Did Russia Play a Role in 9/11?

gottago,

Unfortunately, the view from outside looking in is pretty much as you describe it, so I have to agree with your assessment.

The MIC is losing in a sense, because the weaponry is now becoming quite old, and the US economy does not allow for 1-for-1 replacement in the forseeable future. Eg :- 'It is officially estimated that more than 800 of the USAF's aircraft (14% of the total fleet) are already grounded due to their advanced age or have mission-limiting restrictions' and 'the average age of USAF aircraft has continued to rise and is predicted to increase from 22 years in 2003 to more than 29 in 2013, even if planned new aircraft are delivered in schedule' (source - Air International - May 2007)

This situation is exacerbated by the increased usage of the existing aircraft (and their available fatigue lives) and the massive amount of funding being eaten up in Iraq and Afghanistan. Balanced against a weak US economy, this is not good news for the MIC, America, or the rest of the world.

Judging by some of the views put forward, even on ATS, I hold little hope of 'the people' rising up against the MIC or politicians in general, for the very reasons that you state. The indoctrination and individual isolation from history and the true state of play in the world is too complete for a rapid reversal.

What little hope I do have, is based upon the views of the 'few' who are informed and can see through the web of lies that are daily heaped upon us from all sides.

Keep up the good work.

The Winged Wombat

WW,

You know, the state of the military is a very funny part of all this. After all they are the very heart of the machine and have been pushing the agenda forward and supplying all the testosterone. The other big players are the money men, who like war as it's a cash cow, so they often but not always work in tandem.

Yes, you're right, Iraq is wearing out the war machine, and the cost of these incredibly advanced military systems the Pentagon lusts after--these cool toys for big boys--has simply skyrocketed because they are so enamored of advanced technology, and that costs enormous amounts to develop. So lead times grow and you can't buy as many, because after all there finally are some limits in $ terms, and the grunt stuff--body armor, armored Humvees, don't get properly funded.

They show their utter disregard for the actual soldier in underfunding the soldier--he's cannon fodder to them. I think the Walter Reed scandal was in large part created by the military as a political payback to the Neocons for their utter disregard of the troops. Yes, they themselves were hurt, but the politicos took the greater heat for that and an important moral point was made.

But what you've got in the end is all-too-often a super-cool, super-expensive toy that is both too precious and too delicate to be of much use in the real world. The B2 is a perfect example; the mainstay USAF bomber is still the B-52.

Another irony of all this is that we are chasing our own tail in this tech race--most of the time, the "need" for the new fighter jet or weapons system is to top ourselves--our real adversaries either don't exist or at best have military tech far behind our own.

And the "strategic planners" and the Strangelovians have already moved on to some pie-in-the-sky vision of a future-tech war machine, a lot of it space-based, that combines satellite surveillance and weapons platforms, so advanced that actual soldiers are almost irrelevant. It's madness, will cost more than even our massive black budget can fund, and won't work anyway--but they're going for it nonetheless.

Also, Iraq has created enormous tension between the military and the political factions of the MIC--the JCS and top brass have been in almost open insurrection at times, you had the resignations and threats of resignation over the push to go into Iran, which is now off the table. It's clear the Neocon political wing was gearing up for a strike that they wanted launched just about now, but the military and the old-school CFR's banded together and nixed that.

Another element is the old-school soldiers who are in top positions; many are actual patriots, believing in God and Country, and deeply love the military as an institution. There are lots of them. And they are a big drag on the Neocons, who they see, rightly, as the most cynical and heartless of monsters, who are willing to use the military with no thought or care of the damage a war like Iraq or a "strategic" nuke attack on Iran does to their men and material and moral standing of the country. They have a far different calculus about weighing these things.

Conclusion: the MIC is no monolith--there are lots of cross-currents and competing agendas. Ironically, it's these old-school soldier/patriots who will probably save us from the worse. I think they've already done so regarding Iran. To think it's come to that.


[edit on 15-5-2007 by gottago]