But, but, think of the millions of unemployed defense contractor employees! Oh the horror!
hundreds of millions! billions!
are you counting the undeclared wars?
And several we haven't.
This I agree with. We did not have to get involved in Vietnam, Bosnia, or Grenada. Even Korea is a little iffy in my book, but if you are referring to Afghanistan or Iraq I think we did. At least the intel at the time pointed to it and what has been found since confirms most of it. The only thing not found was Iraqi WMD but the links between Saddam and OBL have all been confirmed by the captured documents.
I have not been able to find the links again that I was looking for but I did find a little. As a percentage of the federal budget total defense spending now accounts for about 20% of the total budget. Compared to most of our history this is low and has been low for a long time. The average since the 50s is around 34%. (you can ignore the first half of the chart) Note where the figures come from.
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content...solationism-BLOG-201111-defense-spending1.jpg
More later as I get more caffeine in me. 4 hours sleep is just not enough anymore.
EDIT: I almost forgot I wanted to add this.
As I said in an earlier post, Eisenhower was not a lefty, but some of what he said has been used by the lefties ever since.
Crap my googlefu sucks today. I am not finding most of the stuff I have read before.
Here is a little lite reading for you until I get my act together.
http://www.workingresources.com/professionaleffectivenessarticles/article.nhtml?uid=10027
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...s-may-result-million-lost-jobs_n_1147940.html
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/...ndy-forbes-says-153-million-defense-jobs-are/
Here is a little lite reading for you until I get my act together.
http://www.workingresources.com/professionaleffectivenessarticles/article.nhtml?uid=10027
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...s-may-result-million-lost-jobs_n_1147940.html
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/...ndy-forbes-says-153-million-defense-jobs-are/
If that is the rationale for invading countries then we should be invading Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt among others.
Of course Ike wasn't a lefty, nor was he an isolationist or anti-military - and he did think intervention was necessary in some instances and on certain levels. He simply viewed things in a more pragmatic manner, and cautioned us repeatedly for his entire political career to not let fear infringe on our liberties and economic prosperity. He railed against politicians drumming up war scares, and cautioned us to be wary of the influence a large defense industry and standing army can have on the political process. The Cross of Iron speech lays it all out very clear, and bear in mind the time period in which in which Ike made the speech and how things were in the Soviet Union at the time. He caution us not to take the road the Soviets took, which was an attempt to attain to security by:
"...not in mutual trust and mutual aid but in force: huge armies, subversion, rule of neighbor nations. The goal was power superiority at all costs. Security was to be sought by denying it to all others."
And nobody listened. For Ike to have the balls to make that speech in 1953, in which he basically told people to quit taking ideas from the Soviet playbook, was impressive. It was spot-on then, and it's spot on now. But Mencken said it best: "The truth, indeed, is something that mankind, for some mysterious reason, instinctively dislikes. Every man who tries to tell it is unpopular, and even when, by the sheer strength of his case, he prevails, he is put down as a scoundrel."
Your bolded line of Ike's farewell address isn't telling me anything I didn't already know - or disagree with. Read the context of the paragraph around that line, and you'll see Ike's concerns, which I think were more like predictions that came true in ways he could not have imagined.
And your numbers, like I say, military spending as a percentage of GDP or the federal budget is grossly misleading.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea. Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. 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 State house, 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.
I bolded a different part of the same quote
I bolded a different part of the same quote
If you were 5 years old and got separated from your parents at the fair, who would you run to for comfort and security - Santorum or Ike?
I rest my case.
I rest my case.
Similar threads
