Nah, let's continue spending 56% of the world's total military budget and continue this downwards spiral.

McCain 08'

Clicky Clicky to see the Federal Budget/Defense Spending explained using Oreo Cookies.


The Military Industrial Complex is the Cookie Monster.

Keep on keepin' on. Kill the patient. Then your children will be forced out of the mass denial you all seem to suffer from.

A debtor nation is a happy nation.

/ Soon, Americans will prefer the Mexican peso over the American dollar.

The next Congress? What about the previously elected one? You know, the one with a majority of Democrats? The one that was supposed to stop all this spending and didn't? The Congress that didn't really do jack? Democrats had their chance and blew it big time. Real tough guys, there, yea, really.

Beemer: That's "spend like a drunken Air National Guardsman," subby.

Blah. As a member of the military, I must object to this "spending like a drunk 'X member of the military'" saying.

We don't have that much money to spend. We don't get paid shiat!

/drunk
//broke

The worst thing about it is that the Pentagon is a bureaucratic boondoggle that has nothing to do with defending America and everything to do with lining the pockets of generalissimos, lobbyists and a few well connected companies.

U sank my Carrier! (new window)

When George W. Bush disappears out the door of the White House, he'll leave his successor a long list of horrendous problems

...and every single treason supporting GOPer will whine like a farking biatch blaming the Dems.
Remember, the GOP and every single supporter is the enemy of freedom, liberty, and the U.S. Constitution.

JerkyMeat:

When George W. Bush disappears out the door of the White House, he'll leave his successor a long list of horrendous problems

...and every single treason supporting GOPer will whine like a farking biatch blaming the Dems.
Remember, the GOP and every single supporter is the enemy of freedom, liberty, and the U.S. Constitution.

Using that 'must be like the enemy to defeat the enemy' reasoning, eh?

xkillyourfacex: The next Congress? What about the previously elected one? You know, the one with a majority of Democrats? The one that was supposed to stop all this spending and didn't? The Congress that didn't really do jack? Democrats had their chance and blew it big time. Real tough guys, there, yea, really.

Come back when you actually have a clue on how the Senate works, and you know the meaning of the words filibuster and veto override.

JerkyMeat: When George W. Bush disappears out the door of the White House, he'll leave his successor a long list of horrendous problems

...and every single treason supporting GOPer will whine like a farking biatch blaming the Dems.
Remember, the GOP and every single supporter is the enemy of freedom, liberty, and the U.S. Constitution.

To be fair, most of those problems stem from bipartisan bills passed through both parties of congress virtually without objection, so blaming the GOP specifically is maybe jsut a wee bit of an oversimplificaiton. By which, I mean completely wrong.

//Haven't really seen any efforts to fix anything from our friends the majority party either, though this does not really surprise me, as their speaker is my old rep. She's probably the most useless person in politics today, and yes I include our president in that evaluation.

Eisenhower tried to warn us, but did we listen? No.

If more than half of what you're spendin' goes to defense,
then less than half goes to whatever you're defendin'.

/J5

He makes too much sense. He'll never be taken seriously by Washington.

xkillyourfacex: The Congress that didn't couldn't really do jack because of the 49% Republican obstructionism?

FTFY

oryx: Eisenhower tried to warn us

Eisenhower was responsible for it.

<b>grxymkjbn:</b> <i>xkillyourfacex: The Congress that didn't couldn't really do jack because of the 49% Republican obstructionism?

FTFY</i>

Don't forget the President that, after six years, finally found his veto pen.

/preview

And apparently I never get html back. I should probably just create an alt. It's what all the popular kids are doing these days...

<b>Dancin_In_Anson:</b> <i>Eisenhower was responsible for it.</i>

Yeah never mind the attack on Pearl Harbor and the declaration of war by Germany. Eisenhower woke up one morning and, out of the blue, decided to convert our manufacturing base to the production battleships, tanks and planes.

xkillyourfacex: The next Congress? What about the previously elected one? You know, the one with a majority of Democrats? The one that was supposed to stop all this spending and didn't? The Congress that didn't really do jack? Democrats had their chance and blew it big time. Real tough guys, there, yea, really.

I don't think having a simple majority is as cool as you think it is. Start complaining when the Dem's have 60+ seats =)

equilibrium: <b>Dancin_In_Anson:</b> <i>Eisenhower was responsible for it.</i>

Yeah never mind the attack on Pearl Harbor and the declaration of war by Germany. Eisenhower woke up one morning and, out of the blue, decided to convert our manufacturing base to the production battleships, tanks and planes.

I think Eisenhower was the one who decided *not* to convert it back once the war was over. That whole "large standing army during peace-time" thing.

equilibrium: Yeah never mind the attack on Pearl Harbor and the declaration of war by Germany. Eisenhower woke up one morning and, out of the blue, decided to convert our manufacturing base to the production battleships, tanks and planes.



/Ike was just a general in WW2. He couldn't say squat about how the US spent its military budget.

The Onanist: equilibrium: Yeah never mind the attack on Pearl Harbor and the declaration of war by Germany. Eisenhower woke up one morning and, out of the blue, decided to convert our manufacturing base to the production battleships, tanks and planes.



/Ike was just a general in WW2. He couldn't say squat about how the US spent its military budget.

Yup, a lot of people forget it was FDR who started it even before we entered WWII. That whole arsenal for democracy thing was,like the New Deal,an attmepted tospend our way out of a depression.

equilibrium: Yeah never mind the attack on Pearl Harbor and the declaration of war by Germany

Has absolutely nothing to do with Ike's building of the Industrial Military Complex as President.

"A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction...

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

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.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together."
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

hardly sounds as if he was in favor of the military industrial complex

MonkeyVegetables: hardly sounds as if he was in favor of the military industrial complex

He was still responsible for it.

As a current member of the military/industrial complex, I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

On the serious side, I won't argue military spending isn't sometimes wasteful. Not only do senior leaders have to be good at war and defense, they also have to make the best decisions with the information at hand. Then, the lower-levels of the military have to work out the details.

Even now, I have to struggle with civilian engineers who don't understand the concept of defense and the military, but work developing weapons systems. On the government side, its own internal & external bureaucracies are challenging to work with. Politicians can make the situation even worse with distribution of funds toward their own areas of interest.

How to do it better? Basically, pick and choose your fights carefully. We're wasting trillions in Iraq. Withdraw slowly and let the Iraqis work this out.

was he responsible for it or did he build it?

MonkeyVegetables: was he responsible for it or did he build it?

Yes.

MonkeyVegetables: "hardly sounds as if he was in favor of the military industrial complex"

I think DIA's point is that the "Military-Industrial Complex" really started during Ike's watch as President. He may have spoken against in speeches, but the veto pen is mightier than the sword.

Dinki So you're going to blame the failure of the Democrats on the Republicans? Nice. Is there anything Republicans can't do?

Republicans Made Me Do It^tm

67 Beetle: I think DIA's point is that the "Military-Industrial Complex" really started during Ike's watch as President

Exactly. Check out the expansion of the Air Force on his watch...especially in the rocket and bomber development. NASAs job was made much easier because of the missile systems already in place.

xkillyourfacex: Republicans Made Me Do Ittm

Ever take over a job from someone incompetent? Turns out that you can't just change everything usually. Half the time is spent coming up with a new plan while you wind up doing things the same way as your predecessor because changing that without a plan is disastrous.

I still am cleaning up our documentation from my predecessor, but if I just change the entire doc set, our operations staff will not be able to do the job the way they have gotten used to doing it. I have to rewrite it and have planned, targeted knowledge transfer sessions to educate them on how to use the revamped docs set.

That being said, the D's haven't really done anything stellar.

Then again, Bush controls the signature and they don't have enough to override a veto for most issues, so don't make this into a "THE DUMBOCRATS ARE IN POWR AND THEY CANT DO NOTHING!!!" line

Dancin_In_Anson: 67 Beetle: I think DIA's point is that the "Military-Industrial Complex" really started during Ike's watch as President

Exactly. Check out the expansion of the Air Force on his watch...especially in the rocket and bomber development. NASAs job was made much easier because of the missile systems already in place.

Now the question is: Would it have been better for us to continue the war, to fight the Soviets right then and there, so as to avoid the Cold War, the buildup military-industrial complex, and our pathetic fear of Communism?

I think it would have been.

I think we could save a lot of money if we stop with all the money wasted in pathetic technological research into military projects. Do we really need bombers that are invisible to radar or drones? I mean, what are we prepping ourselves for? A world war where we think we can destroy the whole world?

The more I think about it, the more Hunter Thompson quotes come to mind. The American century is over. I think it's time we finally get stopped, and it's going to take a depression to knock us into a British state of acceptance of letting go of dominance and realize the world is bigger than a bunch of people living in forced ignorance with mottos instead of convictions and a Bible instead of a farking brain.

<b>The Onanist:</b> <i>/Ike was just a general in WW2. He couldn't say squat about how the US spent its military budget.</i>

That's part of the point which I apparently should have made more obvious since both you and DIA missed it. Ike wasn't president until the Korean War was underway and we'd already had years of military buildup.

Obdicut: Now the question is: Would it have been better for us to continue the war, to fight the Soviets right then and there, so as to avoid the Cold War, the buildup military-industrial complex, and our pathetic fear of Communism?

I think it would have been.

Are you talking WWII?

Dancin_In_Anson: Are you talking WWII?

Yes.

All of this talk between FDR and Ike, as regards the military-industrial complex, and no mention of Truman? You guys are slipping.

NeauxFear: All of this talk between FDR and Ike, as regards the military-industrial complex, and no mention of Truman? You guys are slipping.

Yeah, the farking Truman Doctrine was one of the worst things to happen to America, ever.

Guntram Shatterhand: I think we could save a lot of money if we stop with all the money wasted in pathetic technological research into military projects. Do we really need bombers that are invisible to radar or drones? I mean, what are we prepping ourselves for? A world war where we think we can destroy the whole world?

Throughout human history, most major leaps in technology have been made in the military research sector. From Archimedes to the Internet, it holds true.

Obdicut: Yes.

Wow. that's a tough call. Patton advocated it and was sacked for it (as well as for a host of other reasons). How do you think it should have been conducted. Nuclear or conventional? Conventional would have been an absolute biatch taking account of what happened to the Germans at the gates of Moscow. Don't know if the American population would have had the stomach for it.

NeauxFear: All of this talk between FDR and Ike, as regards the military-industrial complex, and no mention of Truman? You guys are slipping.

Obdicut: Yeah, the farking Truman Doctrine was one of the worst things to happen to America, ever

I think Potsdam shook Truman up a bit. If I have this right, Stalin found out about the test at Roswell about the same time as Truman did...While in Potsdam. That may have had something to do with the way he (Truman) approached the situation.

Remove all Republicans: SO? Pass the damn bill if you can and watch a lame duck veto it. Do you really think the press is going to go with the lame duck? Have the Democratic candidates rip on the President as well. Free publicity all around. No, the Democrats are just freaking happy to get their pork as well. The House finally woke up on the FISA system, and I hope they keep at it.

I think you and I now have a consensus

I have a hard time seeing anybody fix the broken military procurement system or scaling back the defense budget to anything reasonable.

So many senators on both sides are in the pocket of defense contractors, want to bring those jobs to their state, or are simply afraid of the "weak on defense" attack that they can't take meaningful steps to fix the system. The tanker decision in favor of EADS/Northrop Grumman seems to be a step in the right direction (at least in not just taking the biggest corrupt US contractor, the price is still huge), but I'm not optimistic.

In my 25+ years of watching US politics, I've noticed a trend:
Republican takes power. Runs up the debt, but people are happy with tax cuts and (usually) bombing the snot out of someplace.

Democrat comes is, see the numbers and starts to get the fiscal house in order. Bombs the snot out of someone to take peoples minds off their troubles.

Republicans cry out "tax and spend! tax and spend!".

Well, no shiat, Sherlock. It's either that or face bankrupting the nation...

Tron-tonian

25+ years? Really? Hey, old timer. Your generation totally screwed my generation because of petty politics. Thanks a lot.

Remove all Republicans: Forget the fact that Republicans claim government doesn't work due to incompetant politicians and then get into power and prove it.

67 Beetle: I think DIA's point is that the "Military-Industrial Complex" really started during Ike's watch as President. He may have spoken against in speeches, but the veto pen is mightier than the sword.

Ike's point was that while it was necessary to have a strong standing military that could respond instantly to an attack, the temptation to expand the MIC could lead to the situation we have today of war for war's sake, with the MIC promoting wars for profit that aren't in the nation's best interest.

Not like Bush is spending any of his money. He's spending the tax dollars of hard working middle/poor class, not even that of the rich class. Of course, he's going spend like a drunk sailor.