Poll: Americans support the military-industrial complex above all else

Global Research, April 27, 2017

A new Morning Consult/POLITICO survey, published on 26 April, indicates that most American voters support the military-industrial complex more than they support any other recipient of U.S. federal government spending.

The military-industrial complex includes almost all federal contractors, the top ten of which, in the ranking of the “Top 100 Contractors of the U.S. federal government”, are all military suppliers:

.

1: Lockheed Martin.
2: Boeing.
3: General Dynamics.
4: Raytheon.
5: Northrop Grumman.
6: McKesson.
7: United Technologies.
8: L-3.
9: Bechtel.
10: BAE.

Those ten firms would be the likeliest main beneficiaries from today’s America’s extremely pro-military-industrial-complex public, which is clearly revealed in this poll.

2,032 American voters were asked in the poll a list of objectives that might be so important as to justify “the government must shut down.” Only one single objective was close to being supported by an absolute majority of the respondents, so that the government’s going to shut-down would, in those respondents’ view, be justified for Congress to do in order to achieve that given objective, which was stated as: 

“Increase funding for defense and homeland security.” 47% of respondents (just shy of an absolute majority, which is 50+%) chose that goal as being so drastically important; 39% chose instead the answer, “NOT important enough to prompt a shutdown.” 14% chose “Don’t Know / No Opinion.” In other words: 47% were in support of any member of Congress who refused to vote to fund the government unless the proposed legislation to keep the government going would “Increase funding for defense and homeland security” (increase funding that’s going mainly to those ten firms).

Increased spending on the military-industrial complex (which is incontestably the most corrupt portion of the U.S. federal government) is so extremely important to 47% of America’s voters, according to this poll. Those 47% are like a huge cheering section for those ten corporate stocks: they’re willing to shut down the federal government if the taxpayer-money going to those ten firms isn’t increased.

The second-highest-supported listed objective, “Continue to make cost-sharing payments to health insurance companies,” was supported by only 42% of respondents. Exactly the same percentage, 42%, chose “NOT important enough to prompt a shutdown.” So: only “Increase funding for defense and homeland security” was supported, in this poll, by more people than opposed it — and it was supported by 47% and opposed by only 39%; so, it was supported by 47/39, or 1.21 times as many respondents, as the number of respondents who opposed it. The proponents of increasing the military-industrial-complex don’t merely dominate; they clearly dominate.

The third-highest-supported objective, at 35%, was “Provide health care benefits to retired coal miners.” 44% said that that goal isn’t worth shutting down the government in order for it to be attained. I.e.: more think that those miners should be left to die than think that continuing to provide for their black-lung treatments (etc.) is essential.

The lowest support of all, at only 27%, was “Fund a wall along the Mexican border.” Donald Trump’s alleged support for that is shared by far fewer Americans than oppose it. 61% of respondents on that say it’s “NOT important enough to prompt a shutdown.”

In between was the 32% who wanted to shut down the government unless it would “Decrease funding for domestic programs.” By contrast, 48% said that that goal was “NOT important enough to prompt a shutdown.” In other words: congressmen who would vote to shut down the federal government unless the proposed budget reduces “funding for domestic programs” would be opposed by a very large majority (48% to 32%) of America’s voters: 50% more Americans oppose than support it.

Americans, according to this poll, very strongly, by a 47% to 39% margin, absolutely demand “Increase funding for defense and homeland security,” but by an even stronger 48% to 32% margin, they do NOT absolutely demand “Decrease funding for domestic programs.” (This poll did not inquire regarding whether there is more support for increasing domestic programs than for decreasing those programs.)

Retired U.S. Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, who, as the Chief of Staff to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell had been deceived into believing the military-industrial-complex’s hired allegations in 2002 about Saddam Hussein and “WMD,” became afterward an opponent of that very same operation which had deceived him, has since said (at 11:06- on the video here) about that operation which had deceived him:

It is a corporate complex that is growing and it surrounds everything else, including what I call fateful decision-making. … You are serving the ulterior purposes of the leadership of the country. … You are serving corporate and commercial interests, you are serving the interests of people who bureaucratically are seeking power within the structure, and you are serving the interests of what is basically an incompetent governing process. 

This latest poll makes very clear that the majority of the U.S. public are satisfied with that situation, or else don’t know that it’s even the case. Of course, if they don’t know the reality about this matter, then they’ve been deceived by the news media they’re being exposed to, and/or by whatever other sources have influenced them regarding it; but, otherwise, they really do love the military-industrial-complex, and they authentically demand that more and more of their tax-dollars go toward paying for it.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

An American says, “We Are the new Nazis…”

Global Research, September 19, 2016
The Smirking Chimp 17 September 2016

After more than two decades of continuous war against countries we bombed with which we were officially at peace, and then invaded, and after millions have been killed and after billions have been spent to finance America’s illegal wars, we are no safer than we were before 9-11 and the world is facing the greatest refugee and worst humanitarian crisis since WW II. The United States is to blame for these wars of atrocity and the American political class that promulgated them are war criminals. In short, we Americans are the new Nazis of the world disorder.

Reports by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), Mother Jones, and Time put the costs of American adventurism at about $1.6 trillion dollars. Other reports have estimated the cost of US wars since 9/11 to be far higher, between $4 -$7 trillion. According to MJ, “a report by Neta Crawford, a political science professor at Boston University, estimated the total cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—as well as post-2001 assistance to Pakistan—to be roughly $4.4 trillion. The CRS estimate is lower because it does not include additional costs including the lifetime price of health care for disabled veterans and interest on the national debt.”

The U.S. is primarily to blame for the wars in Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq which have killed thousands of people, most civilians, every year. The U.S. is complicit in proxy wars in Yemen, Sudan, Pakistan, Ukraine, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Congo, and Libya, which have claimed hundreds lives in recent years. Mexico, which suffered the fifth highest number of violent deaths in the world last year, is sort of a special case because the country is effectively a narco-state due to the violence unleashed by drug gangs. Afghanistan is also a narco-state but it is under occupation by American forces, which have not stopped, or even slowed much of the opium production in that country. U.S. agencies like the DEA, AFT, and FBI have been deeply involved in Mexico, as U.S. military forces are involved in Afghanistan, and those agencies were responsible for gun shipments to drug traffickers in Mexico. These facts are undisputed.

So while hundreds of armed conflicts are on-going around the world, the bloodiest conflicts are the ones where U.S forces are either directly or indirectly involved.

The American wars have led to famine and a refugee crisis which in turn is leading to the dissolution of the European Union and to new military and political alliances that will make the world a more dangerous place than it is now.

American exceptionalism that has guided the last three administrations was supposed to bring happy days of peace and security and democracy to the world but none of that has materialized and anybody who still thinks our militarism will accomplish those fanciful goals is drinking too much tainted Kool-aid.

In short, we Americans are like those good Germans who bought Hitler’s propaganda and enjoyed a better life for a while as German armies invaded their neighbors with whom they were officially at peace. History does have its lessons but we have not learned from it and are condemning ourselves by repeating it.

The U.S. is the Fourth Reich. God help us all.

Peter White is a writer and producer. He lives in Tennessee with his two sons and a dog, Ashes, who loves books. Ashes is not choosy about what she sinks her teeth into and her master is a regular contributor to the Nashville Public LIbrary.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/we-are-the-new-nazis/5546623

U.S. accused of smuggling 2000 ISIS fighters out of Ramadi, as it continues to crush Iraq

Global Research Editor’s Note

Evacuating US sponsored terrorists is routine. See Seymour Hersh’s coverage of the evacuation of Al Qaeda “enemy combatants” in Afghanistan in November 2001.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-accused-of-smuggling-2000-islamic-state-isisdaesh-fighters-out-of-ramadi/5499017

From Fort Russ
31st December, 2015
by Elijah J. Magnier 

Edited by Ollie Richardson

Reuters

The Iraqi Army, the Counter Terrorism units, the Federal police, and Anbar tribes entered the city of Ramadi that was occupied by the self-proclaimed “Islamic State” group (ISIS) for several months. To their biggest surprise, only a few bodies of the terrorist group were found when intelligence gathering by the U.S led coalition and the Iraqi intelligence service confirmed the presence of around 2000 fighters in the city until days before the final assault. Six ISIS fighters were arrested while trying to flee Ramadi among the 442 civilians who left the city one day before the final assault on the city center.

The same phenomena of “ISIS evaporation” was registered in Sinjar when 7500 Kurds, supported by the U.S Air Force, occupied the key northern Iraqi city, finding a very small number of ISIS fighters in it.

So where did all these ISIS fighters go to?

A high-ranking source within the Iraqi government told me:

“The US forces operating in Iraq within the military operation room in Baghdad are the ones who define the units and the time (day and hour) of attacks against ISIS. If we want to benefit from an Air Force to defeat the terrorist group, we should bow to the American command. It is not unlikely for a possible American – Turkish coordination to communicate with “ISIS” and give a free way out to fighters to withdraw in the direction of the Syrian – Iraqi borders. That’s the information our drones collected in the last few days prior the attack of Ramadi.

Our signals and Human Intelligence informed the Americans and us about ISIS movement of troops. We were not allowed to engage against these and no one in the government can contradict the Americans for the moment. The U.S ordered Baghdad to keep al-Hashd al-Sha’bi (PMUs) away from the battlefield of Anbar perhaps to ensure a free passage to ISIS and to reduce the Iranian influence and credit of victories in Iraq”.

America has asked decision makers in Baghdad to change the heads of anti-terrorism, intelligence and security services of the army and Interior Ministry. Moreover, the Secretary General of the Council of Minister was also suggested by the Americans and in consequences he has been appointed to this position. The U.S wants a homogeneous team that is friendly to its policy and presence of these (US forces) on the ground in Iraq.

The hostile Era – created by the former Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki that led to a withdrawal of the forces from Mesopotamia – is over and the policy adopted at the moment consists of reducing the influence of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani over a few Iraqi armed groups. What is contributing to the success of such a policy is the fact that the Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is in a bad terms with Soleimani. Since the start, PM Abadi believed that Soleimani was planning to remove him from power, supporting al-Maliki and promoting other choices to replace the actual Premier”, said the source.

The source concluded:

”Iran controls various military organisations fighting within the Popular Mobilisation Units that are strongly present in the battlefield in Iraq and in Syria. Such an influence persuaded al-Abadi to choose the path that leads to ” Uncle Sam ” instead of choosing the one of Welayat-el- faqih. This is why Abadi rejected, following an explicit American demand, to reject any Russia military assistance in the air, in Iraq, unlike the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The Iraqi Prime Minister is aware of the possibility that the U.S would like to see 3 Iraqi cantons, one for the Kurds, one for the Sunni and another one for the Shia. The Americans are also supporting the Turkish presence in Iraq, and met with the Director of the French Intelligence Service who said: The Middle East will never be the same as before. What is becoming more clear now that ISIS is a toy used by players for their agenda and plans to reshuffle the map of the Middle East”.

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/12/us-accused-of-smuggling-2000-isis_31.html