Kriegsgewinnler

von LePenseur

 

 

Ein wenig am Schleier der Sais zupft Lt.Col. Daniel Davis in seinem interessanten Interview Profits of War - Where's the Money Really Going ?:

 

 

Warten wir ab, wie lange es auf Youtube zu sehen bleibt ...

-----

Ganz brauchbare AI-Zusammenfassung (damit AI wenigstens zu irgendwas gut ist ...) unter dem Video:

Revolving Door: Government to Defense Industry 

 

Lloyd Austin, despite promising not to become a lobbyist post-government, reentered the defense industry after his term. 80% of retiring 3- and 4-star generals and admirals go into the arms industry, creating a conflict of interest while they’re still in office. This incentivizes officials to avoid challenging contractors while in power, hoping for lucrative future roles. Example: The official who approved the final F-35 contract joined Lockheed Martin’s board shortly afterward.

 

Impact on Policy and Budgeting Career motivations corrupt decisions: Generals may avoid pushing back against defense contractors to secure post-retirement jobs. Despite cutting $800 million in "waste," the Pentagon budget jumped to $1.06 trillion in 2025 (including supplemental funding). Since 2000, military spending has nearly doubled (in constant dollars), from $531 billion to $1.06 trillion, a 99% increase. Every opportunity to reduce spending (e.g., post-Afghanistan) is spun into new global threats to justify reallocation—not reduction.

 

Systemic Entrenchment Defense projects are spread across congressional districts to ensure political protection. Even communities heavily funded by the Pentagon remain poor and economically undiversified. Military spending crowds out investment in sectors like education, health, and green jobs—areas with higher economic multipliers. Dead-end spending (like tanks and jets) creates no long-term value, unlike infra-structure or social programs.

 

Can the System Change? Reform is hard because of: Congressional self-interest ("You vote for my weapon, I’ll vote for yours"). Voter apathy or fatalism ("The system is rigged"). Lack of a national debate untainted by defense industry influence. But change is possible: A few leaders (e.g., Sen. Warren, Bernie Sanders, Chuck Grassley) challenge the status quo. Independent organizations and investigative journalists continue to expose corruption. Public awareness and grassroots education are key to long-term reform.

 

Call to Action The speaker emphasizes the need for: Organizers, educators, and coalitions that can translate research into action. Spaces like teach-ins, forums, and longform discussions (beyond social media) to build consensus. Without public pushback, the U.S. risks remaining a “garrison state”: overmilitarized, economically skewed, and strategically misguided.

 

Final Thought "This isn't just about war. It's about democracy, economics, and the future we want." The system won't reform itself. But awareness, public engagement, and collective pressure can still create meaningful change—if people act before the costs become irreversible.