BUCKNACKT'S SORDID TAWDRY BLOG We should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive & well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate, bier or wein in hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WHOO-HOO, WHAT A RIDE!!!!!!"
Showing posts with label War Is Business:The Blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War Is Business:The Blog. Show all posts
29 June 2012
Click. Boom. Why Amnesty's gone bananas; We need millions to sign the petition for a strong Arms Trade Treaty 28JUN12
BAHRAIN, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, The Democratic Rep of Congo, Uganda, The Central African Republic, Mali, Chad, Colombia, Mexico...just some of the countries being devastated by the world's rampant arms trade supplying every weapon imaginable to tyrants, despots, drug cartels and terrorist. The UN is meeting next week on this issue and Amnesty International has an ongoing campaign calling on the international community to take action to regulate and enforce restrictions on the arms trade. They face formidable opposition, here in the U.S. war is big business and the military-industrial complex often dictates our foreign and military policies, Check out the information below and sign Amnesty's petition to Pres Obama to be part of the solution, not part of the problem...
06 April 2012
PROTEST MUSIC AND ACTIONS AGAINST THE WARS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN
FROM 2007, and unfortunately things are basically the same, though no doubt things would be worse if the fascist repiglican ticket would have won. STILL, we have a responsibility to rise up and protest against any administration in the name of peace and freedom and social justice and civil rights and civil liberties.
http://youtu.be/_tpwbv-LZLA
http://youtu.be/OT_aR6H1pcs
http://youtu.be/9fZDm1nSjAM
28 January 2012
Navy wants commando ‘mothership’ in Middle East 27JAN12 & Crude Oil and Total Petroleum Imports Top 15 Countries September 2011 Import Highlights 29NOV11
AGAIN the American taxpayers are being asked to put our troops in harms way and to pay for protecting oil exports from the Persian Gulf, oil exports we are not dependent on, but the American oil cartel is dependent on for their corporate profits, and the economies of Europe, Southeast Asia, India, Japan and South Korea are dependent on. Let those who need this oil provide the forces necessary to keep it flowing. Big oil and the military-industrial complex in the U.S. dictate American foreign policy in the region, it is nothing on their corporate books for their greed and willingness to sacrifice American lives, spill American blood for oil.Let those who need this oil provide the forces necessary to keep it flowing. Let the oil producing nations of the Persian Gulf pay for it. Instead of continuing to waste American lives and tax dollars on this oil profit protection racket and subsidizing the military-industrial complex (because war is big business) we should eliminate corporate welfare subsidies for big oil and gas in the U.S., invest those hundreds of millions of dollars into the proven renewable energy technology available now and more into upgrading our energy grid to effectively distribute energy and into R&D into improving and developing more renewable energy and conservation programs. The propaganda of big oil, gas and the military-industrial complex deceiving the American people, their ownership of too many American politicians in D.C. and throughout the states and their insatiable greed keep us dependent on imported oil. In return we get a "mother ship" in the Persian Gulf, another platform for launching the caskets of American troops to their families in the U.S.
Here is the Washington Post article on the commando "mother ship" followed by the latest available from the Dept of Energy showing the top 15 oil exporters to the U.S.
The Pentagon is rushing to send a large floating base for commando teams to the Middle East as tensions rise with Iran, al-Qaeda in Yemen and Somali pirates, among other threats.
In response to requests from U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, the Navy is converting an aging warship it had planned to decommission into a makeshift staging base for the commandos. Unofficially dubbed a “mothership,” the floating base could accommodate smaller high-speed boats and helicopters commonly used by Navy SEALs, procurement documents show.
Special Operations forces are a key part of the Obama administration’s strategy to make the military leaner and more agile as the Pentagon confronts at least $487 billion in spending cuts over the next decade.
Lt. Cmdr. Mike Kafka, a spokesman for the Navy’s Fleet Forces Command, declined to elaborate on the floating base’s purpose or to say where, exactly, it will be deployed in the Middle East. Other Navy officials acknowledged that they were moving with unusual haste to complete the conversion and send the mothership to the region by early summer.
Navy documents indicate that it could be headed to the Persian Gulf, where Iran has threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping route for much of the world’s oil supply. A market survey proposal from the Military Sealift Command, dated Dec. 22 and posted online, states that the floating base needed to be delivered to the Persian Gulf.
Other contract documents do not specify a location but say the mothership would be used to “support mine countermeasure” missions. Defense officials have said that if Iran did attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz, it would rely on mines to obstruct the waterway.
With a large naval base in Bahrain, and one or two aircraft carrier groups usually assigned to the region, the Navy has a substantial presence in the Persian Gulf and surrounding waters. Adding the mothership would do relatively little to bolster U.S. maritime power overall, but it could play an instrumental role in secretive commando missions offshore.
The deployment of the floating base could also mark a return to maritime missions for SEAL teams, which for the past decade have spent most of their time on land in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Other details of the project became public Tuesday when the Military Sealift Command posted a bid request to retrofit the USS Ponce, an amphibious transport docking ship, on a rush-order basis.
Until December, the Navy had planned to retire the Ponce and decommission it in March after 41 years of service. Among other missions, it was deployed to the Mediterranean Sea last year in support of NATO’s air war over Libya.
Instead, the ship will be modified into what the military terms an Afloat Forward Staging Base. Kafka said it would be used to support mine-clearance ships, smaller patrol ships and aircraft.
The documents posted by the Military Sealift Command in December, however, specify that the mothership will be rebuilt so that it can also serve as a docking station for several small high-speed boats and helicopters commonly used by Navy SEAL teams.
Among the vessels listed are Mark 5 Zodiacs, inflatable boats that can carry up to 15 passengers and can roll up into bags, and seven-meter-long Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats, which can carry an entire SEAL squad.
SEAL teams also deploy from regular warships, but most vessels in the Navy’s fleet must patrol or move around on a regular basis. A mothership can stay in one spot for weeks or months, effectively serving as a floating base for commandos as they monitor coastal areas or prepare for amphibious operations.
The U.S. Special Operations Command has sought a transportable floating base for several years, saying that a mothership would expand the range of commando squads operating from small speedboats, particularly in remote coastal areas.
Defense officials said the Ponce will serve as a stopgap measure until the Navy can build a new Afloat Forward Staging Base from scratch. In budget documents released Thursday, the Pentagon said it would fund that project starting next year.
The floating base also could be suited to the coast of Somalia, a failed state that is home to an al-Qaeda affiliate and gangs of pirates. A mothership there would give SEALs or other commandos more flexibility in missions such as Wednesday’s rescue of a pair of American and Danish hostages who had been held for months by Somali pirates.
The term “mothership” is also commonly used to describe a vessel used by Somali pirates. After hijacking a large container or cargo vessel, pirate crews often turn it into a floating base to extend the range of their skiffs or speedboats far into the Indian Ocean, Gulf of Aden and Persian Gulf.
U.S. military officials declined to say what prompted them to give the Ponce a sudden new lease on life. But contract and bidding documents underscore the urgency of the project.
One no-bid contract for engineering work states that the military was waiving normal procurement rules because any delay presented a “national security risk.” Other contract bids are due Feb. 3. The Navy wants the conversion work to begin 10 days later on the Ponce, which is docked in Virginia Beach.
Here is the Washington Post article on the commando "mother ship" followed by the latest available from the Dept of Energy showing the top 15 oil exporters to the U.S.
The Pentagon is rushing to send a large floating base for commando teams to the Middle East as tensions rise with Iran, al-Qaeda in Yemen and Somali pirates, among other threats.
In response to requests from U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, the Navy is converting an aging warship it had planned to decommission into a makeshift staging base for the commandos. Unofficially dubbed a “mothership,” the floating base could accommodate smaller high-speed boats and helicopters commonly used by Navy SEALs, procurement documents show.
Special Operations forces are a key part of the Obama administration’s strategy to make the military leaner and more agile as the Pentagon confronts at least $487 billion in spending cuts over the next decade.
Lt. Cmdr. Mike Kafka, a spokesman for the Navy’s Fleet Forces Command, declined to elaborate on the floating base’s purpose or to say where, exactly, it will be deployed in the Middle East. Other Navy officials acknowledged that they were moving with unusual haste to complete the conversion and send the mothership to the region by early summer.
Navy documents indicate that it could be headed to the Persian Gulf, where Iran has threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping route for much of the world’s oil supply. A market survey proposal from the Military Sealift Command, dated Dec. 22 and posted online, states that the floating base needed to be delivered to the Persian Gulf.
Other contract documents do not specify a location but say the mothership would be used to “support mine countermeasure” missions. Defense officials have said that if Iran did attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz, it would rely on mines to obstruct the waterway.
With a large naval base in Bahrain, and one or two aircraft carrier groups usually assigned to the region, the Navy has a substantial presence in the Persian Gulf and surrounding waters. Adding the mothership would do relatively little to bolster U.S. maritime power overall, but it could play an instrumental role in secretive commando missions offshore.
The deployment of the floating base could also mark a return to maritime missions for SEAL teams, which for the past decade have spent most of their time on land in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Other details of the project became public Tuesday when the Military Sealift Command posted a bid request to retrofit the USS Ponce, an amphibious transport docking ship, on a rush-order basis.
Until December, the Navy had planned to retire the Ponce and decommission it in March after 41 years of service. Among other missions, it was deployed to the Mediterranean Sea last year in support of NATO’s air war over Libya.
Instead, the ship will be modified into what the military terms an Afloat Forward Staging Base. Kafka said it would be used to support mine-clearance ships, smaller patrol ships and aircraft.
The documents posted by the Military Sealift Command in December, however, specify that the mothership will be rebuilt so that it can also serve as a docking station for several small high-speed boats and helicopters commonly used by Navy SEAL teams.
Among the vessels listed are Mark 5 Zodiacs, inflatable boats that can carry up to 15 passengers and can roll up into bags, and seven-meter-long Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats, which can carry an entire SEAL squad.
SEAL teams also deploy from regular warships, but most vessels in the Navy’s fleet must patrol or move around on a regular basis. A mothership can stay in one spot for weeks or months, effectively serving as a floating base for commandos as they monitor coastal areas or prepare for amphibious operations.
The U.S. Special Operations Command has sought a transportable floating base for several years, saying that a mothership would expand the range of commando squads operating from small speedboats, particularly in remote coastal areas.
Defense officials said the Ponce will serve as a stopgap measure until the Navy can build a new Afloat Forward Staging Base from scratch. In budget documents released Thursday, the Pentagon said it would fund that project starting next year.
The floating base also could be suited to the coast of Somalia, a failed state that is home to an al-Qaeda affiliate and gangs of pirates. A mothership there would give SEALs or other commandos more flexibility in missions such as Wednesday’s rescue of a pair of American and Danish hostages who had been held for months by Somali pirates.
The term “mothership” is also commonly used to describe a vessel used by Somali pirates. After hijacking a large container or cargo vessel, pirate crews often turn it into a floating base to extend the range of their skiffs or speedboats far into the Indian Ocean, Gulf of Aden and Persian Gulf.
U.S. military officials declined to say what prompted them to give the Ponce a sudden new lease on life. But contract and bidding documents underscore the urgency of the project.
One no-bid contract for engineering work states that the military was waiving normal procurement rules because any delay presented a “national security risk.” Other contract bids are due Feb. 3. The Navy wants the conversion work to begin 10 days later on the Ponce, which is docked in Virginia Beach.
Crude Oil and Total Petroleum Imports Top 15 Countries |
|---|
September 2011 Import Highlights: Released November 29, 2011
ftp://ftp.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
Monthly data on the origins of crude oil imports in September 2011 has been released and it shows that three countries exported more than 1,000 thousand barrels per day to the United States (see table below). The top five exporting countries accounted for 69 percent of United States crude oil imports in September while the top ten sources accounted for approximately 88 percent of all U.S. crude oil imports. The top five sources of US crude oil imports for September were Canada (2,324 thousand barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (1,465 thousand barrels per day), Mexico (1,099 thousand barrels per day), Venezuela (759 thousand barrels per day) and Nigeria (529 thousand barrels per day). The rest of the top ten sources, in order, were Colombia (510 thousand barrels per day), Iraq (403 thousand barrels per day), Ecuador (299 thousand barrels per day), Angola (283 thousand barrels per day) and Russia (275 thousand barrels per day). Total crude oil imports averaged 9,006 thousand barrels per day in September, which is a decrease of (16) thousand barrels per day from August 2011.
Canada remained the largest exporter of total petroleum in September, exporting 2,829 thousand barrels per day to the United States, which is an increase from last month (2,637 thousand barrels per day). The second largest exporter of total petroleum was Saudi Arabia with 1,479 thousand barrels per day.
Monthly data on the origins of crude oil imports in September 2011 has been released and it shows that three countries exported more than 1,000 thousand barrels per day to the United States (see table below). The top five exporting countries accounted for 69 percent of United States crude oil imports in September while the top ten sources accounted for approximately 88 percent of all U.S. crude oil imports. The top five sources of US crude oil imports for September were Canada (2,324 thousand barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (1,465 thousand barrels per day), Mexico (1,099 thousand barrels per day), Venezuela (759 thousand barrels per day) and Nigeria (529 thousand barrels per day). The rest of the top ten sources, in order, were Colombia (510 thousand barrels per day), Iraq (403 thousand barrels per day), Ecuador (299 thousand barrels per day), Angola (283 thousand barrels per day) and Russia (275 thousand barrels per day). Total crude oil imports averaged 9,006 thousand barrels per day in September, which is a decrease of (16) thousand barrels per day from August 2011.
Canada remained the largest exporter of total petroleum in September, exporting 2,829 thousand barrels per day to the United States, which is an increase from last month (2,637 thousand barrels per day). The second largest exporter of total petroleum was Saudi Arabia with 1,479 thousand barrels per day.
| Crude Oil Imports (Top 15 Countries) (Thousand Barrels per Day) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country | Sep-11 | Aug-11 | YTD 2011 | Sep-10 | YTD 2010 |
| CANADA | 2,324 | 2,240 | 2,157 | 1,937 | 1,971 |
| SAUDI ARABIA | 1,465 | 1,075 | 1,180 | 1,082 | 1,072 |
| MEXICO | 1,099 | 1,150 | 1,113 | 1,108 | 1,132 |
| VENEZUELA | 759 | 806 | 893 | 919 | 928 |
| NIGERIA | 529 | 854 | 826 | 1,107 | 1,018 |
| COLOMBIA | 510 | 365 | 364 | 308 | 328 |
| IRAQ | 403 | 637 | 473 | 422 | 464 |
| ECUADOR | 299 | 303 | 203 | 229 | 215 |
| ANGOLA | 283 | 311 | 323 | 404 | 413 |
| RUSSIA | 275 | 252 | 246 | 286 | 295 |
| BRAZIL | 163 | 213 | 225 | 177 | 270 |
| KUWAIT | 145 | 165 | 164 | 172 | 204 |
| ALGERIA | 139 | 140 | 204 | 366 | 337 |
| CHAD | 74 | 32 | 54 | 30 | 14 |
| OMAN | 72 | 52 | 39 | 0 | 0 |
| Total Imports of Petroleum (Top 15 Countries) (Thousand Barrels per Day) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country | Sep-11 | Aug-11 | YTD 2011 | Sep-10 | YTD 2010 |
| CANADA | 2,829 | 2,637 | 2,670 | 2,479 | 2,537 |
| SAUDI ARABIA | 1,479 | 1,075 | 1,187 | 1,093 | 1,086 |
| MEXICO | 1,192 | 1,185 | 1,218 | 1,254 | 1,260 |
| VENEZUELA | 806 | 906 | 979 | 1,008 | 1,007 |
| RUSSIA | 592 | 585 | 609 | 648 | 624 |
| NIGERIA | 580 | 892 | 876 | 1,174 | 1,053 |
| COLOMBIA | 529 | 395 | 395 | 363 | 360 |
| IRAQ | 404 | 637 | 473 | 422 | 464 |
| ECUADOR | 305 | 309 | 205 | 229 | 217 |
| ANGOLA | 304 | 331 | 335 | 417 | 422 |
| ALGERIA | 291 | 298 | 396 | 543 | 512 |
| VIRGIN ISLANDS | 189 | 185 | 189 | 302 | 261 |
| BRAZIL | 188 | 228 | 240 | 181 | 289 |
| ARUBA | 149 | 81 | 79 | 0 | 0 |
| KUWAIT | 145 | 165 | 165 | 172 | 206 |
Note: The data in the tables above exclude oil imports into the U.S. territories.
29 January 2011
Egyptian President’s Private Jets Have Cost US Taxpayers $111 Million 28JAN11
WAR IS BUSINESS, and here is another example of how the American government, controlled by the military-industrial complex, placed war profits over the human rights of Egyptians....just imagine the number of lives that could have been improved in Egypt if this money had been foreign aid to develop education, nutrition, health care, housing and economic interest in the country.....what a waste of American taxpayer dollars.
WIth all the worldwide news coverage of street protests in Egypt, conflict academic Chris Albon makes an astute point via Twitter: “Want to know why foreign military assistance is often a bad idea? Imagine video of Egyptian protesters being crushed by US-built APCs.”
As it happens, the anti-riot trucks favored by Egyptian police bear the logo of an Italian company, Iveco SpA.*
Albon’s concern is not misplaced, however. The US government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the years to equip the Egyptian security forces with high-tech military hardware.
But unless things get really, really bad there, it’s unlikely that any big-ticket American military hardware will be used directly against the Egyptian demonstrators. A selection of Defense Department contracts dating to the mid-1990s reveals weapons sales to Egypt that include a Black Hawk helicopters (Sikorsky), a dizzying variety of missiles (Raytheon), Abrams tanks (General Dynamics), Humvees (AM General Corp.) and all manner of ammunition.
Now, if through some incredible circumstance Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak decides to flee the country, à la Ben Ali, there’s a good chance his first-class flight would come courtesy of the American taxpayer.
Pentagon contracts show that the US government has spent at least $111,160,328 to purchase and maintain Mubarak’s fleet of nine Gulfstream business jets. (For those keeping score, Gulfstream is a subsidiary of General Dynamics.)
Amateur planespotters have photographed several of the planes around the world. Mubarak also apparently travels in a Airbus A340; I have no idea who put up the money for that one.
Here are the relevant contract summaries:
WIth all the worldwide news coverage of street protests in Egypt, conflict academic Chris Albon makes an astute point via Twitter: “Want to know why foreign military assistance is often a bad idea? Imagine video of Egyptian protesters being crushed by US-built APCs.”As it happens, the anti-riot trucks favored by Egyptian police bear the logo of an Italian company, Iveco SpA.*
Albon’s concern is not misplaced, however. The US government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the years to equip the Egyptian security forces with high-tech military hardware.
But unless things get really, really bad there, it’s unlikely that any big-ticket American military hardware will be used directly against the Egyptian demonstrators. A selection of Defense Department contracts dating to the mid-1990s reveals weapons sales to Egypt that include a Black Hawk helicopters (Sikorsky), a dizzying variety of missiles (Raytheon), Abrams tanks (General Dynamics), Humvees (AM General Corp.) and all manner of ammunition.
Now, if through some incredible circumstance Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak decides to flee the country, à la Ben Ali, there’s a good chance his first-class flight would come courtesy of the American taxpayer.Pentagon contracts show that the US government has spent at least $111,160,328 to purchase and maintain Mubarak’s fleet of nine Gulfstream business jets. (For those keeping score, Gulfstream is a subsidiary of General Dynamics.)
Amateur planespotters have photographed several of the planes around the world. Mubarak also apparently travels in a Airbus A340; I have no idea who put up the money for that one.
Here are the relevant contract summaries:
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $9,535,315 firm fixed price contract modification to provide for continued fleet maintenance support for nine Gulfstream aircraft owned by the Egyptian government. This modification extends contract for 12 months plus 1-year option. Total funds have been obligated. This work will be complete by October 2006. Headquarters 72nd Air Base Wing, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (FA8106-04-C-0001/P00005).
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $19,825,221 firm fixed price contract modification to provide for the Foreign Military Sales Program in support of FMS Case Egyptian. The Air Force provides follow-on maintenance support for the Egyptian Government’s Presidential fleet of Gulfstream aircraft. The program will provide depot maintenance support, parts and material repair, and supply, field team, and Aircraft on Ground or urgent situation support. At this time, $14,825,221 of the funds has been obligated. Further funds will be obligated as individual delivery orders are issued. This work will be complete by November 2005. Solicitation began October 2003 and Negotiations were completed October 2003. The Headquarters Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (FA8106-04-C-0001).
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $14,907,400 firm-fixed-price contract modification to provide for the Peace Lotus III Program, which is a foreign military sales program for the procurement of two Gulfstream G400 aircraft, Cleopatra modification, associated spares, logistics, support equipment, program management and training on behalf of the government of the Arab Republic of Egypt. The aircraft will become part of the Egyptian Presidential Fleet. Current modification is to establish negotiated firm-fixed prices for the outfitting of two aircraft interiors. Previous effort established negotiated firm-fixed prices for the procurement of two “green” aircraft (airframe only, no interior completion), Cleopatra modification and program management. Future effort will establish firm-fixed prices for associated spares, support equipment, logistics and training and will be covered under a separate 1279 report. Total funds have been obligated. This work will be complete by August 2004. The Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (F34601-03-C-0038, P00001).
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $66,892,392 firm fixed price contract to provide for two Gulfstream GIV-SP executive aircraft, associated spares, logistics, support equipment, and training. Contract is expected to be completed September 1998. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. There was one firm solicited and one proposal received. Negotiations were completed March 1997. This effort supports foreign military sales to Egypt. Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (F34601-97/C-0244).
* This tidbit also comes via Twitter, thanks to eagle-eyed Foreign Policy magazine managing editor Blake Hounshell; Hounshell also noticed a report that Egyptian First Lady Suzanne Mubarak once “commandeered a bus that had been bought with money from the United States Agency for International Development and that had been meant to carry children to school.”
06 January 2011
New Map Shows 2,200 Private US Military Contractors from WAR IS BUSINESS 5JAN11
WANT TO SEE WHERE OUR TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING WASTED ON THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX? Check out the interactive map below.....also added to the TOP SECRET AMERICA page on this blog
Finally! Here’s a rough version of a feature I’ve had in mind for this site since its launch late last year: Military contractor maps.
The closest comparable online project is a part of the Washington Post’s Top Secret America series, by Dana Priest and Bill Arkin. Aided by a team of researchers and computer geeks, Priest and Arkin did an impressive job at sketching out the nationwide network of US military and intelligence contractors. Unfortunately, the Post chose to censor the results of their research, even though the “secrets” had been gleaned through public records. As an editor’s note to the series explained, users can “see the cities and towns where the government conducts top-secret work in the United States, but not the specific locations, companies or agencies involved.”
The “national security” justification, in that case, was unconvincing.
The new War Is Business map, by contrast, is designed specifically to show the locations of companies doing business with the Pentagon, because the point of this website is to reveal who profits from war spending. To that end, the map links up to our DIY investigations form, so not only can users easily find nearby military companies, they are given the tools to find out who owns those companies.
Revealing this information is not—repeat not—a threat to members of the armed forces or their civilian colleagues. On the contrary. As an eight-month Congressional investigation recently determined, US national security is gravely threatened by system-wide ignorance regarding the ownership of military contractors.
Anyway, enough with the introduction—give it a try!
Send suggestions and comments to editor-at-warisbusiness.com. And if anyone has the time and expertise to help build a more expansive version of this project based on OpenStreetMap, please get in touch.
A quick visual scan shows, predictably, that some regions of the country landed more big Pentagon projects than others. The point here is to explore the data in greater detail, and fill in some important unknowns about today’s military-industrial complex.
Source: DoD
Finally! Here’s a rough version of a feature I’ve had in mind for this site since its launch late last year: Military contractor maps.The closest comparable online project is a part of the Washington Post’s Top Secret America series, by Dana Priest and Bill Arkin. Aided by a team of researchers and computer geeks, Priest and Arkin did an impressive job at sketching out the nationwide network of US military and intelligence contractors. Unfortunately, the Post chose to censor the results of their research, even though the “secrets” had been gleaned through public records. As an editor’s note to the series explained, users can “see the cities and towns where the government conducts top-secret work in the United States, but not the specific locations, companies or agencies involved.”
The “national security” justification, in that case, was unconvincing.
The new War Is Business map, by contrast, is designed specifically to show the locations of companies doing business with the Pentagon, because the point of this website is to reveal who profits from war spending. To that end, the map links up to our DIY investigations form, so not only can users easily find nearby military companies, they are given the tools to find out who owns those companies.
Revealing this information is not—repeat not—a threat to members of the armed forces or their civilian colleagues. On the contrary. As an eight-month Congressional investigation recently determined, US national security is gravely threatened by system-wide ignorance regarding the ownership of military contractors.
Anyway, enough with the introduction—give it a try!
Send suggestions and comments to editor-at-warisbusiness.com. And if anyone has the time and expertise to help build a more expansive version of this project based on OpenStreetMap, please get in touch.
Where Were The Winners In Pentagon Procurement?
These 2,200 companies received a collective $12 billion from the US military in fiscal year 2010. Each contract was worth at least $1 million, so this subset represents a fraction of the hundreds of billions diverted from American taxpayers to the Defense Department to private corporations in that year.A quick visual scan shows, predictably, that some regions of the country landed more big Pentagon projects than others. The point here is to explore the data in greater detail, and fill in some important unknowns about today’s military-industrial complex.
You can help. Browse the map and find a contractor near you.
Click through the company’s name to begin a new DIY WIB investigation, and help piece together something that even the Pentagon doesn’t know—namely, who owns all these companies.Source: DoD
29 December 2010
WAR IS BUSINESS
A really informative and disturbing article from WAR IS BUSINESS....showing again the greed of the U.S. military-industrial complex and the control they have on our government no matter what political party is in the White House or has a majority in either chamber of Congress. The business of war disgust me....I hate the fact that so many people are so ignorant and blind that they see nothing wrong with their tax dollars being given away to countries all around the world in the form of guns and tanks and planes and mortars and missiles...but object to the minuscule level of humanitarian foreign aid we send to the world. Just imagine the possibilities for peace and prosperity if we applied the same level of money we waste on the military on educating, feeding, housing, and providing health care here and around the world! Imagine if we subsidized tractors and teachers, renewable energy and health care, mass transit and sustainable housing, conservation and urban renewal, both here in the U.S. and around the world at levels greater than what we subsidize weapons systems and war. When people have a good life they want to live in peace, they have no reason to fight, in fact, they realize they have too much to loose. This may sound like an unattainable dream but I believe if given the choice a vast majority of people would choose to live in peace, and given the opportunities and the means to improve their lives they will turn their backs on war and military waste, fraud and the death and destruction the military-industrial complex offers...the only thing they have to offer to the people of the world. Click the header to go to the NY Times story and check out the WAR IS BUSINESS website by clicking the link at the end of this post.
The New York Times published on Christmas Eve a story exposing nearly 300 US companies that hold special export licenses allowing them to do “billions of dollars in business with Iran and other countries blacklisted as state sponsors of terrorism.”
The companies include such household names as Pepsi, General Electric and Bank of America. The countries include such international pariahs as Sudan, Burma, North Korea and Zimbabwe.
With a little database work, I filled in one missing facet of the story. At least 83 of the companies listed by the Times as having multiple special export licenses are Department of Defense contractors.
Regardless of whether you agree with the policy of blacklisting, or its particulars, it’s hard to understand why the US government would allow top military contractors to cut deals with declared adversaries. The Times reports that many of the special licenses “were deemed to serve American foreign policy goals”—whatever that means. Other exemptions were inexplicable except perhaps as kickbacks.
There’s another angle to all this double-dealing. Yesterday, I took note of a post by John Quiggin at Crooked Timber. Quiggin argues that wartime profit spikes for “the elite or the capitalist class” are not a key reason behind America’s penchant for doomed foreign occupations and insistence on excessive military budgets. Quiggin oversimplifies the process by which private profits influence military policy, but I’ll let him finish making his case before I pick at it. He continues,
The fact is, some major American corporations and military contractors are perfectly able to trade with putative enemies right now—and presumably at enviable margins, given the scarcities imposed by sanctions. Therefore they have no economic incentive to advocate for peace.
It gets uglier. Should an actual shooting war break out, these contractors may stand to gain from a surge in spending by their best customer, the US military—even though they would temporarily lose out on those special trade opportunities.
In short, big military corporations can’t really lose. They don’t have to play by the same rules as ordinary businesses. And it’s increasingly clear that profit-minded military contractors—not rule-bound Pentagon bureaucrats—wear the pants in this incestuous relationship.
Here’s the list of US military contractors holding extra-special export licenses, derived from the Times’ reporting, and the blacklisted countries or organizations with which they’ve done business. The list runs in descending order by the number of export licenses held, from over 200 in the case of Bank of America and GE, down to five at the bottom. Click on any of the names to help our research and gain access to more of the site.
Sources: Department of Defense, New York Times
http://www.warisbusiness.com/2010/12/named-83-pentagon-contractors-who-do-business-with-iran-north-korea-and-other-us-enemies/
The New York Times published on Christmas Eve a story exposing nearly 300 US companies that hold special export licenses allowing them to do “billions of dollars in business with Iran and other countries blacklisted as state sponsors of terrorism.”The companies include such household names as Pepsi, General Electric and Bank of America. The countries include such international pariahs as Sudan, Burma, North Korea and Zimbabwe.
With a little database work, I filled in one missing facet of the story. At least 83 of the companies listed by the Times as having multiple special export licenses are Department of Defense contractors.
Regardless of whether you agree with the policy of blacklisting, or its particulars, it’s hard to understand why the US government would allow top military contractors to cut deals with declared adversaries. The Times reports that many of the special licenses “were deemed to serve American foreign policy goals”—whatever that means. Other exemptions were inexplicable except perhaps as kickbacks.
There’s another angle to all this double-dealing. Yesterday, I took note of a post by John Quiggin at Crooked Timber. Quiggin argues that wartime profit spikes for “the elite or the capitalist class” are not a key reason behind America’s penchant for doomed foreign occupations and insistence on excessive military budgets. Quiggin oversimplifies the process by which private profits influence military policy, but I’ll let him finish making his case before I pick at it. He continues,
[W]hile some businesses obviously benefit from, and lobby for, war, there are plenty more who would prefer to make money trading with putative enemies like Iran and Iraq.That sounds good, in theory. A look at the evidence here reveals another story.
The fact is, some major American corporations and military contractors are perfectly able to trade with putative enemies right now—and presumably at enviable margins, given the scarcities imposed by sanctions. Therefore they have no economic incentive to advocate for peace.
It gets uglier. Should an actual shooting war break out, these contractors may stand to gain from a surge in spending by their best customer, the US military—even though they would temporarily lose out on those special trade opportunities.
In short, big military corporations can’t really lose. They don’t have to play by the same rules as ordinary businesses. And it’s increasingly clear that profit-minded military contractors—not rule-bound Pentagon bureaucrats—wear the pants in this incestuous relationship.
Here’s the list of US military contractors holding extra-special export licenses, derived from the Times’ reporting, and the blacklisted countries or organizations with which they’ve done business. The list runs in descending order by the number of export licenses held, from over 200 in the case of Bank of America and GE, down to five at the bottom. Click on any of the names to help our research and gain access to more of the site.
| Bank of America | Cuba, Iran, Kosovo, Sudan, Non-Proliferation, Multiple, Iraq, Burma, Weapons Mass Destruction, Yugoslavia, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers |
| General Electric | Iran, Sudan, Iraq, Libya, Cuba |
| Siemens | Iran, Iraq, Sudan |
| Boston Scientific Corporation | Iran, Iraq |
| Datascope Corp | Iran |
| Pfizer Inc | Iran, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers |
| Becton Dickinson and Company | Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Cuba, Libya |
| Caterpillar Inc. | Iraq, Iran, Taliban, Cuba |
| Abbott Laboratories | Iran, Sudan, Cuba, Libya, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers |
| Archer Daniels Midland Company | Iran, Cuba, Libya, Sudan, Iraq |
| Hologic Inc | Iran |
| Philips Electronics | Iran, Libya, Sudan |
| Cargill | Cuba, Sudan, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Yugoslavia, Iraq |
| Medtronic Inc. | Iran, Sudan, Libya, Iraq |
| Stryker Corporation | Iran, Sudan, Libya |
| Wyeth | Iran, Sudan, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers, Libya, Narcotics, Global Terrorism, Iraq |
| AirSep Cororation | Iran, Libya, Sudan |
| Coca-Cola Company | Iran, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, Iraq |
| Medrad Incorporated | Iran, Sudan |
| Eastman Kodak Company | Iran, Sudan |
| PepsiCo Inc. | Iran, Sudan, Libya |
| Carl Zeiss Meditec | Iran, Iraq |
| Draeger Medical Systems | Iran, Sudan |
| Bayer Corporation | Iran, Sudan, Kosovo, Cuba, Iraq |
| Merck | Iran, Sudan, Libya, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers, Iraq |
| Genzyme Corporation | Iran, Libya, Cuba |
| St. Jude Medical Inc. | Iran, Iraq |
| The Boeing Company | Sudan, Multiple, Global Terrorism, Iran, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers, Libya, Belarus, Cuba |
| Varian Medical Systems | Iran, Sudan |
| Haemonetics Corporation | Iran, Sudan, Cuba, Iraq |
| Ohmeda Medical | Libya, Sudan, Iran |
| Del Monte | Iran, Sudan |
| Hill-Rom Company | Iran, Iraq |
| Zoll Medical Corporation | Iran |
| American Red Cross | Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Multiple, Sudan NGO Registration, Terrorism List |
| Johnson & Johnson | Iran |
| Mallinckrodt Pharmaceutical Company | Iran |
| Valmont Industries Inc | Iraq, Iran |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Company | Iran, Libya, Sudan |
| FMC Technologies | Iraq |
| Gambro BCT Inc. | Iran, Sudan |
| Genetics International | Sudan, Iraq |
| Masimo Corporation | Iran |
| 3M Company | Iran, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers, Sudan |
| Beckman Coulter | Sudan, Iraq |
| C.R. Bard Inc | Iran, Sudan, Cuba |
| Edwards Lifesciences LLC | Iran, Libya, Sudan |
| ExxonMobil | Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Narcotics, Angola, Taliban, Iran, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers |
| Nova Biomedical Corporation | Iran, Sudan |
| Royal Crown Cola Co. | Sudan |
| ConAgra Foods | Cuba, Libya, Sudan, Iran |
| Fisher Controls International | Iraq, Libya |
| Lockheed Martin Corporation | Sudan, Multiple |
| MCI | Cuba, Iran, Iraq |
| DynCorp International LLC | Sudan, Iraq, Cuba, Iran |
| EG & G | Global Terrorism, Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers, Liberia, Terrorism |
| Ingersoll-Rand Company | Iraq, Cuba |
| Merit Medical Systems Inc. | Iran |
| Minrad Inc. | Iran, Sudan |
| Alcon Laboratories | Iran |
| CHS Inc. | Iran, Libya |
| Elekta Limited | Iran |
| General Mills | Iran |
| Grason-Stadler/Div of Viasys Healthcare | Iran |
| Lincoln Electric Company | Iraq |
| Oracle Corporation | Iraq |
| PAE Government Services Inc | Sudan |
| Pall Corporation | Iran |
| Respironics Inc. | Iran |
| Starkey Laboratories Inc. | Iran |
| World Fuel Services Corporation | Iraq, Iran, Burma, Sudan |
| ABB Inc. | Iraq |
| AGA Medical Corporation | Iran, Sudan |
| American Equipment Company | Iraq |
| Aspect Medical Systems | Iran, Sudan NGO Registration |
| Bechtel | Iraq |
| Datex Ohmeda Inc. | Iran, Iraq |
| Motorola | Iraq, Taliban |
| Ortho Clinical Diagnostics Inc. | Iran |
| Pharmavite | Iran |
| Smiths Medical MD Inc. | Iran |
| William Wrigley Jr. Company | Sudan, Iran |
| York International Coporation | Iraq |
http://www.warisbusiness.com/2010/12/named-83-pentagon-contractors-who-do-business-with-iran-north-korea-and-other-us-enemies/
18 December 2010
War Is Business: The Blog from MOJO 17DEZ10 & Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
REMEMBERING former President Eisenhower's warning BEWARE THE MILITARY here is a new blog to check out WAR IS BUSINESS: THE BLOG, and there is a link to it on this blog. Check it out, and read the Eisenhower speech below.
War Is Business: The Blog
As MJ's resident industrial-military complex guy, I feel it's my duty to introduce the readership to the best information resources out there, and to pass on readers' recommendations, as well. So check out this new watchdog media start-up, War Is Business. Billed as "Rolling Stone guest-edits Jane's Defence Weekly," it's a blog edited by outstanding journalist Corey Pein, and it's already busted out some awesome takes on recent news, like "the Blackwater-Vegan Soap Connection" and the use of US embassy workers as de facto Lockheed arms salesmen. Best of all, it's got a crowdsourcing "DIY" function: Check out a defense firm in its searchable database, and contribute your findings to the website. I'm excited to see what they turn up. Assuming Corey and the rest of the WIB crew don't try to (allegedly) assault any Swedish maidens, of course.
And if you have any recommendations for readers that I can pass on, leave 'em in the comments or ping me. I'll blog/tweet the best of them semi-regularly.
Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040
http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II.
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV.
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.
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 militaryindustrial 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.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
V.
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
VI.
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII.
So -- in this my last good night to you as your President -- I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I -- my fellow citizens -- need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
And if you have any recommendations for readers that I can pass on, leave 'em in the comments or ping me. I'll blog/tweet the best of them semi-regularly.
Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040
http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II.
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV.
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.
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 militaryindustrial 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.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
- and is gravely to be regarded.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
V.
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
VI.
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII.
So -- in this my last good night to you as your President -- I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I -- my fellow citizens -- need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)