| Chapter Twenty-Seven of Pax Americana: The Military Industrial Complex and the War On Terror by Danny Quintana |
The excesses in defense spending cannot and should not be blamed on our men in uniform whom try so hard to guard our freedoms and
protect our liberties. We are in a new century with new enemies and a different mission for our armed forces. We are no longer facing a
totalitarian empire like the former Soviet Union. Other large nation states, like India, China, Pakistan and Brazil have their hands full just
managing their exploding populations. These large countries have major economic ties to the West. The Chinese are very much interested in
developing their economy not in “ruling the world”. With a population of over 1.3 billion, their government has their hands full with internal
governance. 1
In the last century our politicians would often use our military as the enforcer for big business. As Major General Smedley Butler, USMC
observed in 1933:The following excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933 by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC. General Butler was twice
awarded the congressional Medal of Honor (1914, 1917). General Douglas MacArthur described Butler as "one of the really great generals in
American history."
protect our liberties. We are in a new century with new enemies and a different mission for our armed forces. We are no longer facing a
totalitarian empire like the former Soviet Union. Other large nation states, like India, China, Pakistan and Brazil have their hands full just
managing their exploding populations. These large countries have major economic ties to the West. The Chinese are very much interested in
developing their economy not in “ruling the world”. With a population of over 1.3 billion, their government has their hands full with internal
governance. 1
In the last century our politicians would often use our military as the enforcer for big business. As Major General Smedley Butler, USMC
observed in 1933:The following excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933 by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC. General Butler was twice
awarded the congressional Medal of Honor (1914, 1917). General Douglas MacArthur described Butler as "one of the really great generals in
American history."
In a world where major multinational corporations transcend the legal reach of any nation state, the American military machine no longer has
the role of protecting the free world from the dangers of global communism. Far greater dangers come from international viruses like aids and
economic dislocation from globalization. Both are here to stay and will not be eradicated or controlled any time soon.The military does not set
public policy. They are asked to do the unpleasant task of carrying out political objectives, regardless of how ill-advised. If that means the
angry jungles of Vietnam or the hot deserts of Iraq or the mountains of Afghanistan, then our military is there and ready. It also means the
military is stuck with weapon systems they don’t want, programs they don’t need and military hardware that is not appropriate for today’s
challenges. The history of weapons procurement in Washington is one of intrigue and pork barrel politics. 3 The B-2 bomber is the poster
child for excessive defense spending and an accurate portrait of the vast reach of the military industrial complex.
the role of protecting the free world from the dangers of global communism. Far greater dangers come from international viruses like aids and
economic dislocation from globalization. Both are here to stay and will not be eradicated or controlled any time soon.The military does not set
public policy. They are asked to do the unpleasant task of carrying out political objectives, regardless of how ill-advised. If that means the
angry jungles of Vietnam or the hot deserts of Iraq or the mountains of Afghanistan, then our military is there and ready. It also means the
military is stuck with weapon systems they don’t want, programs they don’t need and military hardware that is not appropriate for today’s
challenges. The history of weapons procurement in Washington is one of intrigue and pork barrel politics. 3 The B-2 bomber is the poster
child for excessive defense spending and an accurate portrait of the vast reach of the military industrial complex.
“War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it
seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is
conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here
to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent
over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows
the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag. I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect
some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is
the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is
simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger
men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war
preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism. It may seem odd for me, a
military man, to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty-three
years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile
military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant
to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-
man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a
gangster for capitalism. I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it.
Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the
service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of
higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped
make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I
helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall
Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international
banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 . I brought light to the Dominican Republic
for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its
way unmolested. During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell
racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he
could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents”. 2
seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is
conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here
to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent
over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows
the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag. I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect
some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is
the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is
simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger
men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war
preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism. It may seem odd for me, a
military man, to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty-three
years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile
military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant
to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-
man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a
gangster for capitalism. I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it.
Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the
service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of
higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped
make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I
helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall
Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international
banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 . I brought light to the Dominican Republic
for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its
way unmolested. During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell
racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he
could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents”. 2
The seafood is exceptional. On my last trip to Vegas, (November 2006), we went to the buffet at the Aladdin. The tuna sushi is larger than any
sushi I’ve had in Japan or Florida. It was the very best sushi and seafood I ever had anywhere. And I ate until I could not possibly eat
anymore. But being a product of poverty, I did not waste one single morsel.
The line into the seafood buffet is at least 35 minutes long. Is it worth it? In all of our actions in life, we have to ask ourselves this question as
individuals and as a nation. Is it worth it? Is killing the fish stocks and creating a future where the next generation does not enjoy the bounty of
God’s creation, worth it? In our gluttony, will future generations observe that, we ate it all and wasted what we did not eat? Do we as a
people have no obligation to the future generations and to the creatures themselves to insure their survival? How serious is the problem of
over fishing? Numerous sources indicate this problem is very serious. It warrants our immediate attention. According to Greenpeace, whose
objectivity is always suspect: Records kept by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) also indicate that of the
world's 15 main fishing regions, four are depleted and nine are declining. This global fisheries crisis is primarily a result of over harvesting.
The world's marine catch has increased more than four times in the past 40 years -- from 18.5 million tons in 1952 to 89 million tons in 1989,
but that growth is at great cost to the environment, and ultimately, perhaps to world food security.2
Between the United States, Japan and Europe numerous stocks of fish will soon disappear because of over fishing. 3 Then there is the
massive waste both at sea and on the plate. In addition to the target fish, the unwanted by-catch is just destroyed at incredible cost to the
ecosystem. 4
So people who don’t need more to eat, we kill “by-catch”. According to Carl Safina and Mercedes Lee: Virtually every kind of fishery
unintentionally catches unwanted creatures, known as by catch. Each year, about one-quarter to one-third of the world's total catch is simply
discarded overboard, dead or dying. Indiscriminate fishing techniques cause this waste; this careless practice also pits fishery against fishery.
Shrimp trawlers have more by kill than any other type of fishing gear: For every pound of shrimp kept, anywhere from a pound and a half to
eight pounds of sea creatures, many of which are juveniles of commercially important species such as red snapper, are discarded dead.
Shrimp trawls are the largest source of mortality in adult sea turtles, and in the U.S., shrimpers must now have "turtle excluder devices" in
their nets to shunt turtles out. The highest amount of by catch occurs in the Northwest Pacific: Nine million metric tons of catch is discarded
annually.
Aside from problems of waste, bycatch can also deplete or endanger wildlife populations, including fish, sea turtles, birds, and marine
mammals. For example, coastal gillnets threaten certain small dolphins and seals with extinction, and long lines set for tunas and swordfish
are endangering several albatross species. 5
sushi I’ve had in Japan or Florida. It was the very best sushi and seafood I ever had anywhere. And I ate until I could not possibly eat
anymore. But being a product of poverty, I did not waste one single morsel.
The line into the seafood buffet is at least 35 minutes long. Is it worth it? In all of our actions in life, we have to ask ourselves this question as
individuals and as a nation. Is it worth it? Is killing the fish stocks and creating a future where the next generation does not enjoy the bounty of
God’s creation, worth it? In our gluttony, will future generations observe that, we ate it all and wasted what we did not eat? Do we as a
people have no obligation to the future generations and to the creatures themselves to insure their survival? How serious is the problem of
over fishing? Numerous sources indicate this problem is very serious. It warrants our immediate attention. According to Greenpeace, whose
objectivity is always suspect: Records kept by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) also indicate that of the
world's 15 main fishing regions, four are depleted and nine are declining. This global fisheries crisis is primarily a result of over harvesting.
The world's marine catch has increased more than four times in the past 40 years -- from 18.5 million tons in 1952 to 89 million tons in 1989,
but that growth is at great cost to the environment, and ultimately, perhaps to world food security.2
Between the United States, Japan and Europe numerous stocks of fish will soon disappear because of over fishing. 3 Then there is the
massive waste both at sea and on the plate. In addition to the target fish, the unwanted by-catch is just destroyed at incredible cost to the
ecosystem. 4
So people who don’t need more to eat, we kill “by-catch”. According to Carl Safina and Mercedes Lee: Virtually every kind of fishery
unintentionally catches unwanted creatures, known as by catch. Each year, about one-quarter to one-third of the world's total catch is simply
discarded overboard, dead or dying. Indiscriminate fishing techniques cause this waste; this careless practice also pits fishery against fishery.
Shrimp trawlers have more by kill than any other type of fishing gear: For every pound of shrimp kept, anywhere from a pound and a half to
eight pounds of sea creatures, many of which are juveniles of commercially important species such as red snapper, are discarded dead.
Shrimp trawls are the largest source of mortality in adult sea turtles, and in the U.S., shrimpers must now have "turtle excluder devices" in
their nets to shunt turtles out. The highest amount of by catch occurs in the Northwest Pacific: Nine million metric tons of catch is discarded
annually.
Aside from problems of waste, bycatch can also deplete or endanger wildlife populations, including fish, sea turtles, birds, and marine
mammals. For example, coastal gillnets threaten certain small dolphins and seals with extinction, and long lines set for tunas and swordfish
are endangering several albatross species. 5
Defense spending is an easy sell politically. If a credible threat does not exist, then lie to justify the spending. In the words of the infamous
Hermann Goring (1945).
Hermann Goring (1945).
 | |  | |  |
| the Military Industrial Complex "Worse than traitors in arms are the men who pretend loyalty to the flag, feast and fatten on the misfortunes of the nation while patriotic blood is crimsoning the plains of the south and their countrymen are moldering in the dust." Abraham Lincoln |
his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece?
Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England,
nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along,
whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce
the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same
in any country." 4
Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England,
nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along,
whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce
the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same
in any country." 4
From the B-70 bomber to the B-1, the B-2, various nuclear submarines, the Nimitz air craft carriers, the MX weapons system, the Osprey
helicopter to the missile defense system, the F-22 fighter program, politics was the decisive factor in going forward with these major defense
programs. 5 The well-funded high tech bomber programs are a lesson in politics. With sub-contractors in numerous Congressional Districts,
these weapon programs have popular appeal.
helicopter to the missile defense system, the F-22 fighter program, politics was the decisive factor in going forward with these major defense
programs. 5 The well-funded high tech bomber programs are a lesson in politics. With sub-contractors in numerous Congressional Districts,
these weapon programs have popular appeal.
The funding by Congress of the various weapon systems meant major financial gain for defense contractors. Each system costs millions of
dollars per product. The B-1 cost over $200 million per plane without armaments or support bases. 6 These planes provided handsome
profits for Rockwell International, the builder and General Electric, one of the world’s largest corporations, the engine provider. 7
dollars per product. The B-1 cost over $200 million per plane without armaments or support bases. 6 These planes provided handsome
profits for Rockwell International, the builder and General Electric, one of the world’s largest corporations, the engine provider. 7
Northrop Grumman has done well as the prime contractor of this expensive plane. And the politics are spread out throughout the nation to
force the program down the public and the military’s throat. These bombers succeeded politically as well as technologically. The B-2 bomber
was a political pork barrel project, not a military necessity. In the end, the bomber was found not to be as effective as far less expensive
alternatives. 9
These impressive weapons systems are the wrong solution for the challenges of this century. Major weapons systems were absolutely
necessary for the last century when America was fighting the Nazis, Japanese imperialism in Asia and competing with the Soviet Union. They
do not work against religious extremists who are determined to kill others even if they have to kill themselves in the process. Suicide bombers
and snipers cannot be stopped by nuclear submarines, expensive fighter planes or aircraft carriers.
force the program down the public and the military’s throat. These bombers succeeded politically as well as technologically. The B-2 bomber
was a political pork barrel project, not a military necessity. In the end, the bomber was found not to be as effective as far less expensive
alternatives. 9
These impressive weapons systems are the wrong solution for the challenges of this century. Major weapons systems were absolutely
necessary for the last century when America was fighting the Nazis, Japanese imperialism in Asia and competing with the Soviet Union. They
do not work against religious extremists who are determined to kill others even if they have to kill themselves in the process. Suicide bombers
and snipers cannot be stopped by nuclear submarines, expensive fighter planes or aircraft carriers.
| The B-2 has a unit cost average of $2.1 Billion dollars. 8 |
What is needed to stop the criminals who are attacking the free world is good detective work and international criminal prosecution. An $8
billion dollar aircraft carrier will do wonders for the defense contractors who build this massive weapons system. It will not make the nation or
the world safer from criminal terrorists. But much of the defense budget has little to do with the projection of American power and protection of
American interests, such as they are.
Ultimately, what motivates defense spending is the need of Congressmen to be re-elected, the creation of jobs for labor and profits for the
mission at hand. Politics, not military necessity will continue to fuel defense spending.
Congress will refuse to close military bases in politically powerful districts despite the Pentagon wanting to shut them down. Congress will
allocate more fighter planes then the Air Force needs. Congress, not the military and not the Executive branch has control of the purse
strings. This political reality existed prior to September 11, 2001 and continues today. As John Isaacs observed in December 1998 issue of
the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:
billion dollar aircraft carrier will do wonders for the defense contractors who build this massive weapons system. It will not make the nation or
the world safer from criminal terrorists. But much of the defense budget has little to do with the projection of American power and protection of
American interests, such as they are.
Ultimately, what motivates defense spending is the need of Congressmen to be re-elected, the creation of jobs for labor and profits for the
mission at hand. Politics, not military necessity will continue to fuel defense spending.
Congress will refuse to close military bases in politically powerful districts despite the Pentagon wanting to shut them down. Congress will
allocate more fighter planes then the Air Force needs. Congress, not the military and not the Executive branch has control of the purse
strings. This political reality existed prior to September 11, 2001 and continues today. As John Isaacs observed in December 1998 issue of
the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:
As usual, many congressional advocates of increased military spending have undermined
their case by championing military pork. Gingrich helped to foist on the Pentagon many
unwanted C-130 cargo planes made near his district. And earlier this year Lott won initial
funding for an unrequested $1.5 billion helicopter carrier to be made in Pascagoula,
Mississippi. Stevens is famous for ensuring that Alaska receives a sizable chunk of defense
dollars from his appropriations bill. 10
their case by championing military pork. Gingrich helped to foist on the Pentagon many
unwanted C-130 cargo planes made near his district. And earlier this year Lott won initial
funding for an unrequested $1.5 billion helicopter carrier to be made in Pascagoula,
Mississippi. Stevens is famous for ensuring that Alaska receives a sizable chunk of defense
dollars from his appropriations bill. 10
But simple things like an increase in military pay create a firestorm of controversy. There are lobbyists for fighter planes, ships and artillery
pieces. But paying a competitive salary to our soldiers to stay in the military is not always a high priority with Congress. Like schoolteachers,
we expect a lot from them but are unwilling to properly pay for their services. The people who protect this country are willing to give their lives
to insure we have a Bill of Rights and our homes and streets are safe. They do not keep the profits that come from major weapons system
and they do not get votes for their re-election.
Despite the criticism of these expensive weapon systems being inappropriate in the days of suicide bombers and snipers, the defense
industry pushes forward. With their allies in Congress they continue to make a mockery of the defense needs of this country and the free
world.
Under increased scrutiny are big-ticket weapons that critics say are too costly, unreliable, or otherwise inappropriate in an era shifting from
superpower cold war to terrorism and other forms of unconventional conflict. Among these are the F-22 Raptor fighter aircraft, B-1 bomber,
V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, Crusader self-propelled artillery system, and Comanche helicopter. These "are five of the most wasteful and
ineffective weapons systems," says Danielle Brian of the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight. 11
And in the biggest political pork barrel project in the history of the republic, the missile defense system is scheduled to cost the American
taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. Missile defense was a horrible idea during the Reagan administration and it is an even worse idea
today. A container ship with an atomic bomb or even a dirty radiation bomb will get under a missile defense shield at any of our numerous
ports. Despite the overwhelming scientific criticism of the ill advised missile defense system, the Bush administration, defense contractors and
Congress is pushing forward. 12
Missile defense is cynical and anti-patriotic. When a company clearly knows the product they are pushing is not going to make the country
more secure, they are acting against the interests of everyone. The people who are pushing missile defense know they system is very
expensive and it will not work. These executives of defense corporations that are pushing missile defense are similar to the arguments of
tobacco companies selling their poisons to youth. In a world where tens of thousands of ships visit our harbors annually and hundreds of
thousands of people cross our borders, a space shield is a complete waste of money. The fact that these same company executives would
sell poison to their grandmothers if they could make a buck is not a good reason to fund this cynical program.
Obviously from the distance of time we now clearly know there were no "weapons of mass destruction" and Saddam was a toothless tiger. The
military told Americans exactly what would happen in Iraq if this mission was done politically and not in accordance with the needs of the
troops in the field. General Shinseki made it explicitly clear based upon his experience in the Balkans that 400,000 troops were needed to
keep the peace. Clearly everyone knew the Iraq military was no match for the best fighting force on Earth.James Fallows, one of America's
finest journalists who writes for Atlantic Monthly did a Frontline special for PBS. According to Fallows:
pieces. But paying a competitive salary to our soldiers to stay in the military is not always a high priority with Congress. Like schoolteachers,
we expect a lot from them but are unwilling to properly pay for their services. The people who protect this country are willing to give their lives
to insure we have a Bill of Rights and our homes and streets are safe. They do not keep the profits that come from major weapons system
and they do not get votes for their re-election.
Despite the criticism of these expensive weapon systems being inappropriate in the days of suicide bombers and snipers, the defense
industry pushes forward. With their allies in Congress they continue to make a mockery of the defense needs of this country and the free
world.
Under increased scrutiny are big-ticket weapons that critics say are too costly, unreliable, or otherwise inappropriate in an era shifting from
superpower cold war to terrorism and other forms of unconventional conflict. Among these are the F-22 Raptor fighter aircraft, B-1 bomber,
V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, Crusader self-propelled artillery system, and Comanche helicopter. These "are five of the most wasteful and
ineffective weapons systems," says Danielle Brian of the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight. 11
And in the biggest political pork barrel project in the history of the republic, the missile defense system is scheduled to cost the American
taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. Missile defense was a horrible idea during the Reagan administration and it is an even worse idea
today. A container ship with an atomic bomb or even a dirty radiation bomb will get under a missile defense shield at any of our numerous
ports. Despite the overwhelming scientific criticism of the ill advised missile defense system, the Bush administration, defense contractors and
Congress is pushing forward. 12
Missile defense is cynical and anti-patriotic. When a company clearly knows the product they are pushing is not going to make the country
more secure, they are acting against the interests of everyone. The people who are pushing missile defense know they system is very
expensive and it will not work. These executives of defense corporations that are pushing missile defense are similar to the arguments of
tobacco companies selling their poisons to youth. In a world where tens of thousands of ships visit our harbors annually and hundreds of
thousands of people cross our borders, a space shield is a complete waste of money. The fact that these same company executives would
sell poison to their grandmothers if they could make a buck is not a good reason to fund this cynical program.
Obviously from the distance of time we now clearly know there were no "weapons of mass destruction" and Saddam was a toothless tiger. The
military told Americans exactly what would happen in Iraq if this mission was done politically and not in accordance with the needs of the
troops in the field. General Shinseki made it explicitly clear based upon his experience in the Balkans that 400,000 troops were needed to
keep the peace. Clearly everyone knew the Iraq military was no match for the best fighting force on Earth.James Fallows, one of America's
finest journalists who writes for Atlantic Monthly did a Frontline special for PBS. According to Fallows:
As usual, many congressional advocates of increased military spending have undermined
their case by championing military pork. Gingrich helped to foist on the Pentagon many
unwanted C-130 cargo planes made near his district. And earlier this year Lott won initial
funding for an unrequested $1.5 billion helicopter carrier to be made in Pascagoula,
Mississippi. Stevens is famous for ensuring that Alaska receives a sizable chunk of defense
dollars from his appropriations bill. 10
their case by championing military pork. Gingrich helped to foist on the Pentagon many
unwanted C-130 cargo planes made near his district. And earlier this year Lott won initial
funding for an unrequested $1.5 billion helicopter carrier to be made in Pascagoula,
Mississippi. Stevens is famous for ensuring that Alaska receives a sizable chunk of defense
dollars from his appropriations bill. 10
A better solution is to use some of this money to increase our soldiers’ pay; and lessen our fuels.
----------------------------------------------------------------
1. The World Factbook 2002, China. On the CIA’s website at:www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html#People
2. Major General Smedley Butler, USMC, “War is a Racket” on the internet at:www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
3. See the numerous cites on the internet. Especially, Center for Defense Information, Federation of American Scientists, Bulletin of
Atomic Scientists, Physicians for Social Responsibility and various others.
4. Numerous sources site this now very famous quote by the infamous Hermann Goering. This one comes from the Liberty Tree online at:
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Hermann.Goering.Quote.65D2
5. See Federation of American Scientists at:www.fas.org/index.htm
6. See Federation of American Scientists at:www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-1b.htm
7. Ibid cite 5 supra.
8. See B-2 Spirit at Federation of American Scientists:www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-2.htm
9. See Council for a Livable World, “B-2 or not B-2...That is the Question” www.clw.org/milspend/b2_2001.html
10. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nov/Dec1998,DEFENSE SPENDING When the walls come tumbling down By John Isaacs at:
www.thebulletin.org/issues/1998/nd98/nd98isaacs.html
11. Danielle Brian of the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, February 13, 2002, Christian Science Monitor at:
www.csmonitor.com/2002/0213/p02s03-uspo.htm
12. See generally, Center for Defense Information, Federation of American Scientists and Department of Defense web site on missile
defense
13. Frontline, "Invasion of Iraq" interview with James Fallows for PBS online at:
www.pbs org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/invasion/interviews/fallows.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
1. The World Factbook 2002, China. On the CIA’s website at:www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html#People
2. Major General Smedley Butler, USMC, “War is a Racket” on the internet at:www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
3. See the numerous cites on the internet. Especially, Center for Defense Information, Federation of American Scientists, Bulletin of
Atomic Scientists, Physicians for Social Responsibility and various others.
4. Numerous sources site this now very famous quote by the infamous Hermann Goering. This one comes from the Liberty Tree online at:
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Hermann.Goering.Quote.65D2
5. See Federation of American Scientists at:www.fas.org/index.htm
6. See Federation of American Scientists at:www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-1b.htm
7. Ibid cite 5 supra.
8. See B-2 Spirit at Federation of American Scientists:www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-2.htm
9. See Council for a Livable World, “B-2 or not B-2...That is the Question” www.clw.org/milspend/b2_2001.html
10. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nov/Dec1998,DEFENSE SPENDING When the walls come tumbling down By John Isaacs at:
www.thebulletin.org/issues/1998/nd98/nd98isaacs.html
11. Danielle Brian of the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, February 13, 2002, Christian Science Monitor at:
www.csmonitor.com/2002/0213/p02s03-uspo.htm
12. See generally, Center for Defense Information, Federation of American Scientists and Department of Defense web site on missile
defense
13. Frontline, "Invasion of Iraq" interview with James Fallows for PBS online at:
www.pbs org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/invasion/interviews/fallows.html