A sixty-five-year impression of what our National government looks like from the street.

 “Money for nothin’ and the chicks for free!”

…..Way too much money!

My first memories of money in government started in the late 1950’s. I will never forget Dwight Eisenhower’s speech warning the Nation of the power behind the Military Industrial Complex. He saw that the number one threat to our democratic way of governance may well come from within. This threat is addressed in the oath to public and military service, in part:

 “…defend this Country from all threats, both foreign and domestic.”

 I hope this sounds very familiar to every citizen of this Nation. We constantly keep a vigilant eye toward threats from the outside. Now, it has become painfully clear that we have to be vigilant to threats from within. Unfortunately for Dwight Eisenhower, the money from the did overwhelm the system and inevitably brought us to “Citizens United”.

 In the 1960’s, dark money from the entire corporate world started strutting its stuff in public. John Kennedy doesn’t get elected without huge donation influx of corporate money. Historically corrupt politicians, like Lydon Johnson, had so many money-related I.O.U.’s that he could get whatever he wanted for his campaign war chest.; and did. Then came the major failure, Dick Nixon. He almost made it for eight years, but all his big money guys went sour on him and out the door he went.

 All the time Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon held office the massive war machine flourished and grew to staggering heights. A ton of “dark” money was turning tides at the voter’s polls. Corporations of all types were more seriously getting in the game of buying a government. The 1960’s fomented a movement of great mistrust of our National government which, by the 1970’s, created drastic reductions in the number of actual voters. Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter bubbled us into the 1980’s. We then got this actor person, Ron Reagan, to take us through most of the 1980’s. There was some serious money involved in National politics at this point. The money continued to flow as G. W. H. Bush lead us out of the 1980’s into the roaring 1990’s. The 1980’s seemed to be a wake-up call to the U.S. voters, as far as huge money donors went. Bill Clinton took the helm and all hell broke lose with big, dark money in politics; lots of it, on both sides of the aisle. Clinton’s only remarkable achievement was his leaving office after two terms with a National Budget surplus. Those that came after him blew the National budgets and deficits to hell in a hand basket.

That took care of the roaring 90’s. Y-2K came and went; nothing to see here – keep moving. G. W. Bush came down from on high aided and abetted by Daddy’s big money donors and took a seat in the White House. That seat wasn’t even warm when the Towers came down and the Pentagon was breached. And, just like that, we were involved in an endless war; one which we are still embroiled 20+ years later. That old Military/Industrial Complex once again reared its ugly head and the Federal government fell into their trap and trance. This group of self-serving corporations and individuals never went away they were simply laying low just waiting to ponce on the U.S. Treasury. The Complex was such a dreadnaught that it immediately plunged the Nation into financial crisis [along with sub-prime mortgages].

 We have elected three presidents since “W”, and money in politics has grown to epic levels with the help of “Citizens United”. Our Nation’s finances have been destroyed almost to the point of no return. If this trend goes on any longer, we will indeed be a third-world Nation. For all the men and women who have put their lives on the line for this Country, this would be the ultimate insult to our dedication to democracy.

 

WHEN WILL IT STOP?

FROM WHERE I SIT...

Dwight Eisenhower’s statement

warning of the

Military-Industrial Complex:

This speech was made in January as 

Eisenhower handed the torch to Kennedy.

As we peer into society's future, we – you and I, and our government – must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

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 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 alone more than the net income of all United States corporations.

Now 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. 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. Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocation, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet in holding scientific discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

ALSO:

          - Eisenhower never thought, or meant, our 

            commitment in Southeast Asia to be long term.

         - Then, behind closed doors, Kennedy, under

            pressure from the Military/Industrial Complex, 

            started increasing our footprint there, while

            everyone swooned over what a beautiful person he

            was.

         - Johnson owed many people political I.O.U.’s and the

           M/I Complex held quite a few. He oversaw a huge                     Military buildup; to over 600,000 Troops.

         - Then, 1968-1969-1970 happened in the U.S.

           Martin Luther King - April 4, 1968, Memphis, TN

           Bobby Kennedy - June 6, 1968, Los Angeles, CA

           Woodstock - August 17, 1969, Woodstock, NY

           Kent State - May 4, 1970, Kent, Ohio

                  *note: I was serving in the Army over that period of time,

                  so I wasn’t in the U.S. and that made it hard to fully         

                  appreciate what was going on back home.

Rich people paying poor people      

to kill other poor people on the

other side of the world. War is

a rich man’s game. All wars are

banker’s wars.

Then we got the Reagan - W. Bush years, and we still insisted on fighting wars in foreign lands. I must say that, since the Vietnam Conflict, the U.S. hasn’t had a very good track record of actually winning or ending our Military Expeditions and National objectives, or our wars. Nobody knows how to formulate an “exit plan” from all our recent conflicts, large and small.

No one can lay blame on the Military’s doorstep. The Military did what they were sent to do, and won the battles. There were, and are, forces at work that have a burning desire to micro-manage every aspect of our war machine, so our men and women in uniform can only do their masters’ bidding.

Who are their masters? That would be the Congress and the Military/Industrial Complex. This Complex is not what you see on the surface. It has many layers and runs deep into our economic system.

1)  The major Manufacturers of our war machine

2)  Subcontractors in this Country & foreign Countries

3)  the weapons design community; including our Universities

4)  etc...........

That is just a brief overview of how this system works. It takes a lot of money to make the production chain work; from raw material sourcing to finished product. All the banks and almost all the producers have shareholders who expect to make money. That is when the bankers arrive to start the ball rolling.

The larger players also have their lobbyists on K Street in Washington DC. During this cycle, there are trillions of dollars changing hands. Where does that money eventually come from? If you guessed the American taxpayer, you would be correct.

I think the hardest pill to swallow is that “We The People” are purposely blocked from having any say in how our money is spent. There is also no accounting or auditing on where and how all these trillions of dollars are spent. Somehow, we have left Congress in charge of allocating these monies in their best interests: not ours. More often than not, our Congress bows to those who donate large sums of money to their reelections.

I feel what it comes down to is there has to be some structural changes in the way our elected officials get elected and what they are restricted from doing once elected.

If you can’t be elected to an office without accepting corporate donations from lobbyists, perhaps you’re in the wrong business. If you come under the spell of the sinister, greedy lobbyists on K Street in DC, a career change is a great option.

The only thing that “We The People” have left to control is the ballot box. A staggering number of Americans opt out of the ballot box; they just stay home and suck their thumbs. Meanwhile their world is crumbling and they don’t have a clue. The best this Country can do is send maybe 60% of eligible voters to the polls in a Presidential election year. This percentages are even worse when it comes to State and local elections.

If American democracy is

to survive, these percentages

must be brought up to

the 90-95% level.

Another Government Agency in Distress

From: The American Legion Magazine, June 2106

More than medicine

By Joseph J. Frank

Until the land mine went off, it was a pretty routine assignment. I was directing a truck loaded with sandbags to a bridge site at Tam Ky, in what was then South Vietnam. The road from base camp to the river had been swept for mines, but the truck swerved left, off the main path. There was an explosion, but I didn’t hear it. The next thing I remember is lying flat on the ground, sensing my legs were still in the air. A medic was immediately upon me, pushing painkillers through my skin, to go along with numbing shock. Strange thoughts entered my mind. Someone was giving me last rites. Was I dead? No, I did not think I was dead. Then I heard the beat of Huey blades in the tropical air. 

I will never forget the date. It was Jan. 14, 1968, 48 years ago – the height of the Vietnam War. I had begun that day as a strapping young soldier in the Army’s 39th Engineer Battalion (Combat). It was the last morning I would rise and feel my feet hit the ground beneath me. 

I came back to the United States paralyzed from the chest down, a T4-5 paraplegic. The hardest part of a spinal injury, for many of us, is psychologically accepting the reality that no matter how hard we try, we’re never going to get up and walk again. The human brain is not easily convinced of this and continues, almost involuntarily, to attempt to solve a problem for which there are not yet any medical answers. 

For me, this new and different life began at the Hines VA Spinal Cord Center in Chicago. There, I had doctors and counselors who understood not only my condition but my context. Healthy soldier one day and paralyzed veteran the next, I had suddenly returned to the United States to begin the yearlong rehabilitation from an injury in a war that most Americans misunderstood or hated. Some would look at me and see an illustration of political viewpoints I did not necessarily share with them. 

In a ward with 32 other paralyzed veterans I learned to get dressed in the morning, take care of myself, operate my wheelchair, keep my upper-body muscles strong and drive a vehicle without the use of lower limbs. I also learned what it means to have health-care services specific to my status as a veteran, delivered in the company of others who have served in uniform. As a young veteran in need, I realized that VA care is a cherished benefit reserved only for those of us who pledged our lives to defend our nation. It’s something we get in return for what we have given.

As the VA privatization movement rattles through Washington heading into the fall elections, I think back to that year I spent at Hines. After I got used to my wheelchair, I started helping other paralyzed veterans in the ward as some had done for me when I arrived. I made several discoveries that first year of major adjustment, and those discoveries have guided my career as a champion for veterans and people with disabilities alike. 

I discovered, for instance, that veterans need caregivers who understand the post-military journey, whether we are looking for relief from post-traumatic stress disorder, trying to figure out a new prosthesis, hunting for a job, filing a claim, buying a house or getting checked for hepatitis C. As an American Legion member, and later as a counselor and service officer in the St. Louis VA system, I also discovered why it’s important to be both a constructive critic and a tireless advocate of VA health care. We address the system honestly and demand improvements when needed because VA health care belongs to us, the veterans who use it. Too often today, I find that the biggest supporters of VA privatization are not VA patients at all. Many are not even veterans.

Too often, veterans’ criticism of VA has been misinterpreted as condemnation. And our calls for change and reform within the system have been erroneously translated into a perceived demand for its transfer to the private sector. The American Legion has supported the 2014 Choice Act and its provisions only as a temporary measure for veterans whose VA facilities are unreasonably distant or overbooked. The Legion opposes permanent use of non-VA providers, as well as expansion of vouchered care to the private sector, for a number of relevant economic reasons, including lower average cost per patient – but there’s much more to it than that.

More importantly, VA consistently outperforms other providers in terms of patient satisfaction and quality. That was certainly the case for me in VA’s spinal cord program, which is superior. A VA health-care provider is far more likely to know where to turn for answers on claims applications, disability ratings adjustments, or college and career help. VA health care is more than medicine. It’s a network of people – providers and patients alike – who care about veterans in ways non-VA medical practitioners can’t be expected to understand, let alone provide. Why would we ever want to take this benefit – a health-care system that understands the context of our lives as veterans and can help us in multiple ways – and hand it off to private providers whose quality probably ranks lower and cannot fully understand our needs and the services available to meet them? Outsourcing is only preferable when veterans have no other choice, such as those who live in rural areas distant from VA facilities.

I was honored to serve on the presidential committee of people with disabilities that brought into existence the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which improved the lives of millions and continues to do so. Not only did the ADA open doors and make upper floors accessible to people who use wheelchairs, it changed perceptions. I remember vividly that, in 1968, children were often frightened by wheelchairs. Today my grandkids want to ride on mine. My work on the ADA, and its success, proved that revolutionary positive changes can be accomplished even when dealing with the federal government, and greater understanding can be achieved on a bigger scale about people outside the average U.S. demographic, like those of us who use wheelchairs and military veterans.

The year I was elected national commander of The American Legion, Congress passed the Veterans Health Care Eligibility Reform Act of 1996, which opened up VA to all who honorably served our nation. Priority groups were established to ensure that those with the greatest needs and service-connected conditions would move to the front of the line should demand exceed capacity. As demand grew and capacity did not, today’s access problem understandably arose. The movement to expand privatization because we haven’t solved the access-demand problem seems to suggest that veterans don’t deserve the quality care we fought to achieve in our VA system. Now that quality is great, we will need to go someplace else. That’s pretty hard to accept, regardless of your service-connected disability rating.

A couple of years ago, I went back to the Hines VA center, where this journey began. This time, I was on a completely different mission, conducting an American Legion System Worth Saving site visit. The chief of the center met our group there, and he brought with him a yellowed file from 1968. It was mine. In it was a written chronicle from my arrival as a frightened, young and newly discharged soldier whose future was irreversibly changed, through my wheelchair training, weightlifting, psychological counseling and driving lessons. I was carried into that VA facility and I drove away from it, back to my family in Missouri where I would start a new life. I have been independent, happy and productive ever since, with the benefit of great family support. I knew then, from my experience at Hines, that what lay ahead for me wasn’t always going to be easy, but there are ways to solve almost any problem.  

Joseph J. Frank served as national commander of The American Legion from 1996 to 1997. He also worked as a benefits officer for Paralyzed Veterans of America and as a peer counselor in the Robert Woolsey Spinal Cord Center, attached to the St. Louis VA Health Care System. He often speaks at schools and veterans events about his career in advocacy.

Link: http://www.legion.org/magazine/232777/more-medicine

Why all the fuss about Immigration?

The United States has never had anything close to an Immigration Policy, so why worry about it now.

Prior to the mid-19th Century, the United States had an agrarian economy, as it expanded geographically, and there was no real need for an immigration policy. Since then, the common thread in any discussion on this Country’s “immigration policy” has been the industrial revolution. Closely following the Civil War the Industrial Revolution kicked into high gear. There became an urgent need to staff the growing number of factories. Many workers came from the farmlands and overseas to realize the promise of higher incomes. In a nutshell, as the western Nations industrialized, they needed a workforce to staff and operate their modern-day manufacturing facilities (the factories). The United States seemingly dropped all attempts at immigration policy for the same reason Europe did: industrialization.
“Most Counties, however, have not reconciled the old need for a work force and the need to regulate modern day immigration trends. With the recent failures in many economies, the lack of immigration regulation has bloated the ranks of the poorer classes and is increasing the tension and squeeze on what is left of the middle class. This is a lose-lose proposition in that the poor require certain attention that the middle class tax base can support. Without the middle class tax base, the poor are being hung out to dry (kicked to the curb). The "upper class" has never shown much of a penchant for supporting the lower classes. If you follow a logical train of thought on this, you come to the conclusion that at some point the upper class has no one left to do, their bidding.

Post World War I, the U.S. began struggling with immigration policy. President after President, Congress alter Congress in the 20th century have tried to figure this out, and have failed time and time again. So, for the last 146 years or so, the U.S. has virtually had no immigration policy, and that is large part of our current situation. I have quoted a few sources to detail the chain of events that got us here.

The Rise Of Industrial America, 1876 - 1900: ^[1]

“In the decades following the Civil War, the United States emerged as an industrial giant. Old industries expanded and many new ones, including petroleum refining, steel manufacturing, and electrical power, emerged. Railroads expanded significantly, bringing even remote parts of the country into a national market economy.”

“Industrial growth transformed American society. It produced a new class of wealthy industrialists and a prosperous middle class. It also produced a vastly expanded blue-collar working class. The labor force that made industrialization possible was made up of millions of newly arrived immigrants and even larger numbers of migrants from rural areas. American society became more diverse than ever before.”

Allison Morey on the Center for History and New Media: ^[2]

“During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, millions of immigrants were coming to the United States. The majority of these immigrants came from eastern and western Europe. Immigration increased during this time-period for several reasons. One reason was the hope for a better life, which included economic opportunities and an escape from oppressive governments. Another reason was for the adventure. A final reason includes religious freedom, especially for the Jewish people who were facing religious persecution in Russia.”

Nancy Birdsall, in Foreign Affairs Magazine: ^[3]

“It is interesting to note that, almost to a Nation, the Industrial Revolution had a direct and lasting effect on Immigration Policies. There are a handful of European Countries who chose to readjust their Immigration Policy once they had established a firm manufacturing base. The folks that filled the factories were to become the much needed Middle Class.”

                                    “Say hello to the new Dark Ages!”

“Why is this Middle Class the topic of so many economic and governmental discussions? The answer lies in the realization of just who pays the taxes that allow the wheels of industry and government to turn. The height of the Middle Class in the United States was achieved in the 1960's. The apex was reached as a direct result of our Military Industrial Complex. As much as people like to bash this sector for economic prowess, the Military-Industrial Complex gave this Country its incredible ability to out produce any other Nation on the Globe. It was the sole reason that our Standard of Living was, and still is, head and shoulders above anyone.”

“Unfortunately, in the 1990's there was a Trade Agreement reached, initially involving Canada, The U.S., and Mexico, that started the downhill spiral of our middle class by allowing our manufacturing jobs to be shipped outside our borders. The politicians at the time reassure the American public that this mass migration would never occur. We the people chose to listen without questioning a thing. It seems ironic that the exact opposite of what they promised us happened.”

“Here we are in 2016 wondering if we will ever again see the likes of our old middle class. Another Industrial Revolution does not appear to be in our future; hence, a resurgence of our middle class seems unlikely, at best. The big question facing our young adult population is that of actually paying for things we so easily take for granted; Social Welfare, Food Stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, affordable housing, and, yes, government itself. The Baby Boom generation could probably come up with the solution, but we're just to tired and burnt-out. Our children and grandchildren will have to figure this out on their own, and all we can tell them is, “Good luck"”.

I spent much of my adult life in our manufacturing sector. When I learned the details of this NAFTA deal, it was painfully obvious the Middle Class was going the way of the dinosaur. I witnessed, first hand, the steady decline in my regional manufacturing base, and it was clear that our Nation's tax base was going to suffer from this ill-conceived trade agreement. The politicians, and Lords of Industry, fiddled while “Rome” was burning!

Well, just maybe, Ms. Birdsall’s admonition of “good luck" is not enough. What is left of the middle class could easily team up with the lower classes and forcibly make a change in the status quo. The upper class isn^’t going to like it much, they will try everything in their power to fight back. I have a fairly good grasp on how the rank and file of the Military think, and, if the Military comes around, as I suspect it will, the upper class will have no option but to capitulate. Everything I see happening around me keeps pointing me in this direction of analysis. Yes, we could have a “bloodless” coup d’état, but I wouldn’t bet on it. Our economic and financial structures have become so polarized I don’t see a peaceful solution to the combination of no immigration policy and a disappearing tax base.

Taking a little bit from a number of points of view could possibly solve the problem of this Country ceasing to be a democracy. Take a little bit of isolationism. Take a little bit of libertarianism. Take a good bit of fiscal conservatism. Make our borders a little more secure. Take a little bite out of our financial sector. Make an investment in our infrastructure. Make a few less abominable trade pacts. And, come up with a logical immigration policy that stems the depletion of governmental resources to anyone who can enter this Country: legally, or not. Now, if we don’t get the ball rolling on this, our States will start declaring bankruptcy at an alarming rate (14 of them are on the brink right now). You think you know what true anarchy might look like. Believe me you have no idea what this Nation in total chaos would look like.

Watch this space.......................

References:

[1] Library of Congress, web site-

http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/timeline/riseind/index.html

[2] Center for History and New Media-

Author: Allison Morey

Emergence of Modern America

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://chnm.gmu.edu/tah-loudoun/blog/lessons/immigration-why-come-to-the-united-states/

[3] Foreign Affairs Magazine, March/April 2016 - Nancy Birdsall, President of the Center for Global Development

DO WE REALLY HAVE TO GO TO WAR, DADDY?

                                       Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Given that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different outcome each time. Is the United States of America ready to re-engage the Mideast in armed conflict, again? (We can’t even seem to call it “war” anymore.) Haven’t we learned anything from our latest fiasco in the desert? From the sound-bytes coming out of Washington, DC, it certainly seems we will never learn from our mistakes. I thought the Viet Nam War was supposed to teach us all we needed to know about open-ended, limited engagement, conflicts without any exit strategy, or end game.

A new Century, a new part of the World, and we find ourselves mired in the quicksand of the Mideast deserts among tribal communities who have been at war with each other for thousands of years. We find ourselves, once again, without an exit strategy, or an end game, and on the verge of being sucked into ground combat in the very near future. What could possibly go wrong?

I need to make one thing very clear, right up front. The National Media, both electronic and print, have taken the American Public for a bunch of ignorant fools. The “facts” they so easily string together make absolutely no sense when placed in the same sentence, or argument. The “facts” they so easily string together are not, indeed, facts. Most of what is spewed over the airwaves and in the papers is total fabrication. What is amazing, to me, is that these fabrications are so transparent if their attempts to foster one editorial position, or another.

When the President of the United States says that he will not commit ground troops to a renewed engagement in the Mideast, you cannot tell the American Public that the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces is overriding that statement by saying he “envisions” there could be a day when ground troops would be a necessary commitment. The President is the Commander-in-Chief, and what he says goes; no matter what. The Chief of Staff is simply stating a military possibility that needs to be considered,; even if not used. I do have a bone to pick with the President, however. He tells the American Public that there are no “combat” troops currently being sent to the Iraq; they are only behind the scenes advisors. I harken back to 1956, when President Eisenhower told us that he was only sending “advisors” to South Viet Nam. Does anyone remember how that worked out? Another bone I have to pick with the President and the Press is that they have both insulted the American Soldier by referring to them as “boots-on-the-ground”. If you can’t respect the men and women, you send off to war. Perhaps you don’t have the right to do so in the first place. These men and women are not simply a bunch of boots on anybody’s ground. They form the backbone of the American Dream and the American Democracy, so don’t ever disrespect them; what they do for you, they do willingly. And, one more bone to pick with the Press. When you are good enough to seek commentary from a recent Veteran, or an Active Duty member, please save a few seconds of your precious time to thank them for their Service to their Country. By skipping by that part of the program, you are, once again, showing your total disrespect for our men and women in Uniform. (note to newscasters: Our Military men and women are the only reason you folks have the liberty to do what you do, night in and night out.) And, please, all of you, stop lying to us. We’re not that stupid, and we see right through you for who you are and what you’re trying to do. One little caveat to the American People. Wake up, folks, your Country is being yanked from under you and only you have the power to set things straight, again. You know who you are!

Now, getting back to the Mideast, would someone please pick up an elementary school history book on this the part of the World? No fewer than five “Empires” have tried to conquer and occupy this region. To date, no one has succeeded. I realize that there are some in this Country who just can’t understand why those Arabs over there won’t take to our style of governance. Why wouldn’t they want the very best the West has to offer in societal, political, and economic systems? We can show them the way to their salvation through democracy and capitalism; it’s so easy. Apparently, the folks who have been running our Foreign Policy for past eighty years have neglected to pay attention to history, and have, instead, been bent on spreading American Exceptionalism throughout the World. We seem to just love that “Nation Building” thing. When does this Country wake up and realize that there aren’t a lot of people who think the same way we do. They have a very different view on the meaning of Religion in their lives. They have a very different value system for their society; they like their tribal hierarchies. And, most of all, they don’t like to be told what to do by people who don’t understand them. And, history will prove me right, they don’t like being told what to do by people who do understand them. They’ve been warring among themselves for thousands of years, and they don’t trust one another, either.

So, I ask the question, “What are we doing over there, and why would we want to go back for more?” I don’t think our Government has the answer to that. I am inclined to think that the Military/Industrial Complex has the answer, and they aren’t talking. Maybe our most favorite dick, President Cheeney, could shed some light on the problem. What say you, Dick?

Why do we go to war ?

- a primer on the mechanisms that enable us to constantly enter armed conflict without thought or planning.

Having been to war, and having had the privilege of returning home in one piece, the question of why our society so eagerly participates in armed conflict haunts me every day. Trying to answer this question is a lot like trying to construct the mosaic of a huge jig-saw puzzle. As with a large jig-saw puzzle, you tend to dwell first on the picture of the finished product; most normally on the top face of the box the puzzle comes in. You look for features that might make it easier to find and place the correct pieces in the correct spots. Then, you open the box, and hope that all the pieces are there.

Most of the puzzles I have encountered have begun their construction by first finding the corner pieces. This is followed by trying to lay out the four sides of the puzzle. Then you generally look for remarkable sets of pieces close to the perimeter, and start building inward toward the center. In doing this, you find that there are segments of a puzzle that stand out more than others; it’s a visual thing. What you are doing with this puzzle is precisely what is done in properly planning and constructing a strategy when you are contemplating going to war.

Planning for war, going to war, and coping with the aftermath are the tedious regimens similar to constructing the middle sections of that jig-saw puzzle. You set forth the most obvious categories, fine tune them, and then link them in a way that will give you the best chance for success. This gives you the “how”, the “when”, the “where”, and the “what”, but I does not give you the “why”.

To even start to grasp the “why” of “why we go to war”, it helps to consider our Nation’s rather bellicose nature from our Revolutionary War to the present war in Afghanistan and the re-occurrence of the war in Iraq. Up through most of the Vietnam War, our government and our society was in reasonably coherent agreement on the need to engage. By 1975, our government and our society started taking totally divergent courses when the question of entering armed conflict came up as a National discussion.

So, what happened in the mid-70’s? It is my contention that, from 1969 to 1975, our government began to have an increasing fear of the American public. As a result of this fear, our government began an arduous journey into the land of secrecy and deceit. Over the course of the twenty years following the Vietnam war, the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, and, eventually, the 12 other National Security Agencies had the veil of immunity, anonymity, and secrecy draped over them by all three branches of government; the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch. You can throw the Supreme Court into that mix, as well. At the same time, our Captains of Industry discovered new-found wealth and profit in a planned continuance of the Military/Industrial Complex. With the advent of giant leaps in technology and  the “M/I C” on steroids, our Nation’s war production was probably the most lucrative business to be involved with starting in the late 1970’s; Richard Bruce Cheney certainly thought so.

With both these factors in place and operating on all cylinders, it was relatively easy to commit our Military anywhere in the World. And, you guessed it, that’s exactly what happened. So, the question of “why” starts off with the fact that it was easy and hugely profitable. Coincidentally, there was a societal and philosophical sea change in our National identity.  The “me” generation became thoroughly ensconced in everyday life, and that seemed to lead very quickly to what was coined as “American Exceptionalism”. If we revisit the box with the jig-saw puzzle in it, it looks as if we develop our decisions to engage in precisely the exact way we choose to construct the puzzle. Consider the box itself as the Military/Industrial Complex. Consider the picture on the top of that box to hold all the secret nuances of rationalization and justification. Consider the choice to purchase the box with the puzzle in it as our own “American Exceptionalism”. This could just as easily be stated in reverse by hi-lighting the decision to purchase in the first place.

That’s a lot to chew on in one sitting. Make it a little more digestible by looking at the decision to purchase the box, the box itself, and the picture on top. If, for instance, you take away the need, or urge, to purchase the box, the question is mute, and you don’t engage. Of the three stated aspects prior to opening the box, changing the “Exceptionalism” and arrogance of the American psyche may prove to be the most achievable. You are not going to put a halt to the advancements in technology. You are, most likely, not going to stifle the obscene and profitable war production of this Country. Changing how we look at the rest of the World might be of immediate consideration, and reasonably doable. Dropping the words exceptional and arrogance form our National identity might just show the rest of the World that we will be willing to lead by example, not military force. Consider the respect our Country would regain if we chose to be a true leader, instead of a constant conqueror. Most of us, at one time or another, has voiced a preference for peace on this planet. Perhaps the United States could start the ball rolling in that direction, and do it very soon.

This little essay all began with an all-consuming passion to stop our government from making more Veterans. We obviously can’t take care of the ones we have currently, so tell where the logic is in making new ones. Also, this concept of “nation building” has my head spinning and my shorts in a knot. I ask you, “Who the Hell are we to tell people from any other sovereign Country how to run their government, their economy, and, ultimately, their society?” I don’t think anyone can provide a solid argument for that kind of mentality.

 Saturday, June 28, 2014

from the desk of: We The Peeps 1 
( http://wethepeeps1.blogspot.com/ )