General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDo you believe Hilary Clinton is likely to scale back the military industrial complex?
Or is she more likely to maintain or even expand it?
djean111
(14,255 posts)"is likely" - since she has not been elected, as far as I can tell. By looking outside of DU, of course.
Yes, I think Hillary would expand the military, and take the cost of that out of social programs.
samrock
(590 posts)Even if she wanted to.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Several things occur to me: If she has no real power over it we can presumably assume that no American president ever does. If people want rid of it we're probably going to have to think of avenues other than electoral politics to change the landscape. I have no idea what that would look like.
If the MIC is able to continue to expand it reach and influence over the coming decades to the extend that NO power structure can rival it culturally or politically, where does that leave us? The MIC needs wars in order to exist. I heard somewhere (I can't tell you where) that they need to have wars at a certain frequency so as to keep the percentage of personnel who have seen active duty high enough to keep the system effective...
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)The last POTUS that tried to do something about the MIC was JFK. Look how that turned out.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)FSogol
(45,488 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)when asked to serve on one of your op's that was alerted on, I had just logged on to du and was unaware of the numbers of absurd op's you spammed GD with, and therefore voted to "leave it alone".
Now that I see what you've been doing, I regret not voting to hide these. if you want to have an honest discussion as HRC"s positions on all of these issues, put it ONE op. please.
for now all of these are going into my trash pile, and i expect in one most everyone else's as well.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I doubt she will be looking to start wars.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)She led the charge on Libya and was chomping at the bit to attack Syria. Thankfully, there were saner heads around.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)She will do just fine.
Sancho
(9,070 posts)We don't know what she would do a President. Same thing for Kerry, etc.
The SOS takes the heat for whatever the President desires, but the SOS can't order up a war independently.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)In lauding Henry Kissinger, the possible Democratic presidential nominee goes far beyond her usual hawkish rhetoric.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/hillary-clinton-henry-kissinger-world-order
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Boy, Jeopardy has gotten easier over the years...
Sancho
(9,070 posts)No President since WWII has been successful at scaling back the military. Carter and Clinton tried to avoid starting any new wars, but other than that it's been business as usual.
Sequestration has been the closest to a cut back that we've seen in decades, and it really hasn't slowed up the MIC.