Military Industrial Complex : Global Issue Or Exaggerated?

Expanding the military is one of the things Reagan did to affect the Cold War. He spent $1 trillion building up the US military in his third year in office (Holguin 3). The Soviet Union had one of the biggest militaries of that time. Reagan knew this information, so he felt it was essential to expand the US military. According to Holguin, Reagan

In the farewell speech given by U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower when he left office, he warned the nation about the power of the military establishment and the arms industry. "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." Some conspiracy theorists have argued that Kennedy planned to end the involvement of the United States in Vietnam, and was therefore targeted by those who had an interest in sustained military conflict, including the Pentagon and defense contractors.

President Eisenhower is willingly threatening to use nuclear war to maintain peace. This policy came to be called massive retaliation. This new policy enabled Eisenhower to cut military spending from $50 billion to $34 billion. This can worry many Americans about the well-being of their nation. However, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, the dominant figure in the nation’s foreign policy, strongly defended his approach. He thinks you should have to take chances for peace, just as you must take chances in war. Taking strong action when needed is best instead of walking away from it.

In agency representation the constituents give the politicians the ability to make decisions on their behalf when they don’t know the issue, the constituents expect them to work in their best interest. An issue that has recently been in the news is President Obama’s efforts to close Guantanamo Bay. Since the issue has not attracted the attention of a lot of people it is up to congress to vote in the public’s best interest. Yet, according to New York Times, congress has been blocking the president’s efforts to shut the prison down. The United States spends $2.5 million per detainee in Guantanamo and it currently holds 532 detainees. Acting as agencies on the behalf of the American people, Congress should work with President Obama because the money that the United States could save will be spent on issues that directly affect the public. This raises the question of how well does congress represent its

During the 1950’s we see an economic boom in America. A large amount of this growth has to do with the money made by Corporations with Military Contracts making goods and supplies for the United States Military. With the Cold War beginning the push for new invention in aviation, rocket propulsion, energy, and even automobiles was at the forefront of national defense. Industrial giants like Boeing, General Dynamics, and Raytheon received 60% if their income from the Defense Department. Ten percent of the domestic (GDP) was from military spending. With fears of falling behind the Soviet Union, gaining any edge in innovation was important. The government even funneled millions of dollars into American Universities for scholarships and research

President Dwight D. Eisenhower was very conservative. Over his time of Presidency, he grew concern over the growing size and cost of the American Military, he addressed these concerns just days before his presidency ended. “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influences, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex” (Eisenhower). The first thing that he feared was simply the amount of money that was being poured into the Military. You can look at the chart below, after WWII we spent a large amount of money that we had never spent before during peace time. One thing that made military manufacturing different this time was the advanced technology. Ford could build car or tanks

On January 17, 1961 President Eisenhower gave his farewell speech to the great people of the United States of America. President Eisenhower had delivered this speech to the regards of the final days of him being president of the United States of America, after 2 terms in the White House it was now President Eisenhower’s time to part ways with this country and his services as being a leader of America, after committing a half century to our great nation President Eisenhower, address the nation in his final days as president but to wish the president after him “Godspeed” (Eisenhower 4) and America peace and prosperity.

President of the United States from 1953- 1961, Dwight D. Eisenhower contributed greatly to the American society through his foreign policy. Eisenhower’s foreign policy allowed for him and the United States to get involved and associate themselves with other countries. These associations became good and bad; beneficial and damaging. In addition, many of these foreign affairs became crucial to America and its future occurring events. Some of these affairs include: North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Domino Theory, Massive Retaliation, and the Eisenhower Doctrine. Each of these policy had their own impact on the nation, as well as their own responses.

speech to project an image of strength to the Soviet Union. When Eisenhower threatens, “Should an

Kennedy’s administration followed Eisenhower’s administration by continuing to view military spending abroad as the culprit for the balance of payments deficit. Indeed, a telegram dated September 12, 1961 from the U.S. Department of States to the U.S. embassy in the Federal Republic of Germany showed an effort to reduce U.S. military expenditure in West Germany. The telegram showed that the Defense and Treasury department’s desire to negotiate with the West German government to repay the U.S. for the cost of maintaining U.S. troops in West Germany. Still, the date of the telegram further revealed the urgency to correct the balance of payments deficit. Just a few months earlier on June 4, 1961, in a private meeting, the Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev warned the newly elected U.S. President Kennedy that the Soviet Union was prepared to defend the sovereignty of East Germany and wanted the Western Allies out of Berlin. As the Soviet premier departed, Kennedy closed the conversation by saying “It would be a cold winter” This meeting of course was the beginning of the Berlin Crisis that lasted until early November. Thus, it seemed astounding to request an allied to reimburse for the cost of providing defense against the Soviet Union, especially at the Cold War Frontline. Unfortunately the military spending cuts abroad cuts was not enough, subsequently, on July 18, 1963, President Kennedy delivered a special message to the Congress of the United States on the balance of payments. In the message, Kennedy discussed five goals to achieve a favorable balance of payments. First, to expand of exports, convened a White House conference to expand export. Second, to limit dollars leaving the country, create awareness that encouraged Americans to travel within America rather than abroad. Third, to restrain government expenditure abroad, assess foreign defense and aid budgets. Fourth, to reduce the outflow of short-term capital, the Treasury Department and the Federal

Eisenhower said “the councils of government must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence whether sought or unsought by the military industrial conflicts.”

The authors clearly state this “Our goal has been to highlight some of these potential costs and negative consequences in the hopes of spurring a more balanced discussion of the net benefit of a U.S. government monopoly in the global arms market” (188). The authors educated the audience on the situation that was going on. Then they told the benefits of the United States having this monopoly and then for the rest of the article they discussed the all the negative aspects of this

Not only does direct representation prevent opposition against the F-35 program, social pork barrel politics similarly discourages dissent (Wilson 1968, 49). Wilson describes “social pork barrel politics” as a program’s output declining; yet, its allocation of federal money increases. In addition to the primary contractor, Lockheed Martin, regularly asserting that the F-35 program has led to job creation in key congressional districts, the company also employs

The DoD communicated to Congress that the JSF program was essential to national security and needed to continue. DoD was not the only corner of the iron triangle to influence Congress’s decision to continue the program. Lockheed Martin and various lobby groups highlighted the fact that the JSF program supported 133,000 jobs many of them subcontractors and parts suppliers that were spread across 45 states. Moreover, when full rate production was to begin, the employment figure would grow to well over 250,000. With constituents in 45 states tied to the JSF program it was a given that Congress would decide to continue with the JSF program. It is unlikely that Lockheed Martin having subcontractors and parts suppliers spread throughout 45

Decision making in Congress follows a tried-and-true system, with established industries deploying lobbyists, consultants and advocacy groups to relentlessly court legislators in largely the same manner they have for decades. These entrenched interests that are evident in so many government fights have battle-tested resources, long-term relationships with policymakers and experience at navigating the halls of