is war and the U.S. military all that's left of our once great industrial base...?

A scary thought just occurred to me. I'm at a loss to understand Obama's embrace of the Afganistan "war" in practical terms. Sure, we can argue all day long about the POLITICAL consequences of admitting the futility and ending it, of admitting it is a criminal enterprise, whatever-- but that entails accepting that we are killing our own service men and women, as well as countless (and largely uncounted) Afghans for no better purpose than preserving the vanity of our leaders. There must be a practical reason as well as a political one.

One that gets aired regularly is Afghanistan's purported wealth of natural resources and it's location astride a potential pipeline route for extracting fossil fuels from the Caspian region. But accepting that means turning a blind eye to all those U.S. service personnel being involved in what is essentially piracy, and makes the deaths of Afghans even more difficult to justify. Theft of resources for American corporations is a longstanding plank in U.S. foreign policy, of course, and should never be ruled out when American boots and guns are on the ground, but still, it's hard to imagine the spinning a democratic party administration would have to engage in to sell this. I don't discount it for a minute, but the attraction would have to be pretty shiny to justify this misbegotten war on that account alone.

That led me to wonder what present, practical underpinning might be so compelling that even a democratic president-- who gave every indication during his political rise of having principles that would interfere with wholesale slaughter for naked greed or for mundane political cover-- would be compelled to prosecute an unjust war. It occurred to me that in the present economic downturn, the military industrial complex might be the United States' single biggest remaining economic force. Without much large-scale heavy or light manufacturing left in this country except the auto industry, and that being at least partly on the ropes and facing an uncertain future in any event, what economic drivers might the administration rely on to counter the unemployment and recession that is gripping the nation? Government spending, of course, but where does the government spend most of its money? On the Pentagon, which provides a broad bore money pipeline directly to the corporate wings of the military-industrial complex.

Dumping money into the economy via the MIC serves lots of additional purposes as well. It rewards the already wealthy and powerful, keeping them happy. The opposition party, which is generally a much more effective opposition party than the democrats are when they're the "loyal opposition," supports it almost without question. It reinforces existing power structures and relationships rather than threatening them with reform.

I know some DUers will argue that there aren't any underlying justifications, that the stated justifications are sufficient: defeating the Taliban, stabilizing a puppet government, denying a haven for al-Qaeda. But all of those justifications are transparently impractical or unachievable. Few are fooled by them, so they're just eye-wash and sound-bite material to gloss over the real reasons we're spending billions of dollars a month to stay in the clusterfuck.

While I don't doubt for a minute that there are ridiculous and shallow political forces at work protecting the reputations of failed U.S. leadership AND naked greed for Afghan resources in play-- there's no reason any of these justifications for war are mutually exclusive-- I wonder whether it has also occurred to Obama and his advisers that America's wars are among the few major economic drivers we have left. Has ignoring Ike's warnings about the MIC and shadow government led us to the point where they are them most important growth industries we have left?

So many books, so little time. But you're right-- I need to get to it soon.

It'll blow your mind, even if you read the prequel(s) by Howard Zinn. ;)

now can check yourself out in Wal-Mart, do banking, get on a plane, and fill up the car without seeing another human being. And get charged a 'service charge' on most of your utilities when you can't even pay the bill in the state you live in and the company is located on the other side of the country.

the only thing they made well was military hardware.

...that helped bring down the Soviets, and floundering in exactly the same ways. What's that saying about the lessons of history?

the US is an Empire, and the logic of Empire is what drives this. Many of us said this during the election... it don't matter who is in the WH. Until the Empire collapses under it's own weight (IMO it is coming) this will continue.

The war hasn't been "good" for certain aspects of the MIC. Oh, it's been great for certain suppliers of boots, bullets, and a wide variety of replacement parts. But in many MANY cases, the raw materials of these products are coming from over seas. They are assembled, and yes some of the heavier parts of them are made here. But those are becoming more and more of the exception. Long range is also uncertain. There's been a steadily declining "market" for new ideas and weapon systems. Development of new products has been slowing really for the better part of 2 decades. The wars have only made it worse as Washington has tried to "hide" the full cost of the war by shifting development costs to later years and stretching out programs over longer periods (making them more expensive). Huge amounts of the money spent on these wars has been for infrastructure projects within those countries. Base, hospitals, schools, water systems, power systems, and the list continues. A boon for the contractors that win the projects, but huge amounts of the material come from outside the US. And the payrolls include many non-US citizens in the various "private" armies that were created in both countries. None of this contributes to supporting any sort of US based manufacturing capacity, no where close to what was accomplished in WWII of course. But if that money had been actually spent on US based manufacutered goods, Bush probably could have had a 3rd term. He'd a been that popular. It would have been a huge jobs program.

But Bush wasn't interested in any jobs programs, and Obama hasn't been either.

Upwards of a trillion dollars so far, and that's only the direct costs. Ultimately, it's the FLOW of money that floats the U.S. economy more than anything else, and the money has flowed and flowed into the Pentagon and its support industries.

Yes, there are US based contractors, but the truth is huge amounts of money are being spent outside the US that used to be spent INSIDE the US, and the MIC ain't pleased about it.

...but as others have pointed out recently, it's the FLOW of money that props up the U.S. economy rather than the destination. It's not like we can run out or anything-- the government can simply create more any time they wish. That can be counter productive too, but in the current situation maybe that massive flow through the Pentagon really is a major prop keeping things from becoming substantially worse.

I agree with you that individual corporations might be dismayed to find that lots of that flow is going elsewhere, but as long as they and the military keep directing the flow, our economy continues to be buoyed somewhat. And as someone else commented down-thread, another side of this issue is the need to keep all those military personnel from hitting the unemployment lines or competing for the few jobs being created by this "recovery."

We do have the advantage that most of those guys aren't going anywhere immediately after they get back. They've been on multiple tours and they are "lifers" to some extent. Retention bonuses will be paid to keep some for a bit longer.

I do understand the flow issue, although I think it is a tad oversold. This is partially because the flow of this war cash isn't through the normal "channels" and so alot of folks are cut out of the process to some extent. And it is heavily biased away from generating taxes, so there isn't even that interest. I guess one could make the case that it is a form of "international stimulus" which Timmy has been calling for anyway.

are made in Army Munitions Depots by the DoD.

Many of the uniforms are made by contractors that employ disabled people. My boots were made by Belleville Shoe Company, which is in the US. Most of our vehicles, ships and aircraft are made in the United States.

...tanks, industrial equipment.

It's beyond disgusting...

...or theft of resources from Afghanistan?

plastic drinking glasses at Walmart for around a dollar....marked "Made in USA!"

mark

like these glasses...


mark

:thumbsup:

Virtually all the rest of activity is criminal chicanery and serving each other McDonald's and cable.

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." Thomas Jefferson

"There is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by... corporations. The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses. It's one of the reasons why the word "corporation" doesn't exist in the constitution - they were to be chartered only by states, so local people could keep a close eye on them." James Madison, Father of the Constitution

"In this point of the case the question is distinctly presented whether the people of the United States are to govern through representatives chosen by their unbiased suffrages or whether the money and power of a great corporation are to be secretly exerted to influence their judgment and control their decisions." Andrew Jackson

"I am more than ever convinced of the dangers to which the free and unbiased exercise of political opinion - the only sure foundation and safeguard of republican government - would be exposed by any further increase of the already overgrown influence of corporate authorities." Martin van Buren

"As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless." Abraham Lincoln

"As we view the achievements of aggregated capital, we discover the existence of trusts, combinations, and monopolies, while the citizen is struggling far in the rear or is trampled to death beneath an iron heel. Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people's masters." Grover Cleveland

"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day." Theodore Roosevelt . . . Amen!

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, IS Fascism.” Franklin Delano Roosevelt

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Dwight David Eisenhower