Comments on: What caused Ike to criticize the “military-industrial complex”?

By: newportbob

newportbob — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 04:45:07 +0000

I look forward to reading your book. I have often thought that if I could have 5 minutes to talk to any President, it would have been Eisenhower — to find out how and why the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces Europe could find himself on a collision track that would force him to rail against the very organizations of which he had been a part (military, and [perhaps indirectly] industry). Your analysis above — outlining the indiscretions of the steamy affair between the two (military, industry) — goes a long way toward answering my questions. Throw in Congress, and it becomes a menage a trois — say no more. Interesting that the practice of major corporatons selling/advertizing things that “You can’t buy” has a long history, and that Eisenhower’s warnings are as applicable today (in fact more) than 50 years ago …

By: millschills

millschills — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 03:24:06 +0000

I always thought that C.Wright Mills’ book, the “Power
Elite”, which came out a year or two before Eisenhower’s
speach, provided a direct impact on this problem by giving a blunt description of the collusion between the coporate world and the military. Mills had the government as the junior partner in his description of the powers that run America.
The alarm sent by such reports greatly accelerated the development of the ICBM missle system, which went on line years ahead of plans. The Sputnik scare conjured up thoughts of mobile missle platforms in space, armed with hydrogen bombs. With communist haters like Edward Teller
giving exaggeratrd views of Russian nuclear advancements,it is a wonder we are still here.

By: craigbhill

craigbhill — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:25:23 +0000

It very well could be that Eisenhower’s warning, based on defense industry pressure on the govt via the public, was all he was referring to. The placement of the warning, tho, at the end of the speech, his farewell address, the thoughts he pointedly wanted to leave with the public, without going into the specific situation, wherein the defense industry caused the public to put expectations and pressure on the govt, forcing it to follow the lead of defense industry advertisements rather than that which reality called for, was based on much more than ads alone.

That he deleted in his speech, but wanted to use, reference to direct industry ties with Congress, as opposed to the merely old-fashioned electoral politics the Democrats were reported to be using against the administration, in hopes they could damage the Republican image as stalwart defender and elect a tougher Democrat as his successor, is indication he also felt campaign funding was going to those Democrats who urged for military expansion by circumventing DoD analysis of what was actually needed, which was so insidious, as he put it, to the democratic process itself, he had to stress the existence of the Complex at the end of his speech.

This article, relying solely on industry advertisements as reason for his warning, does not include the desire to bring in Congress as party to the Complex he warned against. That desire had to have been based on something more than ads in magazines.

The reason his warning has not been forgotten, relative to most everything else his administration accomplished, is the history and current events that followed. Pressure on the diletantish lightweight Kennedy, who campaigned on the need for an expanded military, has proven he was the last president to stand up to the military, unfortunately only behind closed doors, blocking them:

When they signed off on Operation Northwoods. which involved hijacked American planes that would crash and kill their American passengers and be blamed on a foreign enemy in order to foment a potential nuclear war;

When unexpected pressure was put on him to bring in the military, which was enthusiastic for its involvement, during the debacle at the well-named Bay of Pigs;

When the joint chiefs again pressured him to use nuclear weapons on the Russians over their missle placement in Cuba.

Kennedy saw Vietnam as the black hole it indeed was. His order to begin withdrawing troops was the first act Lyndon Johnson revoked when he returned to Washington on 11/22/63.

The current situation, wherein defense industry-related federal expenditures, including veterans costs and interest on the debt due to military expenditures, amount to 60% of the federal budget, which is a percentage only banana republics pay, followed the decapitated Kennedy administration unhindered. That this is so and we have still not insisted on answering Eisenhower’s warning with so much as an acknowledgment to at long last invoke a desperately needed shift in policy, is why his warning recurs.