Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 5 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Guns Not Butter: The Impact of a War Economy on the U.S.

By       (Page 1 of 3 pages)     (# of views)   No comments
Author 23346
Message David Model
Become a Fan
  (8 fans)
- Advertisement -

In 2007, the U.S. government spent $766.5bn on defense excluding the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Estimating the costs of American military adventures and defense budgets and relating the expenditures to social and economic needs at home are a common refrain of critics of American foreign and defense policy. It is a tautology to elucidate the merits of allocating part of those funds to social and economic needs at home.

The issue often ignored in critiques of misplaced spending by the U.S. government is the historical context whereby successive American governments since World War II have consciously created and maintained a war economy. In this context, expenditures on wars and defense are perceived as necessary to a healthy economy. On the other hand, harm to economic and social institutions have been more extensive and fundamentally undermined by the long-term impact of sustaining a war economy since WW II.

The embryonic stages of building a war economy occurred after World War II when George Kennan, Ambassador to the Soviet Union, warned policy-makers at home about the threat posed by the USSR and when Paul Nitze, head of the Policy Planning Staff in the State Department, chaired a NSC study which culminated in NSC-68 on April 14, 1950. NSC-68 established the framework for a war economy by proposing that massive military spending was essential to maintaining the security of the United States and to offering protection to the free world as America's inchoate leadership required following the War. According to NSC-68:

- Advertisement -

"The capability of the American economy to support a build-up of economic andmilitary strength at home and to assist a build-up abroad is limited not, as in the case of the Soviet Union."

- Advertisement -

As well, the Report emphasized the imperative of a continual build-up of military strength when it stated that:

"The execution of such a build-up, however requires that the United States have an affirmative program beyond the solely defensive one. Every consideration of devotion to our fundamental values and to our national security demands that we, achieve our objectives by the strategy of the cold war, building up our military strength."

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

- Advertisement -

Rate It | View Ratings

David Model Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

I have been a professor of political science at Seneca College in Toronto. I have published five books the last of which "Selling Out: Consuming Ourselves to Death" was released in May/08. As well, I have been featured in CounterPunch, Z (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Oil is Not Food but Food is Oil: The Imminent Crisis of Food Production Dependence on Oil

Welcoming the Summer Soldier and Sunshine Patriot: Suppressing Dissent in America

Perils of Technology: Dehumanization and Extinction

The Malevolent Government vs. the Beneficent Markets: The Myth of Free Markets

The Elephant in the Room. Ignoring Unsustainable Growth

Guns Not Butter: The Impact of a War Economy on the U.S.