Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 24 Share on Twitter 2 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H4'ed 3/22/19

What the New York Times Will Not Tell You About Military Spending

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)     (# of views)   1 comment
Author 9
Follow Me on Twitter     Message David Swanson
Become a Fan
  (141 fans)
- Advertisement -

I sent the New York Times this letter on March 20, 2019:

To the Editor,

Peter Navarro's op-ed "Why America Needs a Stronger Defense Industry" argues that "Investing in the sector means more jobs at home and improved security abroad." He praises the construction of tanks used in wars in Iraq.

Here is a study demonstrating that military spending produces fewer jobs than other types of public spending, or even than not taxing money from working people in the first place:
"The U.S. Employment Effects of Military and Domestic Spending Priorities: 2011 Update," Political Economy Research Institute, https://www.peri.umass.edu/publication/item/449-the-u-s-employment-effects-of-military-and-domestic-spending-priorities-2011-update

- Advertisement -

So, the more jobs at home claim is false. What about the "improved security abroad" and the labeling of the weapons industry as "defense"?

Tanks have no more function against a foreign invasion than they do against hijackers of airplanes or against mass-shooters in schools or against climate collapse. Thus "defense" is twisted into the vague concept of "security abroad." Yet, clearly most U.S. travelers abroad are not going to be accompanied by tanks.

A review of the data has concluded that: (https://peacesciencedigest.org/military-support-and-an-increased-vulnerability-to-terrorist-attacks/ ) "Deployment of troops to another country increases the chance of attacks from terror organizations from that country. Weapons exports to another country increase the chance of attacks from terror organizations from that country. Ninety-five percent of all suicide terrorist attacks are conducted to encourage foreign occupiers to leave the terrorist's home country."

- Advertisement -

If facts are insufficient, let's appeal to authority. On February 27, 2017, President Donald Trump said, "Almost 17 years of fighting in the Middle East . . . $6 trillion we've spent in the Middle East . . . and we're nowhere, actually if you think about it we're less than nowhere, the Middle East is far worse than it was 16, 17 years ago, there's not even a contest . . . we have a hornet's nest . . . ." (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/02/27/trump_we_spent_6_trillion_in_middle_east_and_we_are_less_than_nowhere_far_worse_than_16_years_ago.html )

An actually defensive defense industry would not resemble the current one. There have been no recorded terrorist attacks driven by resentment at the provision of aid. A tiny fraction of U.S. military spending could end starvation on earth. ("The World Only Needs 30 Billion Dollars a Year to Eradicate the Scourge of Hunger," Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2008/1000853/index.html ) Doing so would actually increase security, not to mention actually helping people if anyone cares about such things when they don't help start wars.

Sincerely,

David Swanson

 

- Advertisement -

Well Said 5   Valuable 5   Must Read 4  
Rate It | View Ratings

David Swanson 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

David Swanson is the author of "When the World Outlawed War," "War Is A Lie" and "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union." He blogs at http://davidswanson.org and http://warisacrime.org and works for the online (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.
Follow Me on Twitter     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)

Feith Dares Obama to Enforce the Law

Obama's Open Forum Opens Possibilities

Public Forum Planned on Vermont Proposal to Arrest Bush and Cheney

Did Bush Sr. Kill Kennedy and Frame Nixon?

Eleven Excellent Reasons Not to Join the Military

Holder Asked to Prosecute Blankenship

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments


John Rachel

Become a Fan
Author 66223
Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since Jun 2, 2011), 44 fans, 70 articles, 3217 comments, 2 diaries
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

Very good job, David Swanson.

Now HERE'S what the peace movement will not tell you about defense spending and what we as citizens can do reverse our disastrous priorities and policies.

Submitted on Saturday, Mar 23, 2019 at 3:20:25 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment