{"id":22819,"date":"2014-02-04T06:53:25","date_gmt":"2014-02-04T14:53:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=22819"},"modified":"2014-02-04T06:53:25","modified_gmt":"2014-02-04T14:53:25","slug":"defense-corporations-and-congress-teaming-up-to-rob-you-blind","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2014\/02\/04\/defense-corporations-and-congress-teaming-up-to-rob-you-blind\/","title":{"rendered":"Defense Corporations and Congress, Teaming Up to Rob You Blind"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-22820\" alt=\"Capitol-Hill\" src=\"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/Capitol-Hill-e1391525546557.jpg\" width=\"580\" height=\"387\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Again, military officials in the Pentagon are insisting on cutting superfluous weapons programs that are wasting billions of taxpayer dollars, but Congress refuses to cut because the defense corporations that line their campaign pockets want the money to keep coming in.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/business\/economy\/the-end-of-the-tank-the-army-says-it-doesnt-need-it-but-industry-wants-to-keep-building-it\/2014\/01\/31\/c11e5ee0-60f0-11e3-94ad-004fefa61ee6_story.html?Post+generic=%3Ftid%3Dsm_twitter_washingtonpost\"><em>The Washington Post<\/em><\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The Army is pushing ahead on a path that could result in at least partial closure of the two U.S. facilities producing these vehicles \u2014 buoyed by a new study on the state of the combat vehicle industry due for release next month.<\/p>\n<p>But its plans could be derailed by a Congress unwilling to yield and an industry with a powerful lobby. They argue that letting these lines idle or close would mean letting skills and technology honed over decades go to waste.<\/p>\n<p>The Pentagon has \u201creally made a turn in that they are now trying to solve million-dollar problems without billion-dollar solutions, but Congress keeps redirecting them,\u201d said Brett Lambert, who oversaw the Pentagon\u2019s industrial base policy until last year. \u201cThis is a zero-sum game. For every dollar the Pentagon spends on something we don\u2019t need\u00a0.?.?.\u00a0it is a dollar we can\u2019t spend on something we do need.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>One might be inclined to describe this as a problem; some kind of defect in the system. But this is not a glitch: this is <a href=\"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/2014\/01\/28\/defense-corporations-fib-job-loss-estimates-to-avoid-budget-cuts\/\">how the system<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/2013\/12\/13\/the-parties-come-together-to-save-the-military-industrial-complex\/\">works from<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/2013\/10\/13\/bloated-redundant-military-spending-in-an-era-of-shutdowns-and-tight-budgets\/\">top to bottom<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>This past summer, the armed services committees in both the House and Senate\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/bigstory.ap.org\/article\/panel-rejects-request-military-base-closings\">rejected Defense Department requests<\/a>\u00a0to shutter military installations in the United States that the Pentagon says it doesn\u2019t want or need.\u00a0The infamous F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, to take another example,\u00a0is the Pentagon\u2019s most expensive weapons program in history. Military officials have told Congress for years\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2010\/05\/27\/AR2010052705614.html\">to scrap it<\/a>, but Congress tells them to screw off.<\/p>\n<p>The U.S. Air Force has a storage facility in Arizona where it keeps brand new aircraft, vehicles, and equipment worth tens of billions of dollars. They sit there in storage immediately after being delivered &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.military.com\/daily-news\/2013\/10\/07\/new-air-force-planes-go-directly-to-boneyard.html\">because the military has no use for them<\/a>.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Veronique de Rugy, over at <em>National Review<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nationalreview.com\/corner\/370230\/us-army-we-dont-need-more-tanks-defense-contractors-well-be-judge-veronique-de-rugy\">writes<\/a> that &#8220;it\u2019s not always Congress and the defense industry \u2014 sometimes it\u2019s the White House that\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/news.usni.org\/2014\/01\/30\/white-house-pushing-proposed-pentagon-carrier-cut\">pushes back<\/a>\u00a0against\u00a0defense cuts that the Pentagon proposes.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>In other words, politicians in Washington are serving their true constituents. Not the general electorate, but the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Mvr72uTd7kc\">Masters of War<\/a> who &#8220;build the big guns&#8221; and &#8220;the death planes,&#8221; but who also cozy up to politicians, cash in hand.<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" src=\"\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/Mvr72uTd7kc\" height=\"315\" width=\"560\" allowfullscreen=\"\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Again, military officials in the Pentagon are insisting on cutting superfluous weapons programs that are wasting billions of taxpayer dollars, but Congress refuses to cut because the defense corporations that line their campaign pockets want the money to keep coming in. The Washington Post: The Army is pushing ahead on a path that could result [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":86,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-22819","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22819","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/86"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22819"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22819\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22821,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22819\/revisions\/22821"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22819"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22819"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22819"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=22819"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}