![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/11\/US-military-mortuary-workers-say-the-remains-of-US-servicemen-treated-with-scant-regard.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nOn 17 January 1961, US President Dwight Eisenhower famously introduced the phrase \u201cmilitary-industrial complex<\/strong><\/span>\u201d<\/a>, referring to what he said might become a threat to American democracy \u2014 a takeover of the US Government by a \u201ccomplex,\u201d composed of generals and other national-security brass on the one side, and corporations such as Lockheed and their financiers, on the other. That warning turned out to have been prophetic. The revolving door, between the military top brass and the boardrooms of the arms-contractors and associated corporations and think tanks, spins ever-faster now<\/a><\/strong><\/span>, and it controls the news-media<\/strong><\/span><\/a> and the US Government ever-more, so as to produce more and more invasions, of countries that never had invaded, nor even threatened to invade, us. Such \u201caggressive wars\u201d (unprovoked aggressions) are international war crimes<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, but are never prosecuted when the US does them. The threat that Eisenhower talked of was real, and it has actually won out against, and defeated, democracy in America, and it has since become a catastrophe, taking up more and more of the US Government\u2019s resources, and delivering \u2014 to the people of the United States, and especially to the world-at-large \u2014 only more wars, and bloodshed, and poverty, and suffering, and less security, for everyone, but with increasing wealth for the few at America\u2019s top, who have invested in this permanent militarization of the United States.<\/span><\/p>\n The chief beneficiaries have been owners of the arms-makers (such as Lockheed Martin) and of the fossil-fuels extraction firms (such as ExxonMobil). Controlling those types of firms is to participate in controlling the US Government, because the US Government serves those firms. Also, high-tech, such as Amazon corporation (whose cloud-computing for the US Government provides almost all of its profits<\/strong><\/span><\/a>), benefits enormously not only from the wars, but from the extension of the American empire. A threat by the US Government is a threat on behalf of<\/em> those owners, and yet the owners who control those international corporations get none of the blame for those wars, which always serve their interests, by extending their empire even when the wars are lost.<\/span><\/p>\n How did this ongoing decades-long catastrophe happen?<\/span><\/p>\n It didn\u2019t even strengthen the US militarily.<\/strong> Look at the record, and consider not only the phenomenon itself, but its actual results \u2014 a ceaseless string of military defeats:<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Why<\/em> did the US lose the war in Vietnam?<\/span><\/p>\n Why<\/em> did the US lose the war in Afghanistan?<\/span><\/p>\n Why<\/em> did the US lose the war in Iraq?<\/span><\/p>\n Why<\/em> did the US lose the war in Libya?<\/span><\/p>\n Why<\/em> did the US lose the war in Syria<\/a><\/strong><\/span>?<\/span><\/p>\n What produces this doubly-bad habit \u2014 actually badness squared \u2014 of the American Government, during the past fifty years: aggressions that fail?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Could it be because the takeover of America\u2019s Government, by its arms-manufacturers and fuel-extraction firms \u2014 and their lobbyists and other agents \u2014 has been accompanied by soaring corruption? We\u2019ll deal with that question later here. But first, let\u2019s consider the shocking present condition of America\u2019s military:<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n On 19 August 2019, the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, in Australia \u2014 a prime US ally in that part of the world \u2014 headlined a lengthy study and report: \u201cAVERTING CRISIS: AMERICAN STRATEGY, MILITARY SPENDING AND COLLECTIVE DEFENCE IN THE INDO-PACIFIC\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/a>. Its Executive Summary presented the following key points:<\/span><\/p>\n America no longer enjoys military primacy in the Indo-Pacific, and its capacity to uphold a favourable balance of power is increasingly uncertain. \u2026<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Over the next decade, the US defence budget is unlikely to meet the needs of the National Defense Strategy owing to a combination of political, fiscal and internal pressures. \u2026<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n America has an atrophying force that is not sufficiently ready, equipped or postured for great power competition in the Indo-Pacific \u2014 a challenge it is working hard to address. \u2026<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n A strategy of collective defence is fast becoming necessary as a way of offsetting shortfalls in America\u2019s regional military power and holding the line against rising Chinese strength.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n But did China actually cause this \u201catrophying\u201d? Clearly not.<\/span><\/p>\n The problem is internal to America itself. Casting the blame elsewhere is only for idiots to believe, but foreign \u2018enemies\u2019 (such as China) are needed in order for the military-industrial complex to thrive. Can you imagine the military-industrial complex growing and thriving if the public believe that domestic corruption is actually behind this consistent and constant record, of US military failures?<\/span><\/p>\n Did China cause America\u2019s defeat in Vietnam, or in Afghanistan, or in Iraq, or in Libya, or in Syria?<\/span><\/p>\n Let\u2019s be more general about this: Did North Korea cause it? During the four-day period of 24-27 August 2019, an Economist<\/em>\/YouGov poll of 1,500 adult US citizens asked them \u201cDo you consider the countries listed below to be a friend or an enemy of the United States?<\/strong><\/span>\u201d<\/a> and listed 13 countries. The ones scoring highest for \u201cEnemy\u201d \u2014 the most-commonly selected, as being an \u201cEnemy\u201d \u2014 were: North Korea 53%, Iran 46%, Russia 35%, and China 21%. Did any<\/em> of those nations cause this \u201catrophying\u201d?<\/span><\/p>\n Ever since 2001, Gallup has asked, almost annually, and always in February, \u201cWhat one country anywhere in the world do you consider to be the United States\u2019 greatest enemy today?<\/strong><\/span>\u201d<\/a> No countries were ever listed for that question; the respondent in these polls always just answered it however that person wanted. In February 2001, 2% said \u201cNorth Korea.\u201d 6% said \u201cRussia.\u201d 8% said \u201cIran.\u201d 14% said \u201cChina.\u201d And a whopping 38% said \u201cIraq.\u201d 4% said \u201cSaudi Arabia.\u201d Those were the most-frequently mentioned countries, shortly before 9\/11 struck. 0% said \u201cAfghanistan.\u201d How accurately informed were Americans, by \u2018our\u2019 \u2018news\u2019-media<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, then? In February 2001, the top \u201cenemy,\u201d overwhelmingly (at 38%), was Iraq<\/em> \u2014 which had never posed any threat, at all<\/em>, to America. It was no enemy, whatsoever, to Americans. But we invaded and destroyed it in 2003 \u2014 after having long been strangulating its population, by means of an economic blockade, \u201csanctions,\u201d following Saddam Hussein\u2019s having invaded Iraq\u2019s neighboring country, Kuwait, in 1990, and trying to take it from its owner, Kuwait\u2019s royal Al-Sabah family. Americans then strangled Iraqis with sanctions for what their ruler Saddam Hussein had done to the Sabah clan, and then we invaded and destroyed Iraq altogether in 2003, for nothing but our Government\u2019s, and its \u2018news\u2019-media\u2019s, war-mongering lies<\/strong><\/span><\/a> \u2014 the \u2018news\u2019-media serving as mere stenographers for (instead of<\/em> as investigators of) the Government\u2019s ceaseless lies about \u2018Saddam\u2019s WMD\u2019, etc.<\/span><\/p>\n Gallup\u2019s next poll on this question was 2005, and the top \u201cEnemy\u201ds at that time were 22% each for \u201cNorth Korea\u201d and for \u201cIraq,\u201d 14% for \u201cIran,\u201d 10% for \u201cChina,\u201d 3% for \u201cAfghanistan,\u201d and 2% each for \u201cSaudi Arabia,\u201d \u201cSyria,\u201d and \u201cthe United States itself.\u201d How accurately informed were Americans, then? (Well: 2% got the answer right \u2014 or, maybe, 4% did, if the correct answer was both<\/em> \u201cthe United States itself\u201d and \u201cSaudi Arabia.\u201d That 2% or 4% was the highest percentage ever who got it right.)<\/span><\/p>\n By 2012, 10% said \u201cNorth Korea.\u201d 2% said \u201cRussia.\u201d 32% said \u201cIran.\u201d 23% said \u201cChina.\u201d 5% said \u201cIraq.\u201d 7% said \u201cAfghanistan.\u201d How accurately informed were Americans, then?<\/span><\/p>\n In 2018 (the latest such poll), 51% said \u201cNorth Korea.\u201d 19% said \u201cRussia.\u201d 7% said \u201cIran.\u201d 11% said \u201cChina.\u201d 2% said \u201cIraq.\u201d 0% said \u201cAfghanistan. How accurately informed were Americans, then?<\/span><\/p>\n Isn\u2019t it remarkable how malleable \u2014 changing over time \u2014 Americas\u2019 opinions are, of which nations are \u2018enemies\u2019? The designation of which ones are \u2018enemies\u2019, at any given time, is controlled by the Government and its stenographic press \u2014 the \u2018news\u2019-media \u2014 and by the billionaires\u2019 think tanks (such as Brookings Institution<\/a><\/strong><\/span>) that provide many of the \u2018experts\u2019, which the \u2018news\u2019-media cite and interview in order to validate the lies.<\/span><\/p>\n None<\/strong> of those countries had ever<\/strong> attacked America (except America\u2019s own Deep State had, if that\u2019s what was being referred to as \u201cthe United States itself\u201d). Nonetheless, the US Government has threatened each one of those other countries many times, and has actually invaded some of them, but did even a single one of those countries ever commit aggression against the United States? Not even Afghanistan did, though the US-and-Saud-created Taliban<\/strong><\/span><\/a> had protected the Saudi aristocrat Osama bin Laden leading up to the 9\/11 attacks. However, the Afghan Government afterward never invaded America. Not only was the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 unprovoked aggression, but (though less clearly) the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan also was. And yet, for some reason, Americans don\u2019t view the US Government as a global criminal outlaw. Instead, Americans view the targeted foreign governments as if they<\/em> were that. This is the consequence of a ceaselessly propagandistic national press, which protects itself and its masters (never revealing the truth about either itself or its masters \u2014 the regime\u2019s propaganda that supplants truth), and fools its public to hate and fear those masters\u2019 targeted \u2018enemies\u2019 \u2014 instead of to loathe <\/em>those masters and their press (which have actually engendered such malleable mass-hatreds and the resulting unprovoked invasions by the US).<\/span><\/p>\n Is it the case that Americans\u2019 fear and hatred of foreign governments varies according to what the owners of America\u2019s major news-media have had their reporters report during the year before, and that the latter is, in turn, unskeptical stenographic reporting from whatever the US Government had just told them during the year before, and that it\u2019s always full of lies, and none of it should be uncritically believed, and the American public are merely fools who are constantly being manipulated by the owners of the military-industrial complex, which actually controls not only the President, but the Congress, in both Parties, as well as their deceiving media? If that\u2019s the case, then the generals and the armaments and extraction firms could be making lots of money, from manipulating the public, in this carefully coordinated way, by the controlling owners, the big stockholders \u2014 America\u2019s 607 billionaires. It\u2019s sometimes called \u201cthe Deep State.\u201d But it\u2019s not aiming for any actual victory by a military that actually represents the interests of the American people; it is instead merely aiming to generate sales of weapons and spreading of fear, and a continual succession of wars, so as to feed the controlling owners\u2019 bloody greed to sell more weapons, oil, and gas. It\u2019s safe for them to do, because international laws aren\u2019t ever enforced against them, nor even against their top agents (such as America\u2019s President, members of Congress, the CEOs of Lockheed Martin and of CNN, and all other agents of the billionaires). They\u2019re all immune, no matter how many times they have deceived their public into supporting the perpetration of international war-crimes, on the basis of lies about their \u2018humanitarian\u2019 concern to spread \u2018democracy\u2019 and \u2018human rights\u2019.<\/span><\/p>\n Is there any alternative explanation for these catastrophic continual results?<\/span><\/p>\n The US military is so profoundly corrupt that there are \u201cTrillions of Dollars in US Military Spending Unaccounted For\u201d<\/a>, and yet <\/strong><\/span>the US military remains, by far, the most-trusted and highest-approved, of all institutions in America<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, respected above the Presidency, above the Congress, above the courts, above the schools, above any, at all, year after year, for decades. And the public accept this even when the US public themselves disapprove of the Government\u2019s wars<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. So: there is total impunity for the mega-profiteers from all of these international war-crimes that are so routinely perpetrated by the US In fact, there is sound reason to believe<\/strong><\/span><\/a> that the corruption is so enormous that not only is the military-industrial complex the most corrupt part of the American nation, but this nation itself is actually, according to the most-reliable measures, the world\u2019s most corrupt at its very top, and perhaps even below the very top<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. Perversely, the military is not only the most respected, but it\u2019s also the most corrupt<\/strong><\/span><\/a>,<\/strong><\/span> of America\u2019s institutions: it is corruption on top of corruption, the peak of corruption. And this is the reason why it\u2019s the only federal department that is \u2014 and has always been \u2014 unauditable<\/strong><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n This is how the country that actually (though not in the official figures) spends around half of the world\u2019s entire military budget<\/strong><\/span><\/a> can lose war after war after war and its military still retain the highest respect from its public \u2014 the highest of all of the nation\u2019s institutions \u2014 regardless of its astounding longstanding record of failure and ongoing global catastrophes, producing benefits virtually only for the nation\u2019s billionaires and their top agents, while mass-murdering millions abroad, for no other real<\/em> purpose than to keep the profits flowing. Like Barack Obama (the invader of Libya and Syria on the basis of lies) repeatedly bragged, \u201cThe United States is and remains the one indispensable nation<\/strong><\/span>\u201d<\/a>, meaning that all others<\/em> are \u201cdispensable.\u201d Those others serve their purpose, as \u2018allies\u2019 to buy US-made weapons, or else as \u2018enemies\u2019 for those weapons to be used against. Even if the wars are lost, the weapons were sold, and the \u2018enemies\u2019 had served as target-practice, to keep the juices flowing, for America\u2019s owners \u2014 people like this<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, and these<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. Such a nation used to be called an \u201cEmpire,\u201d but now it\u2019s called \u201chegemony<\/strong><\/span>\u201d<\/a>, in the wake of WW II. Perhaps it\u2019s now called \u201cthe one indispensable nation,\u201d and \u201chegemony,\u201d because FDR had been opposed to empires, so they can\u2019t call it an empire. Opposition to empires was FDR\u2019s guiding principle in international relations, and this conviction he held was a major reason behind his plan for the UN to become the basis of an international democracy to emerge \u2014 no empires, at all. Today\u2019s America is the reverse of that, more like a posthumous victory of fascism, which is based<\/em> upon empire: this fascist victory after<\/em> World War II is the burial of FDR\u2019s plan and dream for the world. His dream has been buried by America\u2019s own fascists.<\/span><\/p>\n The German intelligence-analyst who blogs anonymously as \u201cMoon of Alabama,\u201d and whose predictions, which I have closely watched for five years and found to be stunningly accurate, wrote, on September 5th<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, that, \u201cThe US military and its weapons are regularly hyped in \u2018western\u2019 media. But it has long been clear to (non-US) experts that US military technology is not superior to that of other countries. In several important fields Russian, Chinese and even Indian build weapons have much better capabilities. The reason is simple. US weapons are not developed or built with a real strategic need in mind. They don\u2019t get developed for achieving the most effect in an existential war against a capable enemy, but to create profit<\/em>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Given that America spends around half of the entire world\u2019s military budget, and yet gets very bad military results, there can be no reasonable doubt that the reason is massive corruption. One prominent example is James Comey<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, who served President Clinton 1996-2001, President Bush 2002-2005, and President Obama 2013-2017; and he was Lockheed Martin\u2019s second-or third-highest-paid executive, and then the chief lawyer for Lockheed Martin\u2019s second-biggest owner, during the interim period 2005-2013, between Presidents Bush and Obama.<\/span><\/p>\n As I wrote in March of this year<\/a><\/strong><\/span>:<\/span><\/p>\n The liberal Republican James Comey became the <\/em>Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Lockheed Martin Corporation<\/em><\/a><\/strong><\/span> during 2005-2010, where his 2009 pay was <\/em>$6,113,797<\/strong><\/span><\/em><\/a>. During that time, he also was a Director of the US Chamber of Commerce\u2019s National Chamber Litigation Center, which works to support business interests in the courts, especially the interests of US-based international corporations, including Lockheed Martin. Furthermore, as of 12 March 2010, Comey also had been granted <\/em>162,482<\/strong><\/span><\/em><\/a> free shares of stock in Lockheed Martin, which number was higher than that of anyone except the Chairman, the CEO President, and an Executive Vice President; so, Comey was among the very top people at Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin\u2019s largest foreign customer was the Saudi Government, which is 100% owned by the Saud family. Today, those Comey shares are worth $47,119,780 \u2014 after his five years with the company, plus nearly nine years of growth in that stock, from the war-producing policies that Comey had helped to initiate. <\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Then, Comey <\/em>bought a $3M mansion in Connecticut and became the General Counsel and a Member of the Executive Committee at the gigantic hedge Fund, Ray Dalio\u2019s Bridgewater Associates, in Connecticut, where Comey\u2019s only publicly known pay was $6,632,616 in 2012<\/strong><\/span><\/em><\/a>. Dalio and Comey became very close \u2014 <\/em>Dalio called Comey his \u201chero.\u201d<\/em><\/a><\/strong><\/span> But Obama then hired the liberal Republican Comey as FBI Director in 2013, replacing the liberal Republican Mueller in that role, from which Obama\u2019s successor President Trump fired Comey, and congressional Democrats then succeeded in getting Mueller assigned to become the Special Counsel who would supposedly investigate the legitimacy of that firing.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n On 21 May 2013, Marketwatch bannered <\/em>\u201cBridgewater Associates\u2019 trades for Q2<\/strong><\/span>\u201d<\/em><\/a> and reported that <\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u201cAfter a number of tech companies \u2014 including those we\u2019ve mentioned [Microsoft, Oracle, and Intel] and EMC \u2014 the largest single-stock holding in the fund\u2019s portfolio was its roughly 220,000 shares of Lockheed Martin LMT, +1.93%. The company recently reported an increase in earnings compared with the first quarter of 2012, but revenue was down slightly and there is a good deal of speculation that the business will be impacted by cuts in US military spending. \u2026 Billionaire Ken Griffin\u2019s Citadel Investment Group reported a position of 1.2 million shares at the end of December.\u201d<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Lockheed Martin is by <\/em>far the largest US \u2018defense\u2019 contractor<\/strong><\/span><\/em><\/a>, taking 8.3% of all US Government purchases during 2015, as compared to #2 Boeing\u2019s 3.8%, and #3 General Dynamics\u2019s 3.1%.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n That\u2019s where the big money is being made: not in Government-service, but in the private-sector side<\/em> of the revolving door between<\/em> Government-service and the private sector. Phrased in a different way, and using a different metaphor: Government-service is the career\u2019s entr\u00e9, but the private sector is its dessert, in America\u2019s corrupt system. Outright bribes aren\u2019t necessary, in this system \u2014 the aristocratic system \u2014 where what matters is not what you know, but whom you know; not what skills you have, but whom your friends are. It doesn\u2019t produce efficiency, but it does produce supercharged wealth at the very top, amongst the richest and most powerful few.<\/span><\/p>\n And it produces gargantuan and longstanding military failure.<\/span><\/p>\n On August 29th, the US Department of Justice\u2019s Office of the Inspector General issued its \u201cReport of Investigation of Former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey\u2019s Disclosure of Sensitive Investigative Information and Handling of Certain Memoranda\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, which identified US criminal statutes that Comey had personally violated in order to precipitate the Obama Administration\u2019s Russiagate investigations against then-candidate Donald Trump. It noted that \u201cComey\u2019s closest advisors used the words \u2018surprised,\u2019 \u2018stunned,\u2019 \u2018shocked,\u2019 and [expressed] \u2018disappointment\u2019 to describe their reactions to learning what Comey had done.\u201d And it stated, not just once but a number of times, the terse phrase that \u201cAfter reviewing the matter, the [Justice] Department [now under Trump] declined prosecution.\u201d Ironically, some of the very same criminal statutes that they said Comey had violated had been the same ones on which Comey had earlier refused to recommend prosecution of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton \u2014 that the documents were his (her) personal property, and not the property of his (her) employer, the US Government. The I.G.\u2019s report stated unequivocally, in his own case, \u201cWe conclude that the Memos were official FBI records, rather than Comey\u2019s personal documents.\u201d Perhaps Comey had felt free to do this because he had earlier refused to recommend prosecution of her for having done it. Perhaps he felt that his actions, as FBI Director, had, in her case, established a legal precedent, which superseded the congressionally passed and Presidentially signed-into-law criminal statutes that he was actually oath-bound to enforce and possessed no legal authority to either override or ignore. Perhaps that\u2019s why he did it \u2014 perhaps he had persuaded himself that he wasn\u2019t a criminal who was at the top. Perhaps he had deceived himself about that.<\/span><\/p>\n At the top, in the United States, corruption is not only massive; it is entirely bipartisan. There\u2019s no way around it<\/strong><\/span>.<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n