Spot the difference, perpetual war edition…
Tag: military industrial complex
Biden’s Plan To Root ‘Extremists’ Out Of The Military Looks Like A Political Operation
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has called for a worldwide “stand down” of the U.S. military in April to focus on extremism in the ranks. This is fine, but indications are that the one-day sessions will not focus on both ends of the political spectrum, and will not identify true extremists who have no place in the military.
One wag snarked, “Just ask if they voted for Donald Trump.” More seriously, retired Army Brig. Gen. Thomas Kolditz, a former department head at West Point, told Fortune in an interview that he was very concerned about a “strong Trump following in the military.”
Kolditz conceded that military men and women can be conservative, but Trump supporters who think that the attack on the U.S. Capitol was “a good thing” (Are there any?) should be removed. “That probably won’t happen,” he added, “until the Trump loyalists are out.”
‘More HUMANE treatment’? Biden admin reopens contaminated FL detention camp for migrant kids that Trump shut down in 2019
Move over fancy-schmancy storage containers with bars on the windows because the Biden administration is reopening a detention camp in Florida that Trump shut down in 2019 … probably because it’s contaminated with military waste.
And they said Trump was cruel, wow.
Biden’s First Foreign Policy Speech Vows Forever Wars
US foreign policy has clearly continued in the same direction, without missing a beat. Unlike in previous transitions in the White House, this time US President Joe Biden has not even really tried to promise even the faintest hope that it wouldn’t.There were a few glimpses of remote hope – particularly regarding the possibility the US wouldn’t abandon its last arms treaty with Russia, New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) – and Biden’s promise of returning to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran Nuclear Deal.
However, in Biden’s first speech regarding foreign policy since taking office, now posted on the White House’s official website and titled, “Remarks by President Biden on America’s Place in the World,” reveals that, if anything, US belligerence on the global stage is set to only expand.
“America is back. Diplomacy is back at the center of our foreign policy.”
Biden’s opening remarks attempt to suggest that America has drifted away under his predecessor US President Donald Trump. But when he says “America is back,” we are left to assume he means “back” to what the US was doing under the administration of US President Barack Obama under which he served as vice president.
This was a president elected into office by the American people to end the wars of his predecessor, US President George W. Bush. Not only did he fail to end those wars – one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan – he expanded both. He also started several new wars including in Libya, Syria, and Yemen.
Under the administration of Obama-Biden, the US also overthrew the government of Ukraine in 2014 precipitating deadly violence in the nation’s eastern region.
Obama also continued Bush-era policies aimed at overthrowing the government of Venezuela and instituted the so-called US “pivot” to Asia in which US meddling was expanded in a bid to peel Southeast Asian states away from China’s orbit – or create an arc of chaos to disrupt China’s rise, trying.
And in Biden’s recent foreign policy speech – he has vowed to continue all of this.
Glenn Greenwald on the perpetual war…
BIDEN COMMITS TO FOREVER WAR ON AFGHANISTAN
The forever war on Afghanistan will continue.
The U.S. and its NATO proxy force have spent nearly 20 years and a trillion dollars to “do something” in Afghanistan. What that something was to be was never clear. There were attempts to impose some kind of enlightened model of governance on the Afghan people. But anyone with knowledge of that country knew that this would never work.
Bribes were handed out left and right and Afghan warlords, many of whom hold government positions, enriched themselves by scamming the occupation forces. They naturally do not want that to end. There are also Afghans who do not want to live under the heel of corrupt warlords and ignorant occupation troops. They are called Taliban and get support from Pakistan and Arab countries which the U.S. calls ‘allies’. The occupation forces tried to fight them but after nearly 20 years of wars the Taliban again rule over half of the country. Even while the warlords still have military support from the occupation forces their troops are losing in nearly every engagement.
Militarily the war against the Taliban has long been lost. Even with the 100,000 ‘western’ troops the Obama administration had sent there was no way to win it.
President Donald Trump made efforts to end the useless war on Afghanistan. He negotiated with the Taliban to remove all ‘western’ forces by May 1. The agreement also commits the Taliban to not attacking those forces and to negotiate with the warlord government in Kabul on power sharing. They agreed to that after the U.S. promised that Taliban prisoners of war, held by the Afghan government, would be released.
The Afghan government had and has of course no interest in losing power. At least not as long as still gets sponsored by ‘western’ money. It also did not want to let prisoners go as those would just turn around and again fight against it. A year ago the Trump administration threatened to withhold money should the Afghan government not follow the negotiated terms:
Facing collapse of Afghan peace talks before they even start, the Trump administration has threatened to withhold up to $2 billion in aid unless President Ashraf Ghani and his main rival put aside their political differences and open negotiations with the Taliban.
…
The threat was the sharpest sign yet that the Trump administration is distancing itself from its Afghan ally and moving closer to the Taliban. The longtime U.S. adversary has in effect become a wary partner as President Trump seeks to withdraw thousands of American troops before the November election and end America’s longest war.
…
The Kabul government is heavily dependent on international assistance. U.S. aid was expected to total $4.3 billion this year, all but $500 million of which was earmarked for training and equipping the Afghan army.
The threat worked as expected. But when it became clear that a new management would take over the White House the Afghan government again tried to stall the process.
“Spot’s Rampage” Event Awakens Us With Reality Of Dystopian World Ahead
To summarize the company’s manifesto. It said: “See Spot KILL!! Spot is an empathy-building tool, because: Cute and approachable!”
Here’s the manifesto:
See Spot Run. It tops out at a blistering 3mph.
See Spot Roll Over. Spot is an empathy missile, shaped like man’s best friend and targeted straight at our fight or flight instinct. When killer robots come to America they will be wrapped in fur, carrying a ball. Spot is Rob Rhinehart’s ideal pet: it never shits.
Good Boy, Spot! Everyone in this world takes one look at cute little Spot and knows: this thing will definitely be used by police and the military to murder people. And what do police departments have? Strong unions! Spot is employee of the month. You never need to union bust a robot – but a robot can union bust you.
The manifesto continued, “Boston Dynamics and they HATED this idea.” They said the robotics company even offered them two free robots to call off the event.
See Spot KILL!! Spot is an empathy building tool, because: Cute and approachable! We talked with Boston Dynamics and they HATED this idea. They said they would give us another TWO Spots for FREE if we took the gun off. That just made us want to do this even more and if our Spot stops working just know they have a backdoor override built into each and every one of these little robots.
See Spot Fall Over And Freak Out. Quite an experience to live in fear, isn’t it? That’s what it is to be a slave. Our saving grace: Spot is evil but not very good at its job.
Boston Dynamics wasn’t thrilled with the stunt.
Raytheon Awarded $49 Million DoD Contract Weeks After Former Board Member Lloyd Austin Confirmed as Defense Secretary
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin stands to profit from a new Department of Defense contract with arms contractor Raytheon, even after he promised to divest from Raytheon holdings he acquired as a civilian.
A new $49 million contract was awarded to Raytheon last week, just weeks after the company’s former board member Lloyd Austin was confirmed as the new Secretary of Defense. The contract is for engines for VTOL (vertical take-off and landing) aircraft.
Austin joined the board of Raytheon Technologies in 2016, the same year he retired from the armed forces. As of 2020, his disclosed Raytheon stock and compensation holdings amount to more than $1.4 million, and it’s likely he’ll sell his Raytheon shares at an inflated price due to the latest contract while in office as Secretary of Defense.
Politico’s Defense News, Brought to You by Northrop Grumman
Since its inception 14 years ago, Politico has risen to become an internet news giant. Now employing over 700 people and reaching 50 million people per month, the website and newspaper has become one of the most trusted sources of information on political issues in the United States. Key to this is its range of influential newsletters, which reach millions every day.
And yet the organization has entered into a number of very troubling partnerships that could potentially undermine the credibility and independence of its reporting. Both its defense and space newsletters, which keep readers informed and up to date on those topics, come sponsored by giant military and aerospace contractor Northrop Grumman.
To its credit, Politico is upfront about their partnership, with those sections bearing an advertisement label stating “presented by Northrop Grumman.” The question is whether readers can truly trust the outlet to accurately report and scrutinize those areas that are so critical to its chief sponsor. Does taking Northrop Grumman’s money make Politico less likely to call out the Pentagon’s enormous and bloated military budget, war crimes committed overseas, or the gross wastage of public funds?
Weapons biz bankrolls experts pushing to extend Afghan War
Earlier this month, a study group established by Congress recommended that President Joe Biden extend the May 1 deadline for withdrawing troops from America’s longest war. It’s a strategy that many experts say runs the risk of abrogating the U.S.-Taliban agreement and potentially setting back the potential peace process in Afghanistan — or even dooming it to failure.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is a striking similarity in the backgrounds of the individuals involved in these critical recommendations, which are likely to influence whether Biden maintains a “conditions based” U.S. military footprint in Afghanistan. Two of the group’s three co-chairs and nine of the group’s 12 plenary members, comprised of what the group refers to as “members,” have current or recent financial ties to major defense contractors, an industry that soaks up more than half of the $740 billion defense budget, and stands to gain from protracted U.S. military involvement overseas.
There was more diversity in views and financial interests among the 26 “senior advisers” that the group consulted. At least three of these advisers have warned publicly that the suggested troop withdrawal extension may pose significant risks. But the study group’s plenary is deeply intertwined with the military industrial base, with nearly $4 million the group’s co-chairs and plenary have received in compensation for their work on the boards of defense contractors.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.