Excellent article by Margolis

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/01/eric-margolis/i-like-ike/

Eric Margolis is most perceptive on this. We failed to heed Ike's warning in 1961

 

The article does not have a single actual factual statement in it. It is all BS. Not to mention that the "military-industrial complex" is largely a myth.

 

Though I enjoyed Dayton Ohio on my several visits there, you sir have precious little credibility.

 

What does that have to do with anything? Neither I nor anyone in my family have any connection to Dayton, Ohio whatsoever. Though I have always wanted to visit Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and see the USAF museum.

 

The problem with the article is that if we believed it, we would have no modern weapons. Neither the Russians or Chinese are standing still in weapons development. We might not necessarily fight the Russians or Chinese, but they sell those weapons to their allies just like we sell our weapons to our allies where there is a pretty good chance we will have confront them. The best defense is a good offense.

Over the years, the defense aerospace companies have been weeded down to two major ones because of competition and the inability to compete. Competition for those defense dollars is intense as it should be.

We want to do battle with the better weapons than our adversaries.

 

Good article, but focuses only on one facet of the Complex, I guess that's fine, but omits the larger danger.

Eisenhower was rightly concerned about crossover between the fiat and war-making powers of government and the profit-seeking aims of private sector segments, specifically defense contractors, the crossover that could result. He was uniquely situated to have experienced the proto development of the Complex. Today we have crossover in ways Ike could never have imagined because the components didn't exist.

We did not have the explosive growth in domestic and foreign government special interests into aboveboard lobbies and under the table quid pro quo (see Bidens, Clinton Foundation), institutional higher level education and government mixing with it, government contracting, government grants, the crossover between modestly compensated public sector careers and extremely lucrative MSM careers. These factors all combine and dovetail into a problem much larger than Ike could have conceived.

But yeah, it's real, bank on it, comprises so much more than defense spending.

 

Neither Ike nor I are opposed to modern weapons or a strong military.

The key to Ike's message and Margolis' point is the term "undue influence". Just that.

The undue influence of the Pentagon and industry is the point. If you do not understand that influence, if you cannot see that influence, we have nothing to talk about.

 

I worked for Eagle Picher and Lockheed Martin for about seventeen years. I saw none of this undue influence. What I saw was Eagle Picher and Lockheed Martin fighting very hard to get and keep contracts. Lockheed Martin ended up losing the contract I was working on when we were underbid by Boeing. It is a tough competitive business. Their is an old fighter pilot saying. "Remember, you are flying an aircraft built by the lowest bidder."

 

A nice career you describe.

To be able to perceive the undue influence, one must be able to step back and look at the big picture. One must examine the influence within the political system.

It's curious, for example, that there has never really been an official audit of the Pentagon. And even more curious that a 2017 audit by MSU scholars found the amount of money the Pentagon cannot account for is approximately equal to the amount of the National Debt.

https://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2017/...nment-spending-defense-department-to-conduct/

The undue influence is there, but like so many other unpleasant truths, most people prefer to turn their eyes away.

 

the problem with that study is that the students at MSU do not have sufficient security clearances and access to do a proper audit.

 

If we had had a strong military industrial complex in 1941 WW2 may have lasted only 2 years rather than 4. We were caught with our pants down and it took many months for our manufacturers to convert factories to producing planes, ships, submarines, tanks, guns, etc. Then it was many more months before we were out-producing our enemies. A military industrial complex is preferred to being overrun by a communist country.

 

Without going through the math, it would appear that the $21 Trillion waste is more than their total budget for those years.

 

Ike was a great man and a great president. His warning was accurate, but history sailed past him with the Cold War and the nuclear age. We gave up a lot to the Cold War, no doubt about it. But eventually, after the sacrifice of much blood and treasure, we won. The question that has our attention now is, when is enough enough?

 

Yes, we know that. The MSU audit was done ONLY with information available to the public.

If all the dark budgets could have been included, the number would likely have been much greater.

 

Yes.

And somehow this goes back to the audit being conducted by congressional auditors at the Pentagon on 11 September 2001, including Donald Rumsfeld's comments before Congress on 10 September.

Of all casualties and fatalities at the Pentagon that day, the bulk of them were members of that audit team.

 

Or much less. The dark budget is approved by congress.

Is this some kind conspiracy that the attack was arranged so that the auditors were intentionally killed?

 

I think he was barking up the wrong tree.
The medical industrial complex has been far more destructive.

 

Yes, the auditors were the bulk of the casualties, and the records being audited were (oops!) destroyed.

Watching Rumsfeld's testimony the day before in a congressional hearing conducted by Cynthia McKinney was priceless, if you have ever watched witnesses being deposed "stonewall" the inquiry. I watched part of it on CSPAN.

Dick Eastman, Tom Flocco, V.K. Durham, Karl Schwarz and E.P. Heidner researched and wrote a very detailed explanation back in 2008. It used to be on the internet, but has probably been taken down by those threatened by the truth.

 

I'm not sure "destructive" is the appropriate adjective. You raise a good point, but if you're going to use "destructive", then the military industrial wins hands down over the medical industrial.

 

Ok, damaging to the American people.

I'd also say that about the media industrial complex and the entertainment industrial complex.

 

As far as I am concerned, all of this is nutty. This conspiracy involved four airplanes, all of which have disappeared along with all their passengers They all took off at about the same time. Two of them can clearly be seen crashing into the two towers and relative of a third airplane heard from them while their airplane was being hijacked and their are pictures and eyewitnesses of the fourth crashing into the Pentagon. Some things are possible. Your account is so improbable to be nearly impossible. This is the last I will discuss with you. I have wasted my time going down this road too many times before.

 

I'll further qualify by saying "American taxpayers". With endless wars brought under deception, and massive amounts of missing funds, the Pentagon is extremely damaging and destructive to taxpayers. In the name of the Global War Of Terror, the US treasury has been plundered big time.

 

You have accepted the official narrative without question. For a number of years I did too.

But when one starts examining the details, and one is curious and in possession of an open mind, one soon realizes that the official narrative is contradicted by all the known facts.

You have accepted the official narrative and asked no questions, so you are misinformed on the subject matter.

No airliner struck the Pentagon. The bulk of the casualties were the congressional auditors.

 

The Pentagon was against the war in Vietnam.

 

You must be very young.