Charles Krauthammer: The fruits of weakness

[Gawain 0]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/20/AR2010052003885.html

I saw a clip of him discussing this a couple days ago. The picture noted on the article was on the front page of the Wall Street Journal a couple days ago too.

Two of our most important allies, in raised arms with Ahmadinejad of Iran. Of course, I understand, given how we treat our allies.

It's okay though, we've apologized to everyone and I think the next step in our foreign relations is to apologize for things that might be done by someone else...just in case.

The final paragraph sums it up:

Quote

Given Obama's policies and principles, Turkey and Brazil are acting rationally. Why not give cover to Ahmadinejad and his nuclear ambitions? As the United States retreats in the face of Iran, China, Russia and Venezuela, why not hedge your bets? There's nothing to fear from Obama, and everything to gain by ingratiating yourself with America's rising adversaries. After all, they actually believe in helping one's friends and punishing one's enemies.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Andy9o8 0]

Since the end of WW2, the US has maintained itself as a militarized, garrison state, where two-thirds of our national budget go to support a military-industrial complex of military (euphemistically, "defense") contractors that get money from defense contracts awarded by the military, a military that survives on appropriations granted by Congress and commanded by senior officers who retire in their 50s and go to work for the very contractors to whom the've been awarding contracts, and Congressmen and Senators whose campaigns are bought and paid for by the corporations awarded these contracts, and for whom the Congress-slugs work for as lobbyists once they leave Congress.

In order to maintain this, a garrison state must be maintained, characterized by the only lengthy peace-time draft the US has ever had (in the 50s & 60s), constant foreign enemies to rally the people around, and constant wars be fought in all over the globe.

As I said, it consumes 2/3 of the US's budget, and is one of the main reasons why the US is the ONLY major industrialized nation on the planet that has no comprehensive national health care service.

The final element to this is an Official Ideology Indoctrination network dedicated to the constant conditioning of the American people to believe that such a military all over the globe is crucial to US national security (it is not), that any re-direction of resources into social services such as national health care is The Evil Demon Socialism (forced upon us by Commies under our beds), and that any disengagement from massive foreign involvement amounts to "weakness", "appeasement" of our enemies (haul out references to Neville Chamberlain), abandonment of our allies, and general America-hating lack of patriotism.

What Krauthammer, ever the loyal soldier to the cause of Received Opinion, has written here is just another installment of the endless Indoctrination and Demonization element. And people will buy it, and eat it. Like Wonder Bread, it will fill their bellies, fatten their bellies, satisfy their hunger pangs and give them the illusion of nutrition. And these people, both mollified and terrified, will vote for more Reagans and Bushes to run their lives. And there will always be Krauthammers to make them feel good about it. Take a bow, folks.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Since the end of WW2, the US has maintained itself as a militarized, garrison state, where two-thirds of our national budget go to support a military-industrial complex of military (euphemistically, "defense") contractors that get money from defense contracts awarded by the military, a military that survives on appropriations granted by Congress and commanded by senior officers who retire in their 50s and go to work for the very contractors to whom the've been awarding contracts, and Congressmen and Senators whose campaigns are bought and paid for by the corporations awarded these contracts, and for whom the Congress-slugs work for as lobbyists once they leave Congress.

In order to maintain this, a garrison state must be maintained, characterized by the only lengthy peace-time draft the US has ever had (in the 50s & 60s), constant foreign enemies to rally the people around, and constant wars be fought in all over the globe.

As I said, it consumes 2/3 of the US's budget, and is one of the main reasons why the US is the ONLY major industrialized nation on the planet that has no comprehensive national health care service.

The final element to this is an Official Ideology Indoctrination network dedicated to the constant conditioning of the American people to believe that such a military all over the globe is crucial to US national security (it is not), that any re-direction of resources into social services such as national health care is The Evil Demon Socialism (forced upon us by Commies under our beds), and that any disengagement from massive foreign involvement amounts to "weakness", "appeasement" of our enemies (haul out references to Neville Chamberlain), abandonment of our allies, and general America-hating lack of patriotism.

What Krauthammer, ever the loyal soldier to the cause of Received Opinion, has written here is just another installment of the endless Indoctrination and Demonization element. And people will buy it, and eat it, like Wonder Bread, and vote for more Reagans and Bushes to run their lives. Take a bow, folks.

2/3 of the the budget to defense/military? Wrong. http://www.federalbudget.com/

Given the condition, quality and cost of other "comprehensive national health care service", I'm okay with the US not having one. The healthcare bill doesn't create one...right away...anyway...

As to the evils of socialism, you are correct. Lengthening unemployment benefits removes the urgency to find/get/create a job. It took welfare reform in the 90s with a Republican Congress to truly reform welfare.

...and none of your points have anything to do with my original post, or the topic of Krauthammer's Op-Ed.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[skybill 19]

Hi Andy,
Cliffhangers are a drag, what's yer' solution??

SCR-2034, SCS-680

III%,
Deli-out

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

none of your points have anything to do with my original post, or the topic of Krauthammer's Op-Ed.

They have everything to do with it. See above.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Hi Andy,
Cliffhangers are a drag, what's yer' solution??

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3841996#3841996

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Given the condition, quality and cost of other "comprehensive national health care service", I'm okay with the US not having one. The healthcare bill doesn't create one...right away...anyway...

As long as you have yours... its all good

[wmw999 2,146]

I hadn't heard about this; it's interesting.

But, just to add to the melee, here is a blog by a Brazilian. OTOH, in a right-leaning (for Brazil) website, someone posted a question about it, and all of the respondents are vehemently against it.

I think we might be seeing an interesting start to new countries trying to take leadership roles in the world in different arenas; not based on their overwhelming military strength (which used to be the main criterion), but based on ideology. With the increased ease of communications, parties can talk to each other directly.

I think that Ahmadinejad is a thoroughgoing asshole, and that's a really ugly situation. However, I do think that it's true that the sanctions against Iraq were a miserable failure, and the same thing is likely to have the same result in Iran -- it gives the people something to rally around. All we have to do is look at the reaction to 9/11 to know how powerful something to rally around can be.

No answers. But the more that people in Iran feel as though they have a stake in the whole world, rather than just in Iran, then the more likely it is that they'll take that whole world into account.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Given the condition, quality and cost of other "comprehensive national health care service", I'm okay with the US not having one. The healthcare bill doesn't create one...right away...anyway...

As long as you have yours... its all good

First - you know what I have, so why you would consider that "all good" is beyond me. The coverage is good, the price is cheap - the bureaucracy is stifling.

Screwing 85% of the country for the 15% is not what many liberal minded folk would consider "fair". For me, the answer is not the creation of a massive new trillion dollar bureaucracy. Simple checks against a broader/loosened regulatory model could fix it - allowing for inter-state competition, catastrophic coverage only (just like auto-insurance) and malpractice reforms. But, a cloud of lawyers in DC know more than most of the country apparently.

Back to the topic Jeane...do you really have an issue with his analysis? Are you comfortable with these developments in the impotence of our foreign policy? This isn't Chinese style pragmatism, it's white-flag-surrender.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

it's white-flag-surrender.

Utter horseshit.

[airdvr 198]

Quote

Quote

it's white-flag-surrender.

Utter horseshit.

So is thinking that Mahmood is no threat, or worse a made-up threat.

Edited to add. I'll only spend time once in a thread to figure out how to spell his name, and that once has come and gone.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

it's white-flag-surrender.

Utter horseshit.

So is thinking that Mahmood is no threat, or worse a made-up threat.

So is spinning someone's words to say something they didn't say so
you can argue against the spun-up version.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Given the condition, quality and cost of other "comprehensive national health care service", I'm okay with the US not having one. The healthcare bill doesn't create one...right away...anyway...

As long as you have yours... its all good

First - you know what I have, so why you would consider that "all good" is beyond me. The coverage is good, the price is cheap - the bureaucracy is stifling.

Screwing 85% of the country for the 15% is not what many liberal minded folk would consider "fair". For me, the answer is not the creation of a massive new trillion dollar bureaucracy. Simple checks against a broader/loosened regulatory model could fix it - allowing for inter-state competition, catastrophic coverage only (just like auto-insurance) and malpractice reforms. But, a cloud of lawyers in DC know more than most of the country apparently.

Back to the topic Jeane...do you really have an issue with his analysis? Are you comfortable with these developments in the impotence of our foreign policy? This isn't Chinese style pragmatism, it's white-flag-surrender.

What you have is a hell of a lot better than many millions of your fellow countrymen/women/children. A hell of a lot more people will eventually find out just how fucked they really are when they actually go to use the benefits they THINK they have

I am tired of seeing our young people sacrificed on the alter of policing the world that does not want to be policed, screw the whole bunch of ingrates. While its great for business for the few companies who truly benefit and for the Pentagon... the rest of our country pays the price. Its time to bring every one home.... and quit providing "DEFENCE" for the fucking world.

The money needs to be used to rebuild our country and our economy and pay off the GOAT FUCK STUPID debt run up by the "trickle downists" .

We need to take care of our own problems..... ALL OF THEM... let the rest of the world go fuck themselves.

Let the fucking morons of the world blow each other up since that is what they seem to want... and use devestating force only when they fuck with us... Let them spend themselves into oblivion by buying arms if they want.... A very good Republican warned us about this shit in 1960..... seems most of you in todays GOP never heard about that warning

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

it's white-flag-surrender.

Utter horseshit.

Prove me wrong.

We started this dance last year with a tour of apologies, declarations that America's founding principles aren't really relevant anymore, and that we would reach out a hand to collaborate on the world's problems. From Copenhagen to Iran to DPRK to Russia to China to Venezuela to Israel...show me the progress. Show me where America's interests have been represented.

The return? Bowing to royalty we don't recognize, iPods to Queens, DVDs to foreign heads-of-government they can't play. Iran slapped the "open hand" and has endeared lynch-pin traditional allies of the US. DPRK is proliferating their technology. Russia has made Georgia ineffectual and tucked a little more of Ukraine under their thumb, while getting a sweet deal in an ineffective START treaty. We watched sparks of life in Iran's populace fizzle because we did nothing. Israel is very seriously considering their options without de facto US support. Members of NATO are foregoing their obligations under the treaty and their commitments in Afghanistan. Kyrgyzstan wants the US out (while accepting Russia's continued presence)...it's only a vital staging point to Afghan operations. We no longer deal with "radical Islam" or a war (now overseas contingency operations). There have been one successful and two nearly successful terrorist attacks on our soil (counting the airborne Christmas flight). We continue to not secure our borders and how we have foreign heads of state, speaking on the floor in OUR CONGRESS, deriding our State's rights about a law that NO ONE in the ADMINISTRATION HAS READ.

The list goes on, and on...

Prove me wrong.

If we had real leadership we could be doing more to complement Europe's efforts with Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. We could have closer ties with Brazil and Mexico and a free trade agreement with Colombia. We would be truly going arm-in-arm with Russia to bend Iran (China would follow).

President Obama is firing the NDI due to the terror attack attempts, but what is our CIA/NSA/NRO/DIA going to do? The AG is looking at prosecuting them!

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Amazon 7]

Quote

We could have closer ties with Brazil and Mexico and a free trade agreement with Colombia.

Yeah there used to be some military dudes out of Panama that were working on that... with Noriega's help..... that did not turn out so good..... BUT a bunch of them did make millions

[DanG 1]

Quote

Bowing to royalty we don't recognize, iPods to Queens, DVDs to foreign heads-of-government they can't play.

Gimme a break. When someone criticizes Bush for groping Merkel, or stumbling over every word, you dismiss it as childish. Same thing here.

Quote

Iran slapped the "open hand" and has endeared lynch-pin traditional allies of the US.

Taking a hard line towards Iran worked so well for Bush.

Quote

DPRK is proliferating their technology.

They are? Hadn't heard that. Who are they proliferating to?

Quote

Russia has made Georgia ineffectual and tucked a little more of Ukraine under their thumb, while getting a sweet deal in an ineffective START treaty.

Not sure why you don't like the START treaty. Do you feel it is necessary for us to be able to destroy the world five times over instead of just three? You do remember who was in charge when Russia invaded Georgia, don't you? Hint: it wasn't Obama.

Quote

We watched sparks of life in Iran's populace fizzle because we did nothing.

What would you have had us do? Seriously.

Quote

Israel is very seriously considering their options without de facto US support.

Good. They cause us no end of trouble.

Quote

Members of NATO are foregoing their obligations under the treaty and their commitments in Afghanistan.

Started under Bush, many moons ago.

Quote

Kyrgyzstan wants the US out (while accepting Russia's continued presence)...it's only a vital staging point to Afghan operations.

They did just have a coup there, remember? Anyway, the last time I checked, US planes are still landing at Manas every day.

Quote

We no longer deal with "radical Islam" or a war (now overseas contingency operations).

You don't like the nomenclature? So what? It was never a war, anyway. You can't go to war against an idea.

Quote

There have been one successful and two nearly successful terrorist attacks on our soil (counting the airborne Christmas flight).

I seem to remember there was a pretty successful attack on US soil during Bush's first term. Did you blame him for that one? Nope.

Quote

We continue to not secure our borders and how we have foreign heads of state, speaking on the floor in OUR CONGRESS, deriding our State's rights about a law that NO ONE in the ADMINISTRATION HAS READ.

Do you honestly believe that NO ONE in the entire Administration has read the Arizona law? Come on, man. That's Rush and Beck talking out their ass. Not liking the law does not mean you haven't read it. And if you really think that the immigration issue would have been handled by a different President, you're just being naive.

- Dan G

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Bowing to royalty we don't recognize, iPods to Queens, DVDs to foreign heads-of-government they can't play.

Gimme a break. When someone criticizes Bush for groping Merkel, or stumbling over every word, you dismiss it as childish. Same thing here.

One instance versus multiple...nope, a single breach of protocol is reasonably excusable. Multiple times it's not. When President Bush bowed to the Emperor of Japan, he didn't consider the fact that China would send him a messenger-boy at Copenhagen, where nothing got done. The actions have an effect, and it's certainly not childish.

Quote

Quote

Iran slapped the "open hand" and has endeared lynch-pin traditional allies of the US.

Taking a hard line towards Iran worked so well for Bush.

It may have been stagnant with Iran, but we didn't alienate and push allies away in the process.

Quote

Quote

DPRK is proliferating their technology.

They are? Hadn't heard that. Who are they proliferating to?

http://www.cdi.org/nuclear/nk-fact-sheet.cfm
http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_76.html
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/07/missiles_r_us_b.html

It's no secret that DPRK sells a lot of weapons, to a lot of countries, especially missiles.

Quote

Quote

Russia has made Georgia ineffectual and tucked a little more of Ukraine under their thumb, while getting a sweet deal in an ineffective START treaty.

Not sure why you don't like the START treaty. Do you feel it is necessary for us to be able to destroy the world five times over instead of just three? You do remember who was in charge when Russia invaded Georgia, don't you? Hint: it wasn't Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/09/world/europe/09prexy.html

Quote

Under the treaty, if ratified, each side within seven years would be barred from deploying more than 1,550 strategic warheads or 700 launchers. Because of counting rules and past reductions, neither side would have to eliminate large numbers of weapons to meet the new limits. But the treaty re-establishes an inspection regime that lapsed in December and could serve as a foundation for deeper reductions later.

So glad you think it's worth something. It is, to Russia.

Quote

Lubos Dobrovsky, a former Czech defense minister who presided over the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, said he feared that Mr. Obama was appeasing Russia. “This treaty is a diplomatic and military victory for Moscow,” he said in an interview, “and I am not happy that this American defeat is being showcased in Prague.”

As for Georgia, please remember the sentiment that was noted at the time by then-candidate-Obama. A quick Google search will help you find the comparative remarks. Which one was on the side of the Georgians who were invaded?

Quote

Quote

We watched sparks of life in Iran's populace fizzle because we did nothing.

What would you have had us do? Seriously.

If we had an intelligence apparatus that wasn't so gun shy, now that they think they'll be prosecuted for doing their job, they could have help to galvanize and organize the resistance against the mullahs and political leaders that are squandering that nation's talent.

Quote

Quote

Israel is very seriously considering their options without de facto US support.

Good. They cause us no end of trouble.

Right, because the only thriving democracy in the region, with Jews, Arabs and Palestinians all co-existing while getting missiles, bombs, et al thrown at it is just a nuisance?

Quote

Quote

Members of NATO are foregoing their obligations under the treaty and their commitments in Afghanistan.

Started under Bush, many moons ago.

And that excuses whom from what? Is there a treaty limitation to these commitments?

Quote

Quote

Kyrgyzstan wants the US out (while accepting Russia's continued presence)...it's only a vital staging point to Afghan operations.

They did just have a coup there, remember? Anyway, the last time I checked, US planes are still landing at Manas every day.

That's fine with me that the planes are still landing there. What I don't like though is that we have not been a good steward of our relations. How is it that we managed to not position ourselves so that they would welcome a continued presence?

Quote

Quote

We no longer deal with "radical Islam" or a war (now overseas contingency operations).

You don't like the nomenclature? So what? It was never a war, anyway. You can't go to war against an idea.

Yes you can. If you don't truly believe that, then you don't believe in what's taking hold in Iraq or what happened in Libya.

Quote

Quote

There have been one successful and two nearly successful terrorist attacks on our soil (counting the airborne Christmas flight).

I seem to remember there was a pretty successful attack on US soil during Bush's first term. Did you blame him for that one? Nope.

There were significant changes to the intelligence apparatus after 9/11 that somehow managed to keep such attacks from happening for the following 8 years. Even then, Fort Hood? We can agree that the officer corps did too little to see the signs and too much in processing their own. Christmas Day? Let's see, the guy's dad had been waving down the State department for months. NYC/Times Square? Don't know enough about what's really happening, but the arrests are mounting, there seems to be little difficulty in tracking these guys.

Quote

Quote

We continue to not secure our borders and how we have foreign heads of state, speaking on the floor in OUR CONGRESS, deriding our State's rights about a law that NO ONE in the ADMINISTRATION HAS READ.

Do you honestly believe that NO ONE in the entire Administration has read the Arizona law? Come on, man. That's Rush and Beck talking out their ass. Not liking the law does not mean you haven't read it. And if you really think that the immigration issue would have been handled by a different President, you're just being naive.

http://www.breitbart.tv/state-department-spokesman-critical-of-arizona-law-admits-he-too-hasnt-read-it/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/13/holder_criticizes_arizona_immigration_law_he_hasnt_read.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/17/napolitano_admits_she_hasnt_read_arizona_law_but_says_she_wouldnt_sign_it.html

Some pretty important people there that haven't read it...of course if they did, they would have real trouble perpetuating the lies they're spreading about it.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

If we had an intelligence apparatus that wasn't so gun shy, now that they think they'll be prosecuted for doing their job, they could have help to galvanize and organize the resistance against the mullahs and political leaders that are squandering that nation's talent.

If our "intelligence apparatus" had stayed the fuck out of Iran in 1953 that country would likely still be a thriving secularist West-leaning democracy. The "might is right" belligerence you seem fond of has created many of the tensions that plague the world today. The mullahs and political climate in Iran are creatures of our own making. Given our crappy track record at using intelligence agencies to create "friends" by installing dictatorial regimes, you'd think we would have learned a little humility. Apparently the lesson is lost on some, who still think we can bully the rest of the world into jumping to our every whim. Perhaps Mr. Krauthhammer should volunteer to go fight in one of the limitless wars he seems to think we should be fighting.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[kallend 1,646]

Quote

Quote

If we had an intelligence apparatus that wasn't so gun shy, now that they think they'll be prosecuted for doing their job, they could have help to galvanize and organize the resistance against the mullahs and political leaders that are squandering that nation's talent.

If our "intelligence apparatus" had stayed the fuck out of Iran in 1953 that country would likely still be a thriving secularist West-leaning democracy. The "might is right" belligerence you seem fond of has created many of the tensions that plague the world today. The mullahs and political climate in Iran are creatures of our own making. Given our crappy track record at using intelligence agencies to create "friends" by installing dictatorial regimes, you'd think we would have learned a little humility. Apparently the lesson is lost on some, who still think can bully the rest of the world into jumping to our every whim. Perhaps Mr. Krauthhammer should volunteer to go fight in one of the limitless wars he seems to think we should be fighting.

Don

Krauthammer is yet another right wing CHICKENHAWK. His columns are as predictable as the Sun rising in the east.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Quote

If we had an intelligence apparatus that wasn't so gun shy, now that they think they'll be prosecuted for doing their job, they could have help to galvanize and organize the resistance against the mullahs and political leaders that are squandering that nation's talent.

If our "intelligence apparatus" had stayed the fuck out of Iran in 1953 that country would likely still be a thriving secularist West-leaning democracy. The "might is right" belligerence you seem fond of has created many of the tensions that plague the world today. The mullahs and political climate in Iran are creatures of our own making. Given our crappy track record at using intelligence agencies to create "friends" by installing dictatorial regimes, you'd think we would have learned a little humility. Apparently the lesson is lost on some, who still think can bully the rest of the world into jumping to our every whim. Perhaps Mr. Krauthhammer should volunteer to go fight in one of the limitless wars he seems to think we should be fighting.

Don

Krauthammer is yet another right wing CHICKENHAWK. His columns are as predictable as the Sun rising in the east.

But not quite as reliable as your posts are for name calling and emotional kneejerking.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

a military that survives on appropriations granted by Congress and commanded by senior officers who retire in their 50s and go to work for the very contractors to whom the've been awarding contracts,

Except that isn't how the contracts are awarded - something the Left conveniently forgets when they bitch about the 'military-industrial complex'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Krauthammer is yet another right wing CHICKENHAWK. His columns are as predictable as the Sun rising in the east.

But not quite as reliable as your posts are for name calling and emotional kneejerking.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

a military that survives on appropriations granted by Congress and commanded by senior officers who retire in their 50s and go to work for the very contractors to whom the've been awarding contracts,

Except that isn't how the contracts are awarded - something the Left conveniently forgets when they bitch about the 'military-industrial complex'.

I was trying to be concise in a post that was getting really long. It's largely a matter of circular mutual back-scratching and influence peddling. The military contractors like Grumman, Northrop, etc., etc., regularly wine and dine senior officers. They also wine and dine - and are wined and dined by - Congress-slugs. Senior officers have the ear of Congress-slugs because Congress-slugs are bought & paid for with money from corporations, including a lot of military contractors. Influenced by this, Congress appropriates money for certain pet projects that are run by certain pet contractors. The senior officers then often retire and take jobs with military contractors, in which they lobby congress-critters as well as current senior military officers. Rinse, repeat. (And I'm still being way concise - it's a lot more involved than that.)

Here's a nutshell description of the process. The rhetoric is overly-dramatic, but it's still pretty accurate.

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/02/17/washingtons-brassy-influence-peddlers/

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

a military that survives on appropriations granted by Congress and commanded by senior officers who retire in their 50s and go to work for the very contractors to whom the've been awarding contracts,

Except that isn't how the contracts are awarded - something the Left conveniently forgets when they bitch about the 'military-industrial complex'.

I was trying to be concise in a post that was getting really long. It's largely a matter of circular mutual back-scratching and influence peddling. The military contractors like Grumman, Northrop, etc., etc., regularly wine and dine senior officers. They also wine and dine - and are wined and dined by - Congress-slugs. Senior officers have the ear of Congress-slugs because Congress-slugs are bought & paid for with money from corporations, including a lot of military contractors. Influenced by this, Congress appropriates money for certain pet projects that are run by certain pet contractors. The senior officers then often retire and take jobs with military contractors, in which they lobby congress-critters as well as current senior military officers. Rinse, repeat. (And I'm still being way concise - it's a lot more involved than that.)

Here's a nutshell description of the process. The rhetoric is overly-dramatic, but it's still pretty accurate.

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/02/17/washingtons-brassy-influence-peddlers/

No, it's actually not - not pretty accurate, that is. It's not some General saying "give Company XYZ the contract". There's (many!) regulations and oversight agencies that are involved at every step of the process. Once a contract is awarded, there's not any "pet projects" for Congress to appropriate money for.

Do companies hire retired high-level officers to 'lobby' for them? Sure - just like the lawyer's union lobbied against tort reform in the healthcare bill.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

a military that survives on appropriations granted by Congress and commanded by senior officers who retire in their 50s and go to work for the very contractors to whom the've been awarding contracts,

Except that isn't how the contracts are awarded - something the Left conveniently forgets when they bitch about the 'military-industrial complex'.

I was trying to be concise in a post that was getting really long. It's largely a matter of circular mutual back-scratching and influence peddling. The military contractors like Grumman, Northrop, etc., etc., regularly wine and dine senior officers. They also wine and dine - and are wined and dined by - Congress-slugs. Senior officers have the ear of Congress-slugs because Congress-slugs are bought & paid for with money from corporations, including a lot of military contractors. Influenced by this, Congress appropriates money for certain pet projects that are run by certain pet contractors. The senior officers then often retire and take jobs with military contractors, in which they lobby congress-critters as well as current senior military officers. Rinse, repeat. (And I'm still being way concise - it's a lot more involved than that.)

Here's a nutshell description of the process. The rhetoric is overly-dramatic, but it's still pretty accurate.

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/02/17/washingtons-brassy-influence-peddlers/

No, it's actually not - not pretty accurate, that is. It's not some General saying "give Company XYZ the contract". There's (many!) regulations and oversight agencies that are involved at every step of the process. Once a contract is awarded, there's not any "pet projects" for Congress to appropriate money for.

Do companies hire retired high-level officers to 'lobby' for them? Sure - just like the lawyer's union lobbied against tort reform in the healthcare bill.

QFT

The FARs are mountainous...all you need to do is check out FBO.gov to see the bureaucracy.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!