Why Did Dwight D. Eisenhower Use The Military Industrial Complex?

The American “way of war” can be seen politically through the evolution of military policy as political perspectives changed. Post-World War II reveals primary and consistent policies that lead American military policymakers to avoid major international conflict. Coined the Cold War, Americans began waging war

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

“The Evil Empire” — that is what, at the height of the arms race, United States President Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union (Rudolph 1). Unsurprisingly, the Soviet Union was similarly upset at the United States. This anger is what fueled the arms race. During the Cold War, due to fears of nuclear attack, the US and Soviet Union designed and deployed thousands of nuclear warheads, each hoping to deter the other from nuclear launch with threat of counter attack (O’Neal 1). This massive arms buildup, however, had many negative effects on the US. To recognize the impact that the arms race continues to have on today, it is crucial to understand not only its causes, but also its immediate impacts on the US economy, society, foreign

In a 2015 article, “Is U.S. military becoming outdated?” written by Stuart Bradin, Keenan Yoho, and Meaghan Keeler-Pettigrew, the authors argued that despite the U.S. military maintaining a position of global dominance “without peer” during conventional operations, it is not the ideal force against current and future threats. The authors claim that there are several negative factors arising due to the past sixteen years of war against several state and non-state elements, inferior cultural differences of government bureaucracy compared to commercial firms, and a misallocation of defense spending that leaves the US military waging war inefficiently while simultaneously losing technological dominance against current and future threats.

In response to the increased threat of North Vietnam, recently elected President John F. Kennedy increased America’s presence in Vietnam without intervening by increasing the number of economic, military, and political advisers “from 800 in 1961, when [he] took office, to 16,700 in 1963.” However, once Kennedy was assassinated, Lyndon B. Johnson was elected and was accused of not doing enough to prevent this “domino theory” of falling into communism from happening.

How to ensure that the "military-industrial complex" does not endanger American liberties and the democratic process. This can be done by the statesman, according to Eisenhower, it is their job "to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old,, within the principles of our democratic

The controversial series of measures has earned the opposition of important sectors and organizations, the most influential National Rifle Association. This partnership continues to strongly support the need to maintain in force the sale and carrying of weapons, through the defense of the Second Amendment of the Constitution. It establishes the right to bear firearms under the justification of ensuring personal safety. Opposition to this is added the decisive influence of the House of Representatives.

In recent years, America has faced a major problem revolving around the transnational war in Syria. The conflict in Syria and turned into a major power contest in the post-Cold War history. In an article written by Dostal (2016), “the main factor in Syria that points back to the Eisenhower Doctrine, is the effort to defend the Country’s position as major, and ideally only, external balancer in the Middle East” (214). If there were ever a triple alliance between Syria, Iraq, and Iran, it would become very difficult to control the vacuum of power within the Middle East. This would overall make it very difficult to maintain the policies that were brought up in the Eisenhower Doctrine. The overall difference in the wars that take place in the Middle East are a bit different than they were back when Eisenhower was president. However, the fact that his doctrine is still used and cited today, proves how essential it was to his presidency and one of the reasons why his presidency was so important to the United States national security not only in his years but the years to

Considering the continued growth of Communism on the international stage and the Democratic president Harry S. Truman’s inability to stop events like the Communist takeover of China, the Republican Platform, that President Dwight D. Eisenhower ran on, proposed an exceptionally tougher stance on Communism. The platform had determined mere containment of Communism to be an insufficient solution, so therefore called for military action to reverse the spread of Soviet influence. However, President Eisenhower also promised large budget cuts to the military, so they devised a policy that they believed would cut spending but also increase the effectiveness of the military’s power. The Eisenhower administration announced this policy that called for the creation of a nuclear bomb carrying air fleet, that would be used as a threat to any Communists groups to discourage them from making advances to invade or takeover countries requesting American aid. Eisenhower planned to reverse the growth of Communism by using a superbomber airfleet as an effective weapon against Communism, however, he often failed to follow this initial foreign policy throughout his administration.

The Military Industrial Complex is the circular relationship between the Department of Defense, Congress, and large military corporations. The corporations give large campaign contributions to members of congress. Then, Congress gives funding to the Department of Defense who then contracts the corporations. This is a beneficial and profitable relationship for all parties involved, creating a powerful incentive for the continuance of war. In 1961, President Eisenhower warned the American people of the dangers of this relationship, calling it a threat to democracy.

By slow stages, large and sustained military expenditures produced an enduring Military-Industrial Complex with the self-serving consequences suggested by the World War II economy and, more seriously, with the potential for perpetuating the forces of modern warfare which had provided for the initial growth of such a complex (90).

President Eisenhower was, unequivocally a foreign affairs president. After all what else could we expect out of WWII’s most powerful leader? Regarding all the glory, honor, and power of the presidency, none is felt more strongly than in the arena of foreign affairs. In describing his ascendancy to the presidency, it is a testament to his leadership and composition of character, intellect, and party organization, as well as what Niccolo Machiavelli (‘The Prince’) would call “fortuna”, or, ‘the mysterious interaction of fate and chance.’ As immensely popular as he was, the nation readily chose his nomination as much as he accepted it. Arthur Krock the, New York Times Washington Bureau Chief said on Inauguration Day 1952: “Since George Washington, perhaps no more imposing and popular personage had taken the president’s oath, to greater public expectations” ,“he fairly radiates goodness, simple faith and his honest background”.

With this book, a major element of American history was analyzed. The Cold War is rampant with American foreign policy and influential in shaping the modern world. Strategies of Containment outlines American policy from the end of World War II until present day. Gaddis outlines the policies of presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon, including policies influenced by others such as George Kennan, John Dulles, and Henry Kissinger. The author, John Lewis Gaddis has written many books on the Cold War and is an avid researcher in the field. Some of his other works include: The United States and the Origins of the Cold War, 1941-1947, The Long Peace: Inquiries into the History of the Cold War, We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War

While weapons can be recycled for decades from conflict to conflict, the violence they sustain is fuelled by irresponsible trade in ammunition. The current draft of the arms trade treaty does not include ammunition and many non-governmental organizations strongly condemn this. However, including ammunition in the Treaty may preclude a signature from the U.S., which views this as a threat to citizens’ right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.

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