanwhile, the weapons we DO 'need' languish
Posted by: willie.horton on Apr 3, 2008 3:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here are two examples of weapons we actually need... one small, one large:
A better handgun. The Beretta M9 is universally hated by our troops, both because it is unreliable and because its 9mm ammunition is inadequate. The soldiers' response: Bring their own .45-caliber handguns. The Army's reaction: Ban the importation of any non-approved sidearms.
Replace the A-10 Warthog. The most effective plane we have, dollar for dollar, was discontinued in the 1970s: the Air Force considers "close-air support" a relatively unimportant part of its mission. Army helicopters are too slow and vulnerable to ground fire; the A-10 was a critical part of our 'success' in Iraq... and they are slowly wearing out and falling apart.

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

nothing new
Posted by: richholland on Apr 3, 2008 4:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in the bestseller: the century of my Father"" by mr.GMak is written how the german reluctant scientist made the first uranium factory during world war II.
The scientists didnt want to give Hitler a demonic waepon.
In America there was no hesitation to produce the bomb, so helpfull for the future domination of the world.
As long as only money counts there is little hope.

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

» RE: nothing new Posted by: abbadon2007
Bernanke warns US economy could shrink
Posted by: flymulla on Apr 3, 2008 5:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whom do I listen? Honest. My ENT doctor also has gone to Alaska, as his wife does not believe in the Global Warming. She wants to see this personally. All seem to have lost trust in human voice. May be HIS MATER’S VOICE ought to be back. The dollar will give half the fare return. Not HM, but the doctor.
Bernanke warns US economy could shrink
Published: April 2 2008 15:37 | Last updated: April 3 2008 01:29
The US economy will not grow much if at all during the first half of this year and “could even contract slightly”, Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday, admitting for the first time that a “recession is possible”.
The chairman of the Federal Reserve said its recent actions – big interest rate cuts and emergency measures to support market liquidity – “appear to have helped stabilise the situation” in financial markets “somewhat.” But he said those markets remained under “considerable stress”.
I thank you
Firozali Mulla MBA PhD
P.O.Box 6044
Dar-Es-Salaam
Tanzania
East Africa

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

the very term "defense spending" is pure propaganda for what is effectively
Posted by: Suzon on Apr 3, 2008 5:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
money laundering. But even Sheerer uses it in the very first paragraph.

By and large, our supposed representatives are enemies of the people. I don't think that every last man Jack of them went into politics to plunder the public purse, but it sure seems to work out that way.

We need citizens' juries to indict politicians and bureaucrats for unconstitutional activities. People will do whatever they can get away with.

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

Submarines
Posted by: Mac Geek on Apr 3, 2008 5:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I disagree with the statement that the Virginia-class submarine is useless. The US, for reasons of geography, needs to maintain its maritime power. Submarines are the capital ships of today and the future. The Virginia is designed to deploy Special Forces and for littoral warfare. There are non-state forces in places other than Afghanistan.

The Navy need to keep the carriers but get rid of the Aegis cruisers and destroyers. Then they need to build lots of small cheap ships for littoral patrol.

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

» RE: Submarines Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Submarines Posted by: Mac Geek
» RE: Submarines Posted by: LoveYourEnemies
» RE: Submarines Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Submarines Posted by: Mac Geek
» RE: Submarines Posted by: carbon-based
» China doesn't need a navy Posted by: ReallyBearish
» RE: China doesn't need a navy Posted by: carbon-based
» Exactly! Posted by: meetmeineleusis
» I don't know..folks! Posted by: donl51
» RE: I don't know..folks! Posted by: carbon-based
Maybe the weaponry does have a potential use
Posted by: akai ringo on Apr 3, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My first thought on reading this piece was to wonder how after spending all these trillions of dollars on new weapons, the U.S. can have the gall to criticize China for their military spending.
But then as I continued to think, I remembered China's record in annexing neighboring states. It is by no means inconceivable, I suggest, that one of these fine days, China will make up its mind to invade and take over Taiwan. And voices have been heard to the effect that while they are at it, they may decide to take over Korea and/or Japan while they are at it. If the U.S. made it cleat that in such an event, it was prepared to use its advanced waponry, then perhaps this would function as a deterrent.

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

Does the author know the difference between a sub and an F35?
Posted by: carbon-based on Apr 3, 2008 6:11 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It doesn’t appear that Scheer has a handle on the weapons systems he’s discussing. The F35 joint strike fighter is a unique effort to develop an air superiority fighter as a common platform for the airforce, navy and marines. In the past these were three separate efforts (maybe with the exception of the F-4) and would cost huge sums compared to what it cost now.

“the $81-billion submarine pushed by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, presumably to fight al-Qaeda's navy.”..I know this is sarcasm on his part but based on his apparent lack of knowledge on this program or unwillingness to discuss this in more detail to provide perspective on it does the reader a disservice.

First, the article would have you think each sub cost $81 billion. It doesn’t. The Seawolf class attack sub , which was limited to only 3, cost about $2.2 billion each . The Virginia class, which the author seems to be referring to cost a bit less.. Officially $1.8 billion but lack of volume could raise it some. This is another unique forward thinking program as it is designed to accomplish missions from landing SEAL Teams to carrying out “Blue water” missions. Considering China’s recent progress in sub technology, not to mention Russia’s overwhelming numbers, America needs the best technology it can field. In the Virginias case, much of the technology is off the shelf stuff to help save costs.

So these two programs were designed utilizing the most cost effective program designs we have ever had!

That said, as a former auditor of some government military contracts and operations, I can say it’s no secret the government can waste money and the GAO does an excellent job of keeping the government somewhat in line.

Given the governments history to waste large sums of money , we want them to run our healthcare???.. no way!

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

» RE:red herring Posted by: cwilsondrum
» RE: red herring Posted by: carbon-based
MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL-POLITICAL
Posted by: Ipsi Dixit on Apr 3, 2008 6:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The U.S. government's profligate spending is all part of what is called the Military-Industrial-Political Complex. This came into being during WWII and was the major way in which the U.S. worked its way out of the great depression. And it continues to use this system of what is basically deficit-financing of the American economy(i.e. spending more money than you've actually got in the bank) to prop up what remains of its manufacturing base.

Because this M.I.P. Complex is such an integral part of the American political and economic system, I believe it to be essentially unreformable short of some great economic catastrophe creating the impetus to do so. It creates jobs and spin-off technologies as well as providing the U.S. with a first-class military with which to hold the rest of the world to ransom should someone (the Chinese, Russians or Japanese, for example) try to muscle in on the action.

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

Defense waste does NOT imply private medicine
Posted by: erichwwk on Apr 3, 2008 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Given the governments history to waste large sums of money , we want them to run our healthcare???.. no way!"

Sadly, the military-industrial complex will eventually bring us down, as the US is the mirror image of why the Soviet Union collapsed. The USSR never recognized that some goods are public, whereas the US believes politicians can decree public goods to be privatized. While it is true that we have wasted trillions in defense (we have spent more on obsolete nuclear weapons- and continue this farce- than we have spent on health care, and almost as much as on social security), it is just as true that the US (and most other countries) do socialized medicine magnitudes better than private health care.

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

Now I feel dirty
Posted by: EinMD on Apr 3, 2008 6:46 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As much as it disgusts me to defend this administration over anything, the fact is that the way things work in the military you must always be preparing for the next fight. Even while fighting the current one. There might not be a Soviet Union to fight now but that's not to say that five or ten years from now China's not going to decide that they're tired of putting up with our shit. Then we will need subs and stuff to fight them with.

However, I do believe that the military industrial complex has used a national moment of weakness and fear to exploit the American people. It's one thing to prepare for the war that will inevitably come ( face it kids, this is RL, not Star Trek. There's always gonna be a war somewhere ), but it's another to help bankrupt the nation so you can make a few more bucks.

The fault in all this, though, lies not with the administration so much as it lies with the Congress. Emperor Chimpy, for all his malfeasance and criminality, doesn't control the budget. The mooks in Congress do. So if you're looking to point fingers, start by looking there.

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

» RE: Now I feel dirty Posted by: spanky
Cut the Pentagon's budget to $350B.
Posted by: thekidde on Apr 3, 2008 7:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No additions, no behind the scenes cheating. Do it on this and no more. We'd see the wasteful military/industrial complex welfare go away pretty quickly. Of course, this won't happen - Eisenhower warned us - "we" didn't listen. Eat a military contractor (after CEO BBQ, of course).

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

China: our disconnect between military & economic policy
Posted by: war_on_tara on Apr 3, 2008 7:05 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Scheer is usually better than this. How could he not mention China at all in this article?

I agree with those here who say the military is responding to quite rationally (in most cases) to a genuine threat from China, and seems to have been doing so since I was on active duty in the '70s.

Unfortunately, our civilian government officials and economic leaders have spent the past 30 years working in exactly the opposite direction, to give China control over our own economy!

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

A New Manhattan Project
Posted by: BCcovers on Apr 3, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about we take 1/3 of that money; go to MIT, princeton, ClaTech, etc. Get the very best physicists and tell them we need a new form of clean, abundant energy and let them go to work. This is not only advantageous for the enviroment, but it will be strategically valuable as well for the military and US to have fusion/anti-matter energy or some other new form of energy.

Let's face it, we're not going to solve this problem by building windmills and relying on the sun. The military however, when put to the task has proven time and time again to come to quick, good solutions when it comes to R&D. I fail to see how any citizen who cares for both their country and their enviroment can be against this. The military industrial complex might have to sit a bit idle for the first 5 or so years it takes to develop these new power systems, however eventually it will provide jobs beyond belief to convert our power grid/transportation network to utilize this new energy. Redundancy building (ie tanks and submarines that we don't need but are only ordered to maintain jobs) has to be seriously curtailed as well and all efforts should be put into this new program.

No candidate has suggested such a thing. It seems like a common sense thing to at least give a try. Let's think big people, we are America, and we can do this!

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

» RE: A New Manhattan Project Posted by: donl51
» RE: A New Manhattan Project Posted by: BCcovers
Fear of the Pentagon and the Military Industrial Complex
Posted by: Southern Gal on Apr 3, 2008 8:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Pentagon gets a large part of the country's budget and the military industrial complex is making billions of dollars profit. They feed on each other. The Neo Cons and the conservative right wingers believe that government's only role is to support the military, the rest of us be damned. I believe that the members of Congress and the White House fear the power of the Pentagon and fear attempting to manage the Pentagon and hold it accountable. The Pentagon plays the trump card regarding defending this country and Congress doesn't want to take the blame if something bad does happen. It's that old ruse that the Pentagon know things that we don't know and they know best. Oppose them and disaster happens.

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

themanwithadog
Posted by: the man with a dog on Apr 3, 2008 9:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of he most dangerous weapons on earth is known as "THE WHISPER" Mention `terrorist attack` and panic arises. Supermarket shelves are emptied of all manner of supplies as the population stores food for the "attack". This has happened twice.Mention `Al Queda` and the US military chiefs demand billions to reinforce the most prolifically armed nation on earth.Mention `the Islamic threat` and thousands of innocent muslims are rounded up in the US and imprisoned.Mention `weapons of mass destruction` and the lunatic in the White House declares war on Iraq. Remember, the WMDs were ONLY a whisper!! And look at the cost, not only the 4000 plus of the finest in the military, the uncountable thousands of innocent civilians but the financial burden placed on the ordinary folk of the US.Plus a gauranteed muslim threat for the future.If you disturb a hornets nest you are sure to get stung.

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

» RE: themanwithadog Posted by: donl51
babaloo
Posted by: barbs on Apr 3, 2008 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we keep hearing about the 'shortfalls' in Medicare and Social Security looming....but there's always enough money to waste on the military's useless schemes....what a travesty this is.

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

I can't believe I'm saying this,
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Apr 3, 2008 10:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but you can't pin all (or even most) of the blame for this on Dubya. Every president and Congress for almost half a century is just as guilty.

jdfu!

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

Bass Ackwards
Posted by: NoPCZone on Apr 3, 2008 10:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The nation needs a strong military, but first we need a country worth defending. That would be a nation where the schools are worthy of our kids, the streets are safe to walk, healthcare is available and affordable for all, every person is properly housed, public transport is widely available, predatory lenders are treated like drug dealers and the government stops spying on it's citizens.

It funny (strange- not ha ha) how we always have money for big ticket weapons programs and DHS boondoggles, but never to help all our citizens get ahead.

Non-Christians pardon me, but let me impart some wisdom from my tradition. Jesus said that people place their treasure (material and other) where their hearts truly are. If we pour our money into prisons, warfare, spying and manipulating foreign governments what does that say about us as a nation and society?

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

The list of crimes
Posted by: willymack on Apr 3, 2008 10:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bushies have inflicted upon us and the world would make an impressive and growing stack of papers. Let's face it; these criminals aren't going to slow down one bit as long as there's something left to steal, extort, or bribe from us, and as long as they're still in power. Recitation of ever more revelations and scandals has reached the point of diminishing returns, and even liberals are starting to yawn. What's needed now is a serious discussion of what actions ordinary citizens can take to force the bush regime out of power, and/or prevent them from stealing yet another "election". Let's assume we'll get NO HELP from our gutless congress and we'll have to do all this ourselves. Any ideas?

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

Has There Ever
Posted by: rsmohio on Apr 3, 2008 11:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
been, in the history of humankind, a more profligate waster of resources than the military of the United States?

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

» RE: Has There Ever Posted by: e rice
Smoking gun or State Dept. blues
Posted by: herbal on Apr 3, 2008 12:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When it comes to foreign policy waste, the State Dept. has been cast in the same mold as the Dept. of Defense. We are faced with a systemic problem of the same policy creation by the Emprie builders and corporatists. See this blog on Alternet ( it will absolutely spin your head 180 degrees and is the same fundamental problem of Empire at any cost:


www.alternet.org/audits/80893/?cID=872890#c872890

"you guys are duped" gsolti post

www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/vol_xxx/337_343.html This is the CIA smoking gun!

Also, for a more complete overview see anthropologist Melvyn Goldstein's essay here:

http://omni.cc.purdue.edu/~wtv/tibet/article/art4.html

Posted by: gsolti on Apr 2, 2008 10:42 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your rating: 5
a simple search reveals that Tibet is a problem created by UK and USA to destabilize China.
the originally 1959 riot was organized and paid for by CIA. there is a documentary on youtube by BBC.
linked text = Linked text
CIA has been paying Dalai and his clique afterwards, the documents of which are posted on state department website
linked text = Linked text
linked text = Linked text
linked text = Linked text
Many organizations supporting tibet independence are paid by National Endowment of Democracy, a great name, but if you do a little digging, it is easy to find out what it really is.
linked text = Linked text
someone like Dalai because he received Noble Peace Prize, but a little digging will show you the Noble Prize he received is purely a political statement. the Nobel prize committee chair openly said the reason Dalai was chosen was because the what happened in Beijing in 1989, not because what Dalai did.
it is also not difficult to find out what kind of society it really was before Chinese Communist Party ruled Tibet. just check out some books by Melvin Goldstein.
linked text = Linked text
linked text = Linked text "

This outs the Pope of the East Dalai on a very different projectile as a master if politics and international CIA intrigue. The spin has been so well done that progressives see red when confronted with the very idea of promoting Theocracy in the name of Tibet freedom. The Chinese are being baited with the same destabilization strategy employed on countless other sovereign nations over the years from Angola to Iran. Us arms and corporate War Profiteers are just art of the equation.

Please please bring up the links and read them before passing judgement so you can see just how effective propaganda can be engineered!

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

bill cooper
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Apr 3, 2008 2:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
wasted van be a euphemism for siphoned off to black ops and covert projects

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

I can't say it any better
Posted by: b253@yahoo.com on Apr 3, 2008 3:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.

This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

- Dwight D. Eisenhower

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

Homeland Sweet Homeland
Posted by: chlamor on Apr 3, 2008 3:11 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Welcome to New Germany
Welcome to the Hyper-White Techno-Evangelical Inquisition.

80 billion additional dollars to the War for Lockheed-Halliburton-
totalling trillions for the never-ending war for Brown&Root- for Dyncorp
in addition to the regular 500 million or so a minute for the
Narcotics Trafficking- CIA- Military- Industrial- World's Greatest Polluter- Criminal Think Tank Complex

Small scale tactical nuclear weapons cocktails
served up to brown skinned children
with distended bellies
by well-manicured barbarians in Citadels and Mansions
by their servants in boardrooms
with distended bellies

With 725 military bases
With 350 outposts
In 132 countries
In Every jungle
In Every tree
All baby-faced tamarinds run for cover, hiding in their mother's breasts from:

America- A fundamentally sick society
America- A culture of conquest

Get out of Iraq Get out of Viet Nam
America get out of Colombia
America get off the Rez
America get out of Afghanistan
America get out of etcetera

America, a fundamentally sick society.

Welcome to Plastic Racist Nation
Welcome to McAmeriWal-Martika
Germany- The Fatherland
America- The Homeland
Welcome to Soft Fascism

General Reinhard Gehlen head of German military intelligence on the Eastern front and his network of spies and terrorists were brought over to the USA after World War 2 in the now well known Operation Paperclip. From these advisers and functionaries Allen Dulles, copying many of the methods utilized by the likes of Herr Gehlen, shaped what we now know to be the CIA.

Instruments of Statecraft
Counterinsurgency Literature

Strangle Them- Starve Them
Hold an election
Call it Democracy

I pledge allegiance to the United Sports Utility Vehicle
of Der Father- der Home Land of the Fee
Home Land of Wage Slavery
Land of Tidy White Bestiality
This Land of Pre-Ordained Brutality
This Land of the Hyper-Tense Entreprenurial Mentality

Overthrow Castro
Overthrow Arbenz
Overthrow Mossadegh
Overthrow Chavez
Overthrow National Sovereignty
Overthrow Dignity

It is time to stop living
The Lie that is America- I Secede

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

You Don't Need These Subs to Deliver Seal Teams, Just a Big Excuse!
Posted by: sofla100 on Apr 3, 2008 3:11 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, spending $3 billion for a sub is just ridiculous. As for the excuses about delivering Seal teams and another one, that they can fire cruise missles (that I've heard), it's like saying the only car you can own to get to work is a Mazaradi. Seal teams are small units that can be delivered via patrol boats or much smaller and cheaper submarines. As for cruise missles, they can be fired and fly virtually undetected at low altitudes from almost anywhere in the world. No, what this is all about is just more pork barrel spending and its supported by Congressmen in the Districts with the shipyards and further contributed to by the political campaign contributions of lobbyists. You've also still got the "dingbat" thinking that they (big subs) are still needed as platforms to fire off nukes, a throw back to the Cold War. But, the USA already has thousands of nukes and many, many delivery systems such as bombers and land/sea (carrier/destroyer) based missles. As for China, they have at best a couple subs and won't be a significant sea threat for many years to come. The bottom line, its ridiculous defense spening and totally unnecessary. It also just shows the totally foolish and messed up priorities of the USA.

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

So Vote For Nader..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Apr 3, 2008 4:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He wants to get the Military Pentagon Waste under control..!

Do you think Obama is gonna do that..?


LOL..Think again..!

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

US lawmakers have as much as $196 million invested in defense companies
Posted by: chlamor on Apr 3, 2008 5:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WASHINGTON: Members of the U.S.Congress have as much as $196 million (€126.2 million) collectively invested in companies doing business with the Defense Department, earning millions since the start of the Iraq war, according to a new study by a nonpartisan research group.

The review of lawmakers' 2006 financial disclosure statements, by the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics, suggests that members' holdings could pose a conflict of interest as they decide the fate of Iraq war spending. Several members who earned the most from defense contractors have plum committee or leadership assignments, including Democratic Sen. John Kerry, independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman and House Republican Whip Roy Blunt.

The study found that more Republicans than Democrats hold stock in defense companies, but that the Democrats who are invested had significantly more money at stake. In 2006, for example, Democrats held at least $3.7 million (€2.3 million) in military-related investments, compared to Republican investments of $577,500 (€372,000).

Overall, 151 members hold investments worth $78.7 million (€50.6 million) to $195.5 million (€125.9 million) in companies that receive defense contracts that are worth at least $5 million (€3.2 million). These investments earned them anywhere between $15.8 million (€10.1 million) and $62 million (€39.9 million) between 2004 and 2006, the center concludes.

More Here:
LINK

This is a bi-partisan affair of course with John Kerry at the very top of the list.

Go here and see how Congress is in bed with The Merchants of Death- Democrats and Republicans alike:

Bi-partisan investments in the war machine

According to the most recent reports of their personal finances, 151 current members of Congress had between $78.7 million and $195.5 million invested in companies that received defense contracts of at least $5 million in 2006. In all, these companies received more than $275.6 billion from the government in 2006, or $755 million per day, according to FedSpending.org, a website of the budget watchdog group OMB Watch.

The minimum value of Congress members' personal investments in these contractors increased 5 percent from 2004 to 2006, but because lawmakers are only required to report their assets in broad ranges, the value of these investments could have risen as much as 160 percent—or even dropped 51 percent. It is also unclear how many members still hold these investments, since reports for 2007 are not due until May 15, 2008. In 2004, the first full year after the Iraq war began, Republican and Democratic lawmakers—both hawks and doves—had between $74.9 million and $161.3 million invested in companies under contract with the Department of Defense.

As the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have expanded and transformed, so, too, has the need for goods and services that extend beyond helicopters, armored vehicles and guns. Giant corporations outside of the defense sector, such as Pepsico, IBM, Microsoft and Johnson & Johnson, have received defense contracts and are all popular investments for both members of Congress and the general public. So common are these companies, both as personal investments and as defense contractors, it would appear difficult to build a diverse blue-chip stock portfolio without at least some of them.

While Democrats are more likely to advocate for ending the Iraq war sooner than Republicans, as a group they have more of their own money invested in America's military efforts. In 2006 Democrats had at least $3.7 million invested in the defense sector alone, compared to Republicans' $577,500.

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

War on the Poor
Posted by: Sushi on Apr 3, 2008 7:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps if we could call the War on Poverty, the War on the Poor, we could get trillions spent on dropping sacks of cash from helium balloons over slums. Oh yeah...his friends wouldn't be profiting unless they owned the big-box stores, the grocery stores, the gas stations, the utilities and the rental units the poor would spend the money on.

Oh...they do. So what's the prob?

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

Incentive for change
Posted by: corylus on Apr 3, 2008 9:42 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a proposal:
$50K for the head of any member of Congress or the Senate;
$100K for the head of any major media CEO or editor;
$250K for Karl Rove's head;
$1M for Cheney's balls -- oops, forget about that.

Motherfucking traitors all deserve to die. Americans afraid of killing the enemy should clear out, because the next civil war is coming.

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

» RE: Incentive for change Posted by: Dboy
» RE: Incentive for change Posted by: Uranus
The path to ruin
Posted by: spanky on Apr 3, 2008 10:28 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America is on a path toward self-destruction. The absurd weapons spending is but one of many symptoms of our collective madness. Just go out into the street – the madness is palpable. A herd of crazed and confused automatons, each grasping desperately for their piece of the rotting consumer pie. Blind to the destruction and suffering left in the wake of such a toxic lifestyle.

Politicians, media and the corporate mafia are totally corrupted. But we the people are responsible. Only the masses can stop the madness, but the masses are sound asleep.

Nothing less than a shift in consciousness is necessary to rescue our sick society from collapse. The alarm clock is ringing like mad but very few people hear it.

The biq question is – will enuf people wake up before the collapse??

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

Its not about the weapons
Posted by: radiomorning on Apr 4, 2008 11:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The weapons are just an excuse to get your money into their hands. It is highway robbery, Washington style.

None of this is meant to make you safer. They don't give a fuck about you.

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

The biggest thing taxpayers will buy in 2009
Posted by: Uranus on Apr 5, 2008 6:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
after the war could be black ops weapons development, some of my recent reading strongly suggests. Along with some public servants' stated desire to use them to cook American civilians alive in the streets, you should know about it, even though it's secret beyond classified. Be very afraid.

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

Eisenhower the Prophet
Posted by: DrSteve on Apr 6, 2008 9:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

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

Eisenhower the Prophet
Posted by: DrSteve on Apr 6, 2008 9:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ike the prophet

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