 |
Re: No One Listened To Dwight Eisenhower
Author: The Unprofessional Iconoclast
Date: 11-13-2017 - 18:49
BOB R Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Unprofessional Iconoclast asserts that Eisenhower was aiming criticism at the us, but
reading the text of the speech you see that he talking to the Soviet Union, newly rid of Josef Stalin.
My take is that he's observing the waste or misallocation of resources on BOTH sides. It was the beginning of the Cold War and the arms race.
Here's a good excerpt from his farewell 1961 speech. He said the disastrous rise of misplaced power by the Military Industrial Complex "exists and will persist." He was certainly right about that. They seem to be running the show in Washington DC, regardless of the politicians. Think of a tail wagging a dog.
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 Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Yes, Margaret, that WAS and excellent link to the works of Smedley Butler.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Unprofessional Iconoclast asserts that Eisenhower was aiming criticism at the us, but
reading the text of the speech you see that he talking to the Soviet Union, newly rid of Josef Stalin.
My take is that he's observing the waste or misallocation of resources on BOTH sides. It was the beginning of the Cold War and the arms race.
Here's a good excerpt from his farewell 1961 speech. He said the disastrous rise of misplaced power by the Military Industrial Complex "exists and will persist." He was certainly right about that. They seem to be running the show in Washington DC, regardless of the politicians. Think of a tail wagging a dog.
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 Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Yes, Margaret, that WAS and excellent link to the works of Smedley Butler.
