![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| |
|
Inside the Military-Industrial ComplexPosted on Oct 10, 2007
James Harris and Josh Scheer Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Philip Coyle knows a thing or two about the “staggering” amounts of money the U.S. funnels into the military-industrial complex, and why it is so difficult to stanch the profiteering. Click here to listen to this and other Truthdig interviews. Transcript:James Harris: This is Truthdig. James Harris here again with Josh Scheer. Today we are talking to Philip Coyle, he’s the former assistant secretary of defense, and currently is a senior adviser at the Center for Defense Information. Recently an article was published announcing that UC Berkeley had won a contract to develop defense, a contract worth some $1.6 billion each year. In doing the research for this interview, I found that there was no cap to the trillions of dollars spent on defense. Seeing these astronomic figures, I cannot help but think about the forgotten social programs, the failing education structure. Can you tell me, what do we spend this money on? Where does it go? And are we spending too much? Philip Coyle: The amount of money that the United States spends on defense is really quite staggering. Over $750 billion a year, if you count everything. Typically, those numbers are not counted. Typically you hear numbers like 450, not 750 or more. But when you count everything, it’s a very large amount of money. And that doesn’t count the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the president’s latest request, the total amount of money, either appropriated or requested for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and all, is now over $800 billion, 808 billion to be exact, and that doesn’t include, that is not included, in the 750 or so that we spend each year on regular defense spending. Josh Scheer: It’s actually interesting, a lot of people forget that the DOE, and the Veterans Affairs, and a lot of those departments, also get quite a bit of money from the military-industrial complex. And from the president. Coyle: Exactly. Harris: What are you doing to either defeat this spending mentality or work within the system to change some of these things? Coyle: Well, it’s very difficult, of course. Some defense programs, some defense procurements, spend money in every single state of the union. One of the displays that the U.S. Congress can get from the Pentagon is where exactly all the money is being spent on each particular program. And so sometimes this means jobs all across the country that makes it very difficult to attack. Scheer: And the companies do that on purpose. I’ve talked to a lot of people on this whole subject and companies will make, as they say, the F-22 or the B-2 or one of those planes, wingtips, will be made in a state to guarantee jobs and to guarantee votes, right? Coyle: Yes, they will, and of course once a factory or a plant is established in some city or town or state, the people there don’t want to lose it. Scheer: Yep. ... I know in the news recently we’ve been trying to sell missile defense again and again, and it happens every year, and you were involved in testing for a number of years. Were the tests ever really positive? Because I only read the negative, and maybe that’s the way I look at the news that comes out, but I want to know what you think and, when you were there, were there positive tests; why do we keep putting money in this program year after year? Coyle: Well, the United States is spending about $10 billion a year, sometimes 11, but about $10 billion a year on missile defense and has been since President Bush came to office. All in all, since Ronald Reagan gave his famous “Star Wars” speech, the United States has spent over $100 billion on missile defense. And it’s the most difficult thing the Pentagon has ever tried to do. Much more difficult than any jet fighter or ship or tank or what have you. The tests are sometimes successful; for example, the ground-based system that is being deployed in Alaska and California, there have been 12 flight intercept tests in that system and six of them were successful and six failed. But these tests are scripted to improve the chances for success, and so they don’t really represent battlefield conditions, the fog of war so to speak, all of the uncertainties that you would have in an actual missile fight, in battle. Scheer: So basically they’re giving it a failing grade, 50 percent, in optimal conditions? Coyle: Yes, I think that is fair. There’s nothing wrong with these tests; they need to do them of course if they are ever going to try to make the system be effective. But there is just—they don’t capture all of the realism of war. Remember now that what we’re talking about is nuclear weapons being launched towards the United States and perhaps some of them get through and go off, so talk about the fog of war would be hard to imagine. Scheer: I remember, and this was many years ago, maybe 5-6 years ago, a lecture given at Stanford by an atomic scientist that the missile systems that they had then, and that they had when they were working on them during the “Star Wars” program, that missiles fired from subs, or from a dirty bomb that would be brought from a city—how, what country, besides say North Korea, could fire a missile, and how much do we have to fear from a dirty bomb that these missile systems wouldn’t work on. Coyle: Well, currently the only countries that have missiles that can reach the United States are Russia and China. And neither one of those countries is an enemy of the United States today. People worry very much about Iraq, excuse me, I beg our pardon, about Iran and North Korea.
1
2
3
4
NEXT PAGE >>>
Previous item: The Martyring of Che Guevara Next item: Let's Talk Baseball for a Change Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.
By survival etc., November 26, 2007 at 5:07 pm # For: “114997 You read too much Friedrich Nietzsche! This so called structuring of the survival of the fittest is what led to Hitler’s Germany. There are people in wheel chairs or on crutches who are more fit to lead than the healthiest survivalists. A great physique or the greatest stamina does not necessarily an intelligent person make.” Hey Michael. Actually, I thought of the issue you raise after posting my comments. You are right, of course. Less than ideal appearance and/or disability will eliminate the finest leaders from the race. I meant my proposal to be more of a reminder to politicians that they would not hold up in a survival contest with a similar number of typical Americans. If true merit were to be the standard, those who have prevailed over personal adversity and known the value of setting right priorities would certainly grab my attention at election time.
By 1drees, November 26, 2007 at 2:36 am # All I hear from Americans is “Eisnehower warned....”, “Kennedy warned ....” ..... but did anyone heed or did it make a difference, now the madness is plaguing the whole world and humanity.
By Larson Shaw Chalmers, November 21, 2007 at 2:14 pm # Sounds like a Anglo-Nordic conspiracy to save the world from its doom. Cut it out. I like danger. Not to worry, though. The computer networks thriving in ten or fifteen years won’t likely permit us to blow them up along with everything else. Still, I’d pay fifty bucks to take part in some new kind of nominating process...ALL the political leadership, top to bottom, goes on sabbatical for 90 days to New Guinea or Azerbaijan with an equal number of regular Americans. No phones, no lamps, no instruction manuals. Only raingear, matches, compass, knife and two weeks of food rations. Live off the land, work alone or in groups, no matter. What would the emerging population look like after the three months? That remaining group is your leadership.
By Ken Larson, November 18, 2007 at 6:08 am # I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being used by our forces as we speak. Politicians make no difference. We have bought into the Military Industrial Complex (MIC). If you would like to read how this happens please see: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/03/sp yagency200703 http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/11/ha lliburton200711 Through a combination of public apathy and threats by the MIC we have let the SYSTEM get too large. It is now a SYSTEMIC problem and the SYSTEM is out of control. Government and industry are merging and that is very dangerous. There is no conspiracy. The SYSTEM has gotten so big that those who make it up and run it day to day in industry and government simply are perpetuating their existance. The politicians rely on them for details and recommendations because they cannot possibly grasp the nuances of the environment and the BIG SYSTEM. So, the system has to go bust and then be re-scaled, fixed and re-designed to run efficiently and prudently, just like any other big machine that runs poorly or becomes obsolete or dangerous. This situation will right itself through trauma. I see a government ENRON on the horizon, with an associated house cleaning. The next president will come and go along with his appointees and politicos. The event to watch is the collapse of the MIC. For more details see: http://rosecoveredglasses.blogspot.com/2006/11/inside- pentagon-procurement-from.html
By Satan, November 14, 2007 at 1:36 am # The big thinkers peddling their cool hardware platforms are giving me a big fat erection. The missile defense thing won’t work, though. How about making these instead? Rockets and microwave roasting beams based on the moon. The soft glow of a crescent-moon on a summer’s evening will be the last thing our adversaries ever see. Ha, ha! ~sixes~
By John Borowski, November 3, 2007 at 3:28 am # Whenever I become depressed and feeling low about the quality of the human being, my fate is restored when I read a comment such as Chris Kay #111199. God bless people with good intelligence, good maturity, and good character.
By Chris Kaye, November 2, 2007 at 8:57 am # You know, I’m talking to some pathetic whiners about the healthcare crisis. They are blaming the entire problem on illegal immigrants, ha ha, with no mention of Big Pharma or the insurance companies or the companies that import the workers into the country or anything like that. I guess they are listening to Limbaugh and Hannity and O’Really and people like that, who are paid to distract the people from the real problems encumbering them. 750 billion dollars a year. 808 billion in 2007? for the funding of Iraq, attempted Iran, and Afghanese wars? What a miraculous difference 15 billion a year would make to healthcare funding in this country! Of course we should all be raising hell about this instead of picking on some poor desperate *astards that come here to work for minimum wage to feed their starving families. The money is there, it is in my view simply being misallocated. I’m often struck by how similar we are to Israel: Most of the people sickened by what a few war hawk maniacs are imposing on them, the people suffering for the decisions being made about their economy, and most of the people wanting it to stop, but taken hostage by a few powerful maniacs. I dream of the day we can stop this! I think more and more people are becoming aware and will eventually either dismantle or cripple this beast terribly. One thing is for sure - it can’t go on.
By John Borowski, October 27, 2007 at 3:18 am # Louise comments that 5 children showed signs of torture all over their bodies. This is a common tactic by these right wing evils that fly the flag of god and patriotism. I believe it is the British that teach their colony the US how to do these evils. If they go into an Iraqi village and find only the children and wife in the house they are convinced that the husband is out somewhere fighting against them. The god bless evils will take the children and wife to the torture chamber. They then force the mother to watch their screaming children being tortured until she gives an acceptable answer as to where her husband is. If you believe these right wing human devils are ambassadors to a god, a person is not only insulting his dignity and intelligence; he is insulting the dignity of the very god he professes to believe in.
By John Borowski, October 26, 2007 at 3:25 am # Some wives of top generals say that their husbands must participate in all kinds of sexual perversions or they will never be generals. The two dens of iniquity are in California and Europe. Things like having sex with young boys that are in coffins and killing animals for the devil’s sacrificial pleasure. (I hope it is not humans) They will engage in all kinds of obscenities that a sane person simply could never understand. The excuse the top brass use to tell their wives is that they are exposed to so much stress. There are two types of humans. One could do any kind of abomination, and he can sleep like a baby. The other type can only take it just so long before he starts to crack. One wife describes her husband lying naked on the floor and babbling like an insane person and doing all kinds of weird things. When it gets too much I suppose that easiest way out is to commit suicide. When I read things like this I’m very pessimistic about the future of this world. This is the breed that has the most say in how society should exist.
By rage, October 15, 2007 at 1:42 pm # “Rubbish, ‘rage’. The corporate investors have already seen big profits in “peace” and specifically in addressing climate change and global warming issues. The trouble is that (a) they have been rather late, and (b) they still don’t want to give up this money-spinner. “ by Douglas Chalmers on 10/12 at 10:34 am Trust me, DC, if there was more prifit in addressing climate change and global warming, our corporate overlords would be in heated pursuit of as much. “Any of you “loyal Americans” out there should know by now, though, that every war since Korea in the 1950’s has been for profit!!! Yes, its cost lots of blood - YOUR BLOOD - but you have been stupid enough to go sign up or to be drafted like so many sheep. In doing so, you have lost every war....!!!” Doesn’t matter who wins or loses. It matters that the corporate warlords get paid. Missile defense does not even work. It’s straight up bullcrap. But, a long list of corporations are being paid literal tons of money for it, practically sight unseen. War = MONEY$$$, DC. There is no profit in peace.
By John Borowski, October 14, 2007 at 5:15 am # Eisenhower in his fare-well address after his second term in office as president warned the American people that the nascent Military Industrial Complex will destroy the country of Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson. It is so sad that the Republicans (Aka Conservative right wingers) the darlings of the Military Industrial Complex were voted in because they would cut the American peoples’ taxes. (Three pennies a day for Johnny Q and two hundred and forty seven thousand for the obscene rich) Common sense should tell you the ineffable trillions of dollars given to the Military Industrial Complex will increase your taxes down the road rather than decrease them. You can listen to the fare-well speech by Eisenhower by using search and type Eisenhower and the Military Industrial Complex. (The excerpt is about 2minutes and 30 seconds long)
By rage, October 11, 2007 at 1:55 pm # This confirms that there is no profit in peace. Add Your Comment |
COMMENT TOOLS:
Hide comments
Show comments
Comment on this article