Archive for category Military Industrial Complex
NBC ‘Reality’ Show: War For Fun and Profit
Posted by Richard Warnick in 4th Estate (Media), Disgrace to the Military, Entertainment, Federal Budget, Military, Military Industrial Complex, National Politics, War on August 1, 2012
I’ve seen the promos, and wondered out loud if this is an actual show or just a clever satire of corporate-sponsored “reality” TV. Turns out that NBC is truly going to air “Stars Earn Stripes,” an incredibly stupid faux-war celebrity contest co-hosted by retired U.S. general Wesley Clark. Bear in mind that NBC is owned by defense contractor GE, which profits from the normalization of permanent war.
Dean Cain, Dolvett Quince, Eve Torres, Laila Ali, Nick Lachey, Picabo Street, Terry Crews, and Todd Palin will compete in allegedly dangerous warlike activities — in which no one gets hurt. None of them have ever served in the real military.
RootsAction.org and Just Foreign Policy have set up a petition at StarsEarnStripes.org challenging NBC to tell the truth about war.
Dear NBC,
Your entertainment show “Stars Earn Stripes” treats war as sport. This does us all a disservice. We ask that you air an in-depth segment showing the reality of civilian victims of recent U.S. wars, on any program, any time in the coming months. (StarsEarnStripes.org has provided a few resources to help you with your research.)
It’s not a revelation that American corporate media don’t tell the truth about war. However, this is ridiculous. “Reality” TV has never departed this much from actual reality. General Clark ought to be ashamed of himself — being a tool of the military-industrial complex is bad enough, but he’s gone too far now.
More info: NBC Invents War-o-tainment
UPDATE: Glenn Greenwald weighs in:
It’s actually necessary that America have a network reality show that pairs big, muscular soldiers with adoring D-list celebrities — hosted by a former Army General along with someone who used to be on Dancing with the Stars – as they play sanitized war games for the amusement of viewers, all in between commercials from the nation’s largest corporations. That’s way too perfect of a symbol of American culture and politics for us not to have.
UPDATE: ‘Stars Earn Stripes,’ NBC Reality Show, Criticized By Veterans And Military Reporter
The Consequences of the Invasion of Iraq – Exactly the Opposite of What the Bushies Proposed
Posted by Glenden Brown in American People, Bush Administration, Bush Failures, Disgrace to the Military, Iraq, Liars (politics), Military, Military Industrial Complex, Neocons, Proof Bush Lied on July 14, 2012
In a devastating article, Dan Froomkin observes:
Ten bloody and grueling years later, Iraq is finally emerging from its ruins and establishing itself as a geopolitical player in the Middle East — but not the way the neocons envisioned.
Though technically a democracy, Iraq’s floundering government has degenerated into a tottering quasi-dictatorship. The costs of the war (more than $800 billion) and reconstruction (more than $50 billion) have been staggeringly high. And while Iraq is finally producing oil at pre-war levels, it is trying its best to drive oil prices as high as possible.
Most disturbing to many American foreign policy experts, however, is Iraq’s extremely close relationship with Iran. Today, the country that was formerly Iran’s deadliest rival is its strongest ally.
In other words, the Neo Cons were not just wrong but absolutely 100% wrong, their predictions turned out exactly 180 degrees from what actually happened.
Predicting what’s next in Iraq is next to impossible. In virtually no scenario, however, do things turn out how the neocons intended.
“Whatever [the war] was about, which was never entirely explained, it hasn’t worked out terribly well,” said Freeman, “and in fact Iraq continues to evolve in ways that are, if not fatal to American interests, certainly negative.”
At this point, I’m even more certain the Iraq war was not worth what it cost. It was a colossal waste of time, resources, lives – an exercise in imperial vanity and posturing that was so destructive in every imaginable way, more costly, more ruinous than anyone predicted.
We need a national truth and reconciliation commission. We need it now.
Silent Film Star Speaks
Posted by Larry Bergan in 4th Estate (Media), American History, Authoritarianism, Capitalism, censorship, Military Industrial Complex on April 13, 2012
Charlie Chaplin was WAY before my time, but when he got the chance to do “speakies”, he used his time wisely.
The reason I never knew about this film is obvious:
Posted Sans Comment
Posted by Shane Smith in Contractors Military, Deficit, Economy, Military, Military Industrial Complex, Occupy Wall Street, Peace, War on November 30, 2011
The never ending story of a quack, thats gone to the dogs. (Because everything feels better after a muppets reference)
Solitary Man Ambushes “Gang of Six” and All Three Branches of Government
Posted by Larry Bergan in Bernie Sanders, Corporate Socialism, Corruption, Deficit, Military Industrial Complex, Tax Policy on July 21, 2011
Well, OK! Ambushes usually involve hiding behind opaque objects with deadly weapons. Reasonable people don’t always need to go to that extreme.
Sometimes words can get a point across perfectly well:
A Must Read at the HuffPo: Why Military Spending Won’t Be Cut
Posted by Glenden Brown in Afghanistan, American History, American People, Contractors Military, Corruption, Military, Military Industrial Complex, This Blog on January 28, 2011
Andrew Bacevich has a compelling piece at HuffPo, with the provocative title “Cow Most Sacred.”
He offers 4 points that explain why military spending won’t be cut.
- Institutional Self-Interest
- Strategic Inertia
- Cultural Dissonance
- Misremembered History
Items 3 and 4 are interdependent.
For instnace, the cultural dissonance is a debate about patriotism and whether or not patriots can oppose war:
[The Vietnam] War’s end left these matters disconcertingly unresolved. President Richard Nixon’s 1971 decision to kill the draft in favor of an All-Volunteer Force, predicated on the notion that the country might be better served with a military that was no longer “us,” only complicated things further. So, too, did the trends in American politics where bona fide war heroes (George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, John Kerry, and John McCain) routinely lost to opponents whose military credentials were non-existent or exceedingly slight (Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama), yet who demonstrated once in office a remarkable propensity for expending American blood (none belonging to members of their own families) in places like Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. It was all more than a little unseemly.
The misremembered history erases the ambiguity and nuance from WWII:
he passage of time has transformed World War II from a massive tragedy into a morality tale, one that casts opponents of intervention as blackguards. Whether explicitly or implicitly, the debate over how the United States should respond to some ostensible threat — Iraq in 2003, Iran today — replays the debate finally ended by the events of December 7, 1941. To express skepticism about the necessity and prudence of using military power is to invite the charge of being an appeaser or an isolationist. Few politicians or individuals aspiring to power will risk the consequences of being tagged with that label.
In this sense, American politics remains stuck in the 1930s — always discovering a new Hitler, always privileging Churchillian rhetoric — even though the circumstances in which we live today bear scant resemblance to that earlier time. There was only one Hitler and he’s long dead. As for Churchill, his achievements and legacy are far more mixed than his battalions of defenders are willing to acknowledge. And if any one figure deserves particular credit for demolishing Hitler’s Reich and winning World War II, it’s Josef Stalin, a dictator as vile and murderous as Hitler himself.
Read the whole thing.
The Failure of the Western Way War
Posted by Glenden Brown in Afghanistan, American History, American People, Contractors Military, Corruption, Military Industrial Complex, Neocons, This Blog on August 2, 2010
Hat Tip to the HuffPo for this powerful piece from Andrew Bacevich.
Reality, above all the two world wars of the last century, told a decidedly different story. Armed conflict in the industrial age reached new heights of lethality and destructiveness. Once begun, wars devoured everything, inflicting staggering material, psychological, and moral damage. Pain vastly exceeded gain. In that regard, the war of 1914-1918 became emblematic: even the winners ended up losers. When fighting eventually stopped, the victors were left not to celebrate but to mourn. As a consequence, well before Fukuyama penned his essay, faith in war’s problem-solving capacity had begun to erode. As early as 1945, among several great powers — thanks to war, now great in name only — that faith disappeared altogether.
Among nations classified as liberal democracies, only two resisted this trend. One was the United States, the sole major belligerent to emerge from the Second World War stronger, richer, and more confident. The second was Israel, created as a direct consequence of the horrors unleashed by that cataclysm. By the 1950s, both countries subscribed to this common conviction: national security (and, arguably, national survival) demanded unambiguous military superiority. In the lexicon of American and Israeli politics, “peace” was a codeword. The essential prerequisite for peace was for any and all adversaries, real or potential, to accept a condition of permanent inferiority. In this regard, the two nations — not yet intimate allies — stood apart from the rest of the Western world.
And this passage:
Events made it increasingly evident that military dominance did not translate into concrete political advantage. Rather than enhancing the prospects for peace, coercion produced ever more complications. No matter how badly battered and beaten, the “terrorists” (a catch-all term applied to anyone resisting Israeli or American authority) weren’t intimidated, remained unrepentant, and kept coming back for more.
And this one:
If any overarching conclusion emerges from the Afghan and Iraq Wars (and from their Israeli equivalents), it’s this: victory is a chimera. Counting on today’s enemy to yield in the face of superior force makes about as much sense as buying lottery tickets to pay the mortgage: you better be really lucky. [snip]
By 2007, the American officer corps itself gave up on victory, although without giving up on war. First in Iraq, then in Afghanistan, priorities shifted. High-ranking generals shelved their expectations of winning — at least as a Rabin or Schwarzkopf would have understood that term. They sought instead to not lose. In Washington as in U.S. military command posts, the avoidance of outright defeat emerged as the new gold standard of success.
And this devastating conclusion:
Nearly 20 years ago, a querulous Madeleine Albright demanded to know: “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?” Today, an altogether different question deserves our attention: What’s the point of constantly using our superb military if doing so doesn’t actually work?
In his books, Bacevich has strongly condemned the bipartisan madness of American politics unquestioned belief in our military greatness. The cost of war has vastly outstripped any possible rewards of victory. The real battles are not fought with guns and bombs and tanks; they are fought with words and are fought not on fields or city streets but in hearts and minds. That is a battle we can win but we have to show up and thus far we haven’t.
Rep. Grayson: ‘The War Is Making You Poor’
Posted by Richard Warnick in Afghanistan, congress, Democracy, Disaster, Economy, Federal Budget, Foreign Policy, Iraq, Military Industrial Complex, National Politics, Peace, Poverty, This Blog, War on May 21, 2010
Somebody (Glenn?) told me today that there is no progressive agenda in Congress. So what’s this?
Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL):
Next year’s budget allocates $159,000,000,000 to “contingency operations,” to perpetuate the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. That’s enough money to eliminate federal income taxes for the first $35,000 of every American’s income each year, and beyond that, leave over $15 billion that would cut the deficit.
So let’s do that instead.
Pentagon Thinking About Ludicrously Expensive Weapon System
Posted by Richard Warnick in Foreign Policy, Military, Military Industrial Complex, National Politics, Rumsfeld, Terrorism, This Blog, War on April 26, 2010

This headline may seem like all the others, but get a load of the details:
The Pentagon’s plan to fire ballistic missiles at terrorists isn’t just a nuclear Armageddon risk. It’s a ludicrously expensive way to accidentally start World War III: each weapon could cost anywhere from a few hundred million to $1 billion.
Not surprisingly, this is a Donald Rumsfeld idea. Surprisingly, the Obama administration wants to move ahead with it.
Randy Newman said it better than any politician:
UPDATE: Rachel Maddow highlights a cheaper alternative missile system that terrorists can afford.


Recent Comments