This post is somewhat outside and in between the two assignments at the same time.
In 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower makes a speech where he warns against the military industrial complex.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction…
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. 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. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Although Eisenhower was a Republican and people rightly protested war in the 1960’s, the governments we as a people have elected in the 50 years since Eisenhower has left office have generally grown the military and embraced war, and to some degree this includes Obama, too.
Regardless of whether or not we think a given war, action or conflict is right or correct, there is the concern and issue that our government and economy needs the industries that serve the military. The fact that people in America benefit financially at various levels from wars they conduct abroad leads to a conflict of interest. (Conflicts of interest can be the appearance of the conflict or a true conflict.)
If I was going to be honest, I think in hindsight I was trying to stir some debate by calling it a conflict of interest. I mean we just spent 8 years with a vice president who was previously an executive at Haliburton and during that time, Haliburton got tons of defense contracts and government money, at least some questions arising from the work they did and the payments they got.
But, should people make lots of profits because of war? I’m not talking making a living, or living comfortably. I’m talking I get a 10 million dollar contract from the government and I spend only 5 million dollars filling it. Is that OK? I’m not sure.
It appears to me that Eisenhower is cautioning against the starting unnecessary wars just because we have the ability and power to do so. But you ended your post with a comment that even if a war we are having is correct, it is wrong because of profiteering? In what way is Eisenhower testifying against the fact that we can make money and conduct a good war at the same time?