liberal ["liberalis" L - suitable for a freeman, generous; "eleutheros" Gk - free] (adj) generous, open-minded, not subjugated to authoritarian domination; (n) one who believes in liberty, universal suffrage and the free exchange of ideas. elite ["eslire" Fr -- to choose fr.L "eligere" -- choose] (n) the choice part; best of a class; the socially superior part of society.

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

War and Waste

Why is preventing terrorism now called the "Global War on Terror: the Long War?"

The answer is because the Pentagon has taken over the government and they need an imaginary enemy to maintain the stranglehold of fear on the American people and Congress.

There's money in war. Lots of it. It's up to about a quarter of the US budget. Why so much? Do we need to spend that much money? No, but the Pentagon is leveraging the entire US economy, government and citizenry by claiming to be engaged in a "long war."

If there weren't a "war" then the Pentagon couldn't argue for 7% annual budget increases while every other Department in the Federal government is being cut.

If there weren't a "war" then the American people and Congress would be seeking to redirect funding for military equipment, capabilities, modernization, experimentation, and expansion to things like education, infrastructure rebuilding, health, job creation, energy research and development, transportation, and environmental protections for the benefit of the American people and the rest of the world.

The needs of the civilian population are urgent and the Pentagon knows there is only so much of a pie to slice up.

Hence the long, global war on terror, opening funding channels from Congress to the Pentagon to Defense industries and contractors. The military coup of 2000 is becoming more and more of a fait accomplit.

Unfortunately, using the military against the survival of our own domestic political health is not a syndrome of decay unique to the United States. In fact, Norman Solomon, writing about his latest insights on the matter, said
Right now, the presidents of Iran and the United States are thriving on the belligerency of the other. From all indications, a military assault on Iran would boost Ahmadinejad's power at home. And it's a good bet that the U.S. government will do him this enormous favor.


Post a Comment

<< Home