Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama Ignores Eisenhower at Country's, World's Peril

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Klukie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-11 08:29 PM
Original message
Obama Ignores Eisenhower at Country's, World's Peril
Obama Ignores Eisenhower at Country's, World's Peril
Saturday 15 January 2011

by: Melvin A. Goodman, t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

On January 17, 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower issued his prophetic warning about the military-industrial complex, anticipating the increased political, economic, military and even cultural influence of the Pentagon and its allies. Several weeks earlier, he had privately told his senior advisers in the Oval Office, "God help this country when someone sits in this chair who doesn't know the military as well as I do." Several months after his inauguration in 1953, he warned against warfare that had "humanity hanging from a cross of iron."
In the spring of 1961, I was part of a small group of undergraduates who met with the president's brother, Milton Eisenhower, who was then president of Johns Hopkins University. Milton Eisenhower and a Johns Hopkins professor of political science, Malcolm Moos, played major roles in the drafting and editing of the farewell speech of January 1961. The actual drafter of the speech, Ralph E. Williams, relied on guidance from Professor Moos. Milton Eisenhower explained that one of the drafts of the speech referred to the "military-industrial-Congressional complex" and said that the president himself inserted the reference to the role of the Congress, an element that did not appear in the delivery of the farewell address. When the president's brother asked about the dropped reference to Congress, the president replied: "It was more than enough to take on the military and private industry. I couldn't take on the Congress as well."

http://www.truth-out.org/obama-ignores-eisenhower-countrys-worlds-peril66863
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-11 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. K/R for an excellent article
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-11 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. Not sure this is a comforting point
Edited on Sat Jan-15-11 08:48 PM by ProSense
...God help this country when someone sits in this chair who doesn't know the military as well as I do...

<...>

Unlike Kennedy and Johnson, Eisenhower ignored the hysteria of the bomber and missile gaps in the 1950s, as well as the unnecessarily heightened concerns about US security in the National Security Council report NSC-68 in the late 1940s and in the Gaither Report in the mid-1950s, which called for unnecessary increases in the strategic arsenal. Eisenhower ignored the many Democrats and Republicans who advocated for increased defense spending and even cut the military budget by 20 percent between 1953 and 1955 on the way to balancing the budget by 1956.

Eisenhower clashed with the military mindset from the very beginning of his presidency. He knew that his generals were wrong in proclaiming "political will" the major factor in military victory and would have shuddered when General David Petraeus proclaimed recently that political will is the key to US success in Afghanistan. Eisenhower knew that military demands for weaponry and resources were always based on inexplicable notions of "sufficiency," and he made sure that Pentagon briefings to the Congress were countered by testimony from the intelligence community.

Henry A. Kissinger was one of the rare national security advisers and secretaries of state who understood Eisenhower's point of view. During the ratification process for the first Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty (SALT I) agreement in 1972, he countered conservative and military opposition to SALT and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with two questions opponents of arms control could never answer: what is strategic sufficiency, and what would we do with strategic sufficiency if we had it?

<...>

Unfortunately, with the possible exception of President Richard Nixon, we have not had a president who understood the military mindset and was willing to limit the influence of the military. Democrats such as Kennedy, Johnson and Clinton as well as Republicans such as Reagan, Bush I and Bush II have deferred too readily to the military. They devoted too many resources to the military and often resorted to the use of power instead of diplomacy and statecraft.

One doesn't need to be a General to be President. Also, Kissinger and Nixon are the only persons the author could find to hold up as an examples?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faryn Balyncd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-11 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. Eisenhower also had enough sense to NOT reduce Social Security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-11 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. And create a 91% top tax bracket nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-11 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
5. I see. And was this pointed out to Reagan and Bush and Bush II?
Jumping over those assholes who were the REAL cause of the problems to lambaste Obama is really quite stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC