Skip to main content

View Diary: The MIC is not in control (396 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They have deep roots into the Pentagon (20+ / 0-)

    and that's a very persuasive lobbying force.
    That's why the military budget never gets the axe (until the Sequester).
    But that only goes so far, I'll buy that the MIC is not pulling the strings here.
    My question is: Who is? Defense doesn't want another Mid East war. If as you say, Wall Street doesn't want it and they have more influence with the Administration than MIC, who is pushing for it? Kerry? Is it his French connection?

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 07:23:30 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  "Yes, Minister" solution (5+ / 0-)
      We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
      Try to think of something non-military that Obama could do in response to the use of chemical weapons that would matter to Assad.

      Assume for the sake of argument that Assad or someone close to him did order the use of the CW. That's a different argument.

      What could he do diplomatically or economically that wouldn't look just pathetic?

      So, if he's going to do something, it will probably involve blowing things up.

      I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

      by blue aardvark on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 07:36:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There probably isn't much he could do (10+ / 0-)

        even including military action, that would influence Assad. Particularly if Assad is so pushed to the wall that he did use CW (and I am still not convinced he did, no evidence either way yet).
        Syria is not our client so we have no leverage there. Unfortunately, our relations with Russia are quite frosty at the moment (and Putin is asserting his dickishness) but that's the only peaceful avenue: Pressure from the Russians and/or the Chinese.
        And when the facts of the CW attack are in, if it does turn out to be Assad's regime, the Russians might modify their stance. At the UNSC-permanent-5 meeting, Russia stopped the train because the inspections had not been completed. Once the report comes in, they will not have that reason.
        But regardless, It's not our war.
        The reason I mentioned France is that Syria has two ports that link up to pipelines for Oil and NatGas. Those ports mainly serve Europe. A big investor there is Royal Dutch Shell (the BIG investor is China). So Europe has a dog in the fight and France has been loudly beating the drum.
        You know the dynamic of a gang of bullies, theres one loudmouth that everyone else follows and theres a big dumb kid that he relies on to do the actual beating (and absorb the punishment)? We're the big dumb kid.
        Let's try not to let Europe or Israel or Saudi Arabia or anyone make us fight their wars.

        If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

        by CwV on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 07:54:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  False premise. (10+ / 0-)
        Try to think of something non-military that Obama could do in response to the use of chemical weapons that would matter to Assad.
        Why is it Obama's business to do anything in response to the use of chemical weapons that his Administration is so keen to pin on Assad again?

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:31:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  If you go back up to the diary (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mr MadAsHell, erratic

          where I said I didn't support any strikes into Syria your comment becomes ... less helpful.

          If, though, Obama feels he must do something, that doesn't mean the MIC is in control. It's probably more a function of truly thinking CW are horrible, having made the mistake of calling them a "red line" and being painted into a rhetorical corner, and US - UK - French relations.

          I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

          by blue aardvark on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:55:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Its strange to put it that way: (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            blue aardvark, protectspice, Aspe4

            "The MIC is not in control"

            I would think not. The pentagon has a bunch of generals and advisers that make recommendations to the prez. Then supposedly he would make the final decision.

            I don't know the names of these generals and advisers, and I never looked that up. But for example, Donald Rumsfeld made a ton of money off the Iraq war because of his Haliburton connection. Oh he tried to launder his way out but I'm not buying that. Anyway, through the connections of family members, spouses family members, etc. the MIC kicks back plenty of thank yous to the generals and advisers.

            Add to this that the pentagon wants more and more money all the time, and more war is more money, OK?

            A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

            by onionjim on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 09:33:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Trying to pin it on Assad (0+ / 0-)

          because his regime is most likely the ones that used CW.

      •  i disagree that this is anything noble. truly. (5+ / 0-)

        the sum of injustices and humanitarian breaches happening around the planet that we manage to ignore is long.

        there are so many reasons i can think of that a little warring with Syria would be appealing for this admin and their allies, and none of them have to do with anything noble.

        we don't even properly investigate and prosecute our own war crimes. not even this CiC will.

        so just. not. buying. the. "it's cuz they used chem weapons"  noble excuse.

        "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." ~George Orwell "When it is dark enough, you can see the stars." ~Charles Beard

        by poligirl on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 09:15:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Prosecute After the War (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blue aardvark

        What Obama could do would be to spend the necessary time prosecuting the case on conclusive evidence that a particular party and chain of command used the chemical weapons.

        And then once the Syrian civil war was over, take action. Once that action would have less  chance of blowback onto the US.

        If Assad wins, as seems likely, use the WMD verdict for regime change, without as much risk the jihadists among the rebels will fill the vacuum - and then use more chemical weapons.

        If the rebels win, use the WMD verdict to at least remove the WMD from Syria, and to insist the rebels remove the jihadists from power - or else justify regime change.

        Acting while the war is still in effect will increase the risk that the war will conclude in ways that will increase the risk of further use of WMD, especially higher risks of WMD use against the US.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 01:42:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That seems to be simply deferring (0+ / 0-)

          the military action until someone else is President - and I, myself, doubt very much that Assad will ever again rule all of Syria. The BBC map posted by ivorybill yesterday suggests he's got effective control of about 20%, and a big chunk of that is really Hezbollah. If they decide to just seize what they've got and exercise de facto control, he's down to a fragmented mess.

          I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

          by blue aardvark on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 01:46:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  AIPAC? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark, Mr Horrible

      I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

      by CFAmick on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 07:47:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think we should note that Pentagon brass (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark, erratic

      are made of soldiers who have seen war. They know what it is because, for the most part, in whatever capacity, they have been there.

      There seems to be a pervasive belief (and I'm not accusing you of this CwV) on the left that Brass wants war. I hear time and again from people how bloodthirsty the Military is and that they chomp at the bit to wage it. Most often this is coming from people who have never served in the armed forces, let alone fought.

      The reality is that no one knows better the risks and damages of military action, and I would suggest that very few in the Military brass is itching for another Middle East conflict.

      MIC does have deep roots in the Pentagon. The doors revolve, obviously. That doesn't mean they have sway when it comes to waging war. That just doesn't comport with the reality of how wars are waged or decisions are made.

      I am not an apologist for what Obama does, I am very unhappy with him and it is no longer enough for me to remind myself he is better that the alternative, though that is still very true. However, we do not know what he knows (I know, this is a tired but true one) and the fact is we do not know what any motivation is at all. It could be pure as the driven snow or dirty as campaign cash, or anything in between. We just do not know, and assigning reasons or motivations is as useful as picking numbers for Powerball. Chances are your guess is wrong.

      The place was utterly dark—the oubliette, as I suppose, of their accursed convent.

      by bastrop on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:08:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hm. (14+ / 0-)

        I have known more than a few Admirals who were very gung ho to go into war.  And a lot of them sat behind desks their entire careers.

        There are a lot of REMF's at the pentagon.

        I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

        by trumpeter on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:33:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Tipped for REMFs! (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blue aardvark, bastrop, Aspe4, orlbucfan

          Luckily Ex Adm. Fox was realistic Re: Iran and Mullen, also an adm. was very plain that we don't want, can't afford, should not enter another war in the region.
          Dempsey is not real gung ho either. I don't know where Hagel is on this. And they are the people who really count in these matters.

          If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

          by CwV on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:43:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I don't disagree on REMF's at all (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          onionjim

          and you are correct there are those gung ho.

          On the whole, I don't think that's what we are looking at right now after Afghanistan and Iraq.

          CxV below is illustrating my point to some extent in regard to the names mentioned. Hagel has a pretty long record of being cautious, and his statements re: Iraq and Afghanistan should say a lot about this current Pentagon rushing into things (I hope).

          The place was utterly dark—the oubliette, as I suppose, of their accursed convent.

          by bastrop on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 09:23:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  When you have a hammer in your hand (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bastrop, Aspe4, orlbucfan

            everything seems to look like a nail.

            First, they need to investigate the CWs to find out where they came from.

            Second, is it really logical to respond to a despicable CW attack by killing more people? Why?

            A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

            by onionjim on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 09:41:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  REMFs are people too... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Aspe4

          Or so I've heard.

          I'll believe corporations are people when one comes home from Afghanistan in a body bag.

          by mojo11 on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 09:36:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  On the contrary, the brass is made up mostly (7+ / 0-)

        of desk jockeys.

        Did you think Petraus had some great war experience? He's par  for the course.

        collards, meat, butter, sourdough, eggs, cheese, raw milk

        by Tirge Caps on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:57:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, I had no illusions about Petraus. (0+ / 0-)

          And while you are right, there are plenty of desk jockey's to go around, everyone there at the top has been through the last 10 years, in whatever capacity, and seen the results.

          All I'm saying is this isn't the Bush admin. No one on the civilian side is working to satisfy Obama's blood lust, so there is no incentive from WH to act on those compulsions. Hagel is very cautious. They aren't playing the same game here, IMO.

          The place was utterly dark—the oubliette, as I suppose, of their accursed convent.

          by bastrop on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 09:48:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It isn't... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        orlbucfan, bastrop

        that they are bloodthirsty.  It is that they are largely arrogant that pushes them to advocate for war.  If you have been in the military (I have) you know that the military thinks very highly of itself (this is both good and bad).  They believe that they can accomplish any task put before them and that they are best equipped to end conflicts.

        "[I]n the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone...They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand."

        by cardboardurinal on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 10:17:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Who? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      orlbucfan

      The Amygdala.

      Fear is a powerful thing, and military solutions are something simple, which suits the simpletons in power very nicely.

      That's why we have such a big MIC in the first place - it's simple, it feels powerful, and it feels effective.  Look at the 90 in congress who want to attack - look at their personalities and platforms.

      I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

      by trumpeter on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:29:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Bingo! (6+ / 0-)

      The Pentagon is exactly where the MIC influence is.  In addition, the SIC influence is also in the Pentagon.  The NSA is administered under the military.  An enormous amount of money is being funneled through the Pentagon to private corporations to maintain our military might which equals nearly the same amount that the rest of the world combined spends.  For every military action, private contractors stand to make even more money. The influence for those decisions does not necessarily have to be put upon White House for this to happen.  The control of information is coming from the Pentagon, so that is where the influence is being exerted.

      There also appears to be linkage between the fact that every time we turn around and begin to get out of one conflict, suddenly we must get into another one. Americans are starting to connect the dots here.  And all of this comes at the expense to the American people who are watching their futures being poured down the black hole that is war. The American people are sick of war and sick of asking to sacrifice because of war.  And what of those countries that we have invaded? Just ask the Iraqis how grateful they are that we came in and devastated their country and killed tens of thousands of their fellow citizens.    

      "Growing up is for those who don't have the guts not to. Grow wise, grow loving, grow compassionate, but why grow up?" - Fiddlegirl

      by gulfgal98 on Thu Aug 29, 2013 at 08:37:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site