Future weapon
The "need" for a continuous stream of future weapons of unproven design is the justification of the military-industrial complex - the use of the term "future weapon" implies that technological escalation is inevitable.
In mid-2004, the U.S. Congress made "only modest changes in the Pentagon's plans to spend well over $1 trillion in the next decade on an arsenal of futuristic planes, ships and weapons with little direct connection to the Iraq war or the global war on terrorism." [1]
"House and Senate versions of the 2005 defense authorization measure contain a record $68 billion for research and development - 20 percent above the peak levels of President Ronald Reagan's historic defense buildup. Tens of billions more out of a proposed $76 billion hardware account will go for big-ticket weapons systems to combat some as-yet-unknown adversary comparable to the former Soviet Union." Some defense analysts, notably Thomas P.M. Barnett, consider the People's Republic of China to be the focus of Pentagon obsession.[2]
"On the Pentagon's wish list are such revolutionary weapons as a fighter plane that can land on an aircraft carrier or descend vertically to the ground; a radar-evading destroyer that can wallow low in the waves like a submarine while aiming precise rounds at enemy targets 200 miles inland; and a compact 'isomer' weapon that could tap the metallic chemical element hafnium to release 10,000 times as much energy per gram as TNT."[3]
Debate on the defense bill has "largely skirted the budgetary or strategic implications of this buildup" due to Congressional cowardice and inability to withstand the pro-technology propaganda claiming that these weapons, like the Strategic Defense Initiative, can eventually be made to work somehow.[4]
"In the public mind there is clearly a present danger, so we can't trim back the defense budget in any manner even though counterterrorism spending only accounts for a small part of it," said Carl Conetta, co-director of the Project on Defense Alternatives.[5]
Contents
Resources and articles
Related SourceWatch articles
- arms control / nuclear weapons
- environmental warfare
- revolution in military affairs
- technological escalation
References
- ↑ Dan Morgan, "Congress Backs Pentagon Budget Heavy on Future Weapons," Washington Post (truthout.org), June 11, 2004.
- ↑ Dan Morgan, "Congress Backs Pentagon Budget Heavy on Future Weapons," Washington Post (truthout.org), June 11, 2004.
- ↑ Dan Morgan, "Congress Backs Pentagon Budget Heavy on Future Weapons," Washington Post (truthout.org), June 11, 2004.
- ↑ Dan Morgan, "Congress Backs Pentagon Budget Heavy on Future Weapons," Washington Post (truthout.org), June 11, 2004.
- ↑ Dan Morgan, "Congress Backs Pentagon Budget Heavy on Future Weapons," Washington Post (truthout.org), June 11, 2004.
