"Chickenhawk Nation" The Tragedy of the American Military- by James Fallows

[kpete]

The Tragedy of the American Military
The American public and its political leadership will do anything for the military except take it seriously. The result is a chickenhawk nation in which careless spending and strategic folly combine to lure America into endless wars it can’t win.
James Fallows
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2015


I. Chickenhawk Nation

If I were writing such a history now, I would call it Chickenhawk Nation, based on the derisive term for those eager to go to war, as long as someone else is going. It would be the story of a country willing to do anything for its military except take it seriously. As a result, what happens to all institutions that escape serious external scrutiny and engagement has happened to our military. Outsiders treat it both too reverently and too cavalierly, as if regarding its members as heroes makes up for committing them to unending, unwinnable missions and denying them anything like the political mindshare we give to other major public undertakings, from medical care to public education to environmental rules. The tone and level of public debate on those issues is hardly encouraging. But for democracies, messy debates are less damaging in the long run than letting important functions run on autopilot, as our military essentially does now. A chickenhawk nation is more likely to keep going to war, and to keep losing, than one that wrestles with long-term questions of effectiveness............


.................

“Political engineering,” a term popularized by a young Pentagon analyst named Chuck Spinney in the 1970s, is pork-barrel politics on the grandest scale. Cost overruns sound bad if someone else is getting the extra money. They can be good if they are creating business for your company or jobs in your congressional district. Political engineering is the art of spreading a military project to as many congressional districts as possible, and thus maximizing the number of members of Congress who feel that if they cut off funding, they’d be hurting themselves.

A $10 million parts contract in one congressional district builds one representative’s support. Two $5 million contracts in two districts are twice as good, and better all around would be three contracts at $3 million apiece. Every participant in the military-contracting process understands this logic: the prime contractors who parcel out supply deals around the country, the military’s procurement officers who divide work among contractors, the politicians who vote up or down on the results. In the late 1980s, a coalition of so-called cheap hawks in Congress tried to cut funding for the B-2 bomber. They got nowhere after it became clear that work for the project was being carried out in 46 states and no fewer than 383 congressional districts (of 435 total). The difference between then and now is that in 1989, Northrop, the main contractor for the plane, had to release previously classified data to demonstrate how broadly the dollars were being spread.




.............

If more members of Congress or the business and media elite had had children in uniform, the United States would probably not have gone to war in Iraq.

...........



Key takeaway from a very long & very revealing piece:

A man who worked for decades overseeing Pentagon contracts told me this past summer, “The system is based on lies and self-interest, purely toward the end of keeping money moving.” What kept the system running, he said, was that “the services get their budgets, the contractors get their deals, the congressmen get jobs in their districts, and no one who’s not part of the deal bothers to find out what is going on.”

More here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/12/the-tragedy-of-the-american-military/383516/

[Skittles]

1. I have been sending care packages and postcards to Iraq and then Afghanistan for ten years

the disconnect I see with most people and their meaningless SUPPORT THE TROOPS / forget about them attitude is very disturbing

[pinboy3niner]

2. Good for you, Skittles!

I've seen our local Army Reserve unit off on deployment and was there to welcome them when they came home. And was there with them when they rededicated the local Armory in honor of their KIA.

[Skittles]

3. cue DU's resident assholes saying f*** 'em, they volunteered, as cover

those ones are THE most sickening

[pinboy3niner]

5. Many here recognize that service even in peacetime entails sacrifice

Both for the service members, and for their families. DU's admins also are supportive of our military and veteran members here.

[Skittles]

7. love that you include families

I grew up as a GI brat and have always had trouble answering the question, "Where are you from?"

[pinboy3niner]

9. When I served in Vietnam, I hadn't started my own family yet

But I'll never forget my mom's reaction after I was seriously wounded--and my little brother still had 9 months left to serve in-country. Mom went through hell every day and night until he came home. And she still had to worry about me, still hospitalized during all that time and for long after his return. I've always felt bad that we put mom through that.

[Skittles]

12. oh dear

bless her heart

[JEB]

4. Fight and die for corporate profit.

Meanwhile the peons (citizens) get austerity.

[pinboy3niner]

6. Troops fight and die for each other

Placed in a combat zone, they fight for the survival of themselves and their comrades. That's all that matters when it comes down to it.

[JEB]

8. Exactly right.

It's what I try and do everyday.

[grahamhgreen]

10. Kick

[bemildred]

11. Rotten to the core, seen it myself, over and over again. nt