Gosh, Abhi!! Be realistic! Don’t you see that this is why those evil-doers must be stopped? Why their reign of terrrer must end?

What is this world coming to when you can’t put some pork on your buddy’s table and pocket some chits from defense contractors all because the damn enemy refuses to have weapons of mass distruction? I mean, c’mon!! BOX-CUTTERS?? There was more yellowcake at Dubya’s last birthday then they found in Iraq!

See, this way? We piss ‘em off real good, see? And when it’s all really gone down the tubes there, and we can’t think of any more excuses to funnel money to Haliburton “private contractors” and we finally say that we’ve done our best and it’s up to the Iraqis, and we get our boys back home?

See by then, they’ll know how to fight like the enemy is supposed to, right? And someone over there in one of them A-rab countries is sure to lob a scud our way…and then?!

We’ll be prepared!! With our totally awesome missile-shield, dude!!!

If I write on how we should be investing in public education and health and not missile defense, I know I’m going to be assailed with distorted Realist rhetoric (no, I don’t mean realistic, I mean Realist) saying what’s the point of having a public school or good medical care if it’s going to be nuked by the next terrorist who passes by blah blah blah.

In an interview, David M. Walker, the head of the G.A.O. (formerly known as the General Accounting Office), called the senior analyst “a relatively low-level, disgruntled employee” out of step with his technical peers.

OHHH! Character assassination alert! I had no idea the title “senior technical analyst” fell into the “relatively low-level” category. Now I know Ghoshroy’s onto something.

Nira Schwartz has a website dedicated to this topic. I’m still wading through it, but it seems worth taking a look at.

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 State house, 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 militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

The point of course is that the military industrial complex has made many people rich and at a humbler level, provided employment to many – with political donations and votes tilting the head of the elected representatives – is it any surprise these things happen again and again.
On another note, whatever happened to political leaders, listening to whom was equal parts refreshing and stimulating.
one reason why i welcome ignatieff throwing his hat in the canadian political arena.