Customer Reviews

Political Economy of U.S. Militarism

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

It is a difficult task to write a succinct review of a book such as Ismael Hossein-Zadeh has produced, and do justice to its critical pertinence in the daily lives of every American. But its relevance even to each occupant of planet Earth cannot, and should not, be dismissed or underestimated, for to do so is an invitation to the disaster so eloquently implied and presaged by its content.

This immensely well documented and compiled work embodies a compendium of facts, brilliant writing and logical assumptions that will indeed lend credence to Chicken Little's exclamation - but not, however, that the sky is falling; rather that it indeed already has.

The one misfortune of its publication is that it is priced at a level that seems to aim at academics with university expense accounts. If the publisher, Palgrave Macmillan, desires to best serve its readers beyond academia, they and the public would be very well served by its reprint in a paperback edition. To not do so would be akin to pricing smoke alarms beyond the budget of the average home owner.

In this work, Mr. Hossein-Zadeh tracks the pre-WWII norm of antimilitarism that unofficially mandated the reduction of manpower to its prewar size after each conflict, to the emergence of current policy which established a doctrine supporting "1.5 million military personnel in 6,000 domestic bases and 702 bases in 130 countries." Including "about a dozen carrier task forces in the oceans and seas of the world." In this, he clearly describes the militarist's economic principle that peace is a curse that must have the stake of war driven through its heart - and not just once, but on a regularly recurring basis. This is accomplished by maintaining the citizenry in a constant state of fear and anxiety over manufactured and imaginary threats to national security.

The author very adroitly sets forth a stunning array of damning (or encouraging - depending on your political/economic persuasion) data that clearly penetrates the mythology of America being a peaceful "democracy" - or its intention of spreading democracy peacefully.

Being driven by 85,000 private contracting firms, he covers how DoD has co-opted an appalling number of educational institutions (350 colleges and universities) for Pentagon research programs that one can logically assume are not focused on creating a better soufflé.

The author shows that, unlike war efforts of the past, with more clearly established justification, the current military behemoth "tends to undermine the economic base it is supposed to nurture. Furthermore, control of the massive amounts of national resources by the military-industrial complex tends to undermine democratic values, pervert republican principles, and curtail civil liberties [ala Guantanamo Bay, Extreme Rendition, et. al.]. It also tends to corrupt both policy and politics at home and abroad."

For all of his impressive research and comprehensive documentation on a military industrial complex run amok, Mr. Hossein-Zadeh presents a very flowing and remarkably readable treatment on the subject. What could very well have been a dry treatise by a university professor of economics, is in reality so packed with remarkable and historically documented data that no open-minded reader can but stand in awe at what this nation has perpetrated under the camouflage of "national security." The author clearly presents, in a markedly unbiased manner, the inescapable reality that this professed lamb of alleged democracy speaks and acts as a dragon. His conclusions are eminently logical, and fortified with over 125 sources and 379 carefully documented citations.

This book should occupy several places in any academic or public library: Reference; History; Economics and an as-yet nonexistent section labeled "Wakeup Call."

Mr. Hossein-Zadeh documents:

- the penetration of the Pentagon into the deepest and highest levels of government and education.
- the nearly pervasive invasion of former high-ranking military officers and defense contractor executives into upper level policy making of the Bush and previous administrations.
- how, unlike world military empires past and over 150 years of American history, the present US martial adventurism is not stimulated by the military sector, but rather by market-driven forces on the business side of the Military/Industrial Complex - an economic calculus of death for money.
- that the "Blood for Oil" myth is essentially a red herring created by the neocons to the intent of diverting public attention from the genuine purposes of the current war, i.e., the exsanguination of the American taxpayers bloodstream into the pockets of the enormous beast of industrial militarism.
- that peace is anathema to the ideals of current American policy simply because militaristic proponents believe there is more money and economic growth in war.

The above and very many more findings are clearly not extracted, whole-cloth, from the author's imagination. Each is fortified with either direct quotes from the principals, or extensive documentation from official and/or credible sources. Liberally scattered amongst those well-ordered and factual citations are many logically deduced and thought provoking conclusions such as, "...not all militarists don military uniform. In fact, business and ideological beneficiaries and promoters of war, who do not have to face direct combat and death, tend to be more jingoistic and trigger-happy than professional military personnel who will have to face the horrors of warfare." And "Despite its apparent complexity, reducing international acts of terrorism and fostering global peace and stability would not be very difficult in the absence of this perverse dynamics of the business of war."

In other words, take the profits out of war, and peace is the default.

The author quite agilely connects the dots in an almost incomprehensibly interconnected web of neoconservative, military/industrial and militant Zionist players, all of which are virtually household names for anyone tuning in to mainstream media news. But he takes these players and vividly portrays the incestuous components of American militarism in a way that brings to sharp focus their pernicious, inbred, self-referencing purposes - intents that have literally sacrificed America on the alter of its own cannibalistic consumerism.

This book could be a wakeup call, but it appears to be such that would awaken one to a burning house in which all the exits are blocked. It illustrates that the military-industrial complex has become not so much a case of the tail wagging the dog, as the tail bludgeoning the dog into oblivion.

Oh, and if I haven't already mentioned this: PUBLISHER, you must make this work available in paperback at a price those who really need to read it can afford.

Ismael Hossein-Zadeh's The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism will greatly surprise readers who imagine that what lies between its covers is an abstruse economics argument or a rant against the war in Iraq. This accessible, lucid, and generously documented approach to the history of military engagement by the United States since World War II clearly is written with a mainstream audience in mind although its hardcover price of $80 is out of the average reader's ballpark. Hopefully libraries will pick up the title since every taxpayer deserves the chance to consider Hossein-Zadeh's thesis. In short, he demonstrates that although the economic gains of imperialism might have supported required military outlays for a period, there comes a time in every empire's life when further expansion no longer is cost-effective for the metropole and becomes a drain on the national economy. At this point, the war industry becomes "parasitic" as the dividends of empire fall more and more disproportionately into the laps of those associated with military efforts. Hossein-Zadeh considers the current period in U.S. history such a time.

Readers may have heard this claim before. But few if any will have met such a persuasive presentation of it. The book is extremely helpful in how it identifies and then dismantles what Hossein-Zadeh considers weak explanations for why the United States continues to engage in military intervention and expansion abroad. The first is the widespread theory among liberals that the neoconservative element of the U.S. political scene is attempting to take advantage of the absence of a comparable world power in order to spread American values and free market economics. The second is that George Bush is spearheading military adventurism as a result of the need to pose as a "war president" so as to mask the failings of his administration. The third is that America's Zionist lobbyists are championing the war on Iraq in order to shore up U.S. support of Israel. The fourth (and Hossein-Zadeh considers this the most widespread assumption of all) is that the United States is engaging, in the case of Iraq and other Middle Eastern adventures, in military action in order to better control the world's oil resources. Hossein-Zadeh acknowledges and discusses each of these theories, ultimately discarding them as the driving force behind continued U.S. military imperialism.

Instead, he suggests that the military imperialism we are witnessing today "can be seen largely as reflections of the metaphorical fights over allocation of the public finance at home, of a subtle or insidious strategy to redistribute national resources in favor of the wealthy, to cut public spending on socioeconomic infrastructures, and to reverse the New Deal reforms by expanding military spending." Survival of the working man and woman aside, also at stake is the question of which cabal of capitalists will come out on top--the neoliberal multilateralists who favor globalization--that is, the expansion of free markets throughout the world in order to make way for the products of multinationals largely unconnected with war, or the unilateralists, who tend to be linked to the military industry and to other industries that are not competitive in the international marketplace.

In addition to providing engaging economic explanations and political commentary such as those already mentioned, Hossein-Zadeh offers a number of other helpful analyses. He makes a distinction between the military bureaucracies of past empires--e.g., Rome--and America's present-day military industry, which reflects the imperatives of an advanced capitalist economy. Bearing in mind this distinction, he suggests, unlike many who see the United States as declining in the mode of Rome, that decline of the United States more likely would follow that of the British Empire. He points out that multilateralists have in no way been eliminated by unilateralists; rather, leading capitalist countries tend to experience alternating periods characterized by resurgence and diminution of the importance of these two poles. He also acknowledges the benefits of the military industry on an economy such as that of the United States. Finally, as an Iranian-American he offers a unique perspective in terms of political economy on the issue of religious fundamentalism and the fraught relations between the West and the Muslim world. Ismael Hossein-Zadeh's The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism is a fascinating text and one that deserves to be as accessible to the average pocketbook as it is to the average reader.

Ismael Hossein-Zadeh's book is a finely written historical critique of US militarism, focusing on its roots, its growth, and its current manifestations. One of the primary hurdles that observers of history and political participants must overcome is historical amnesia. Often current policies are thought to have sprung up as fully formed, articulated, and accepted. This book makes great strides in showing the historical roots of militarism in the US, taking shape largely during the perpetual arms race of the cold war era, and continuing with the escalation of the Pentagon spending after the fall of the Soviet Union.

One of the book's great strengths is showing how policy and public perception in the United States are often shaped by the powerful special interests that wish to continue military buildup in order to appropriate an ever-increasing share of our tax dollars. Viewed in this light, militaristic tendencies to wars abroad can be seen, according to Hossein-zadeh, as reflections of the metaphorical fights over allocation of the public finance at home, of a subtle or insidious strategy to redistribute national resources in favor of the wealthy, to cut public spending on socio-economic infrastructure, and to reverse the New Deal and other social safety net programs by expanding military spending.

Another valuable insight of Hossein-Zadeh's book is the recounting of the rise of the military-industrial complex. While a topic already well researched, Hossein-zadeh explores in detail the connections between the military industrial complex, the Israeli lobby, the neo-conservative political think-tanks, and the rising militarization of U.S. foreign policy. The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism provides a valuable tool in analyzing the distinctly American brand of imperialism.

September 16, 2006

In "The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism," Professor Hossein-zadeh of Drake University makes a compelling case that the military-industrial complex combined with the territorial ambitions of the Likud Party drive our aggressive, imperialistic foreign policy. It is not, as is often claimed by anti-Zionists, that this policy has been taken over by Israel with the help of its lobby, the America Israel Political Action Committee [AIPAC], but rather that the goals of the Likud Party happen to dovetail with the needs of our military-industrial complex.

Because of deliberate secrecy by our government, most Americans are unaware of our nearly one thousand overseas bases and military expenses that consume over 41% of the federal budget. No other country comes close to matching our quantities of unwelcome soldiers patrolling foreign lands. Whole sectors of our economy have come to rely on the military for sales. Since 85,000 private companies profit from these expenditures, and since the companies are to be found throughout the U.S., even Congressmen who want to downsize the military are hesitant to demand a reduction in spending. Furthermore, unlike in the past when arms production was dictated by war requirements, these companies are driven by the need to show profit. They MUST keep turning out tanks and fighter planes, and this inevitably means that the U.S. constantly needs to find more Mideast military engagements, more regimes to change.

Meanwhile the Likud Party, inspired by visionary Zionists, continues to dream of a Greater Israel, and this requires the maintenance of constant conflict in the Middle East. Peace would be an impediment to their expansionist dreams. It would mean the end of the territorial breathing space that they have enjoyed and returning to pre-1967 borders--that is, relinquishing Gaza and the West Bank. So while Israel doesn't control our policy -- it needs to form a perfect and seemingly eternal mesh with the needs of our military-industrial complex. No, it is not Big Oil that has co-opted our policy, since a stable Middle East would actually be in the best interests of these companies, nor is it a cabal of neo-cons who supposedly have staged a veritable coup  etat --but rather the military-industrial-Likud complex that is responsible. The neoconservatives simply represent this unspoken de facto alliance.

Despite the claims of many Democrats, President Bush didn't originate our aggressive military policy--Prof. Hossein-zadeh shows how it was formulated back in the 1990's largely by Dick Cheney; Bush has essentially expanded and implemented this earlier plan. By keeping the U.S. in a state of fear with an enemy du jour, he furthers these goals. In fact, for Bush and Cheney, 9/11 was not an unmitigated disaster but rather a perfect opportunity to carry out imperial policies. When Bush talks of a "war against terror" and prattles on endlessly about how "the world is hearing the voice of freedom from the center of the Middle East," and that we must have an American-style jihad against "Islamic fascism," the reality is that he has done everything in his power to see that the Iraqies do not get a "free and fair election." Given our imperial aspirations, why should we be surprised that in Baghdad such figures as the Paul Bremer, John Negroponte, Zalmay Khalilzad and a cohort of our generals at the the pro-Israel American Enterprise Institute should have produced chaos and civil war? It turns out that our policies actually promote a war FOR terrorism; our intrusion and aggression fuel it. The answer, Professor Hossein-zadeh seems to say, is to keep out of Arab territory. Terrorists are over here primarily because we are over there.

Will this military-industrial-Likud complex with its ever wasteful and cost-inefficient policies collapse as did the Roman Empire? For a variety of reasons its demise is likely to be different. There will not be an inevitable collapse of capitalism, for example. Rather, our present situation is like that of England in 1906, before Britain over the next half-century gradually sank under the weight of maintaining its far-flung empire. We seem headed for a gradual degeneration, not from a colonial empire but because our foreign ventures will prove so astronomically costly that no one will lend us more money for our imperialism.

Professor Hossein-zadeh's scholarly yet eminently readable text truly is a "must-read" for anyone who wants a convincing explanation for the wide gap that has arisen between America and much of the world and why our present imperial foreign policy relentlessly seeks to impose American-style capitalism on the rest of the world.

Frank J. Messmann, Ph.D. [ret.]
State University of New York

most comprehencive ,well documented,well researched book exposing the essence of our heartless government subserviant to the demands of giant corporations sacrificing the ones it is elected to protect.

What are the driving forces behind the Bush administration's tendency to war and militarism in general and the invasion of Iraq in particular? And why are Americans let to die, Hossein-zadeh asks, "not only because of horrendous lies, but even more appallingly, after those lies have been effectively exposed?"

To answer these questions, Hossein-zadeh goes beyond some of the most widely-held explanations: the ascendance to power of the neoconservative forces, the influence of the Israeli lobby, and the U.S. designs to gain access to more and cheaper sources of energy. Without denying the contributory roles of these factors, he points to a "more crucial force" behind the drive to war and militarism: the powerful beneficiaries of arms industries and related influential interests that are vested in the business of war and military expansion. In The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism, Hossein-Zadeh argues for the vindication of President Eisenhower's prescient warning that the military-industrial-complex would cause the Pentagon spending to be driven not by "national interests" or "security needs" but by a network of "weapons makers, lobbyists and elected officials."

A salient feature of The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism is that it goes beyond the criticism of the unilateral policies of the Bush administration. It suggests the views that tend to blame the Bush administration for all the recently heightened militaristic tendencies need to be tempered against the evidence that the major components of the neoconservative agenda were designed long before George W. Bush arrived in the White House.

Another distinct feature of Hossein-zadeh's book is that, unlike most similar titles, it cautions against attributing all the power and influence of the neoconservative forces to pure ideology. Instead, it focuses on real special interests that lie behind the front and the rhetoric of the cabal of neoconservatives.

A major advantage of The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism is that it shows that the economic costs of the recent unilateral wars of choice go beyond the unprecedented budget gaps they have created. More importantly, the escalating military spending at the expense of non-military public spending is steadily undermining the long-term national objectives of infrastructure or public capital formation, both physical and human. Furthermore, Hossein-zadeh shows how the rising Pentagon budget is used as a regulatory mechanism to redistribute national income or resources in favor of the wealthy. He also shows that unilateral wars of aggression are costing non-military U.S. transnational capital external sales markets and investment outlets as a result of various economic blowbacks, especially consumer backlashes, abroad.

The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism offers much food for thought for anyone concerned with the destructive bent of U.S. foreign policy. Although it appears as an academic book, it is equally appealing and accessible to informed general public interested in learning about the forces behind the militarization of U.S. foreign policy.

Kamran Nayeri, Survey Research Center, University of California, Berkeley

Ismael Hossein-zadeh is a university economics professor and a self-described "Kurd from the mountains." So, when I began to read his The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism, I expected an esoteric, perhaps one-sided discussion of the current Middle East conflict. Instead, I found a readable yet penetrating and sophisticated, well-rounded analysis of the causes and consequences of U.S. military policy.

I was immediately reminded of Charles Beard's classic work, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. Beard showed us, nearly 100 years ago, that the economic concerns of farmers helped lead 18th century Americans to develop a federal Constitution. Hossein-zadeh reminds us today that, as anticipated by President Dwight Eisenhower, economic concerns of the military-industrial complex are directing major foreign and domestic policies of the United States.

Hossein-zadeh considers the role of neoconservatism, the possible intellectual shortcomings of George W. Bush, the influence of militant Zionism, and the need for Middle East oil as contributing but secondary factors behind the rise of U.S. militarism. He points to the economics of war (or "war dividends" as he puts it) as the primary factor behind a rising tendency toward war and militarism. He makes a distinction between "classical economic imperialism" intended to expand the nation's wealth and "parasitic military imperialism" intended to "appropriate the lion's share of the existing wealth and treasure for the military establishment." Whereas military force in classical imperialism is a means for economic, territorial, or geopolitical gain, under parasitic imperialism militarism becomes an end in itself.

And I am reminded of Alfred Sloan's contention that "what's good for General Motors is good for the country." The automobile industry and road building became ends in themselves, despite the overuse of fossil fuels and harm to the environment. Let us hope that's what's good for the military-industrial complex has not become what's good for the country.

Hossein-zadeh offers us an economic interpretation of militarism that should be added to our national debate.

--James Romig, Albee Professor, Drake University

This book brings together lots of individual facts, statistics, and citations that those with a concern about US militarism who attentively follow current events and recent US history will have come upon in disparate locations.

The genius of the book is that it puts all of this information in one place and presents it in a coherent structure. It is also very clearly written. The citations and bibliography are useful starting points for those wishing to delve more deeply into the economic underpinnings of the military-industrial complex.

An amazingly thorough but extremely depressing book on the Military Industrial Complex in the US. This book suggests that the American political-economic system is totally submitted to the Military Industrial Complex, and that there is no easy way out. To anyone familiar with Seventh Day Adventist teachings about the US as the second beast of Revelation 13, the one that looks like a lamb but speaks like a dragon, this book will ring true.

The only flaw is that it seems to omit the role of international finance in fomenting wars. Nations will go into almost unlimited debt to pay for wars that they view as matters of life or death, and the bankers exploit this and finance both sides of the conflicts.

Here is an excerpt from a letter sent to a local Congressman about this very problem:

Dear Representative Miller,



.... Finally, ever since watching Aaron Russo's 2006 documentary, America: From Freedom to Fascism, I have been studying the history of the Federal Reserve Banking system (FRBS). This has enabled me to attain a level of understanding that was withheld from me when I studied economics at Harvard in the late 1970s. Now I am very concerned that Congress has relinquished its control over our nation's monetary system to a private cartel of secretive international financiers called the "Federal Reserve". (This was perhaps the first - and most fateful - act of privatization in US history, and patently against the Constitution.)



Of particular concern is that the FRBS collateralizes our money supply with interest bearing Treasury Bills. This means that all annual increases in our GNP are forfeited to pay interest on money that the FRBS prints "for us." The consequence of this is that the average US citizen realizes no increase in his or her personal prosperity, since all growth in the national economy must be surrendered to pay the T-bills held by the private banking elites who run the FRBS. Indeed the inexorable laws of compound interest mandate that this system actually guarantees the constantly increasing pauperization of our society. One does not have to be a PhD in Economics to perceive this. A proficiency in high school level mathematics will suffice to enable you to comprehend the appalling reality that each year a constantly increasing percentage of our national wealth is diverted from the private citizen to pay the mounting debt burden held by the FRBS as reward for monetizing "our economy."



Along with millions of other patriotic Americans, I demand that Congress dismantle the FRBS and resume its Constitutionally mandated authority over our monetary system! In our opinion, the FRBS is the root of our current economic crisis, and indeed of every economic crisis that has faced this country since the FRBS's inception in the early 20th century. In fact, many of us believe that the FRBS is responsible for virtually every social upheaval that has afflicted not only our nation but the world in the last 100 years. We do not believe it is a mere "coincidence" that, since the authorization of the FRBS by US President Woodrow Wilson in 1913 (a decision he later lamented was the worst decision of his political career), the world was plunged into two catastrophic world wars, a great depression, an economically ruinous arms' race and cold war, proliferation of conflicts globally, and the current economic disaster facing the US along with the entire global economy.



Wars, and huge military budgets such as is required by the US Pentagon, are avidly promoted by the FRBS because countries will go into virtually unlimited debt in order to finance wars that they perceive are vital to their national interests. The evidence proves that the international banking system, of which the FRBS is just one part, finances both sides of every conflict. Like a casino, the banking houses always win, regardless of which side prevails in any particular war.



Many of us believe that the US ceased to be a sovereign country when it surrendered control of its monetary system to the FRBS. Ever since Woodrow Wilson's fateful decision, the US has functioned as a corporation, that has to borrow its "own" money from private usurious bankers, rather than as a free and independent nation-state.



If you really are serious about saving America , it is imperative that you act immediately to shut down the FRBS, exactly as President Andrew Jackson did so valiantly 177 years ago to the National Bank, which he called a den of vipers intent on devouring the fruits of our nation's labor. Otherwise no economic recovery plan, no matter how ingenious, possibly can restore our nation's dignity, integrity, and prosperity.



But if you are not willing to take these steps, then perhaps we simply should dissolve our democratic institutions and revert to a military dictatorship. That at least will save us all time, expense, and the heartache of having our "representatives" mislead, deceive, and ignore us. And if Congress willingly has subverted the Constitution by turning a blind eye to the FRBS, then America de facto no longer exists anyway and already has become a dictatorship of the international bankers, which means that your mailings are simply an eloquent but ultimately futile waste of time.



Sincerely,





Michael Korn

This question is neither insane nor preposterous.

It's about life or death, about a sustainable future or none at all.

Thank God an awe-inspiring majority of humans worldwide share the wise conviction that peace is desirable and the crucial precondition for a continuation of life on our blue planet, since its ultimate enemy is man - under the curse of self-destructivity.

To help us understand this simple fact Economics Professor Ismael Hossein-Zadeh wrote "The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism". In his scholarly study he explores some of the critical forces behind the urge of the U.S. for increasing militarization of its foreign policy leading to wars.

His carefully researched and easily comprehensible masterwork is a groundbreaking "Political Economy of War", even if it does not reach the depth of reflection of historians like Caroll Quigley or Antony Sutton. The "Political Economy of War" sheds light on the looming perils emerging from a cost-inefficient, parasitic military imperialism that rules the U.S. and has become an end in itself. The U.S. spend more dollars each year on its military than the next twenty largest national defense budgets combined which is about half of the world's total military spending.

"The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism" spotlights the so called "military-industrial complex" (MIC) that encompasses the U.S. armed forces, arms industry, and associated economic and political interests that President Eisenhower had vainly warned us against.

In his economical and historical analysis Prof. Hossein-Zadeh sets forth the development of the U.S. military posture up to the present-day and the escalating costs of the disproportional military buildup at the expense of non-military public spending (i.e. at the expense of the needy). The heavily oversized machinery of militarism tries to appropriate an increasing share of tax dollars.

And again we hear General Eisenhower's warning: "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

The statistics are on the General's side: Without counting the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan the real defense budget in 2004 amounts to $754 Billions (compared to spending on Education $55 Billions, Health $49 Billions, Justice $34 Billions, Housing Assistance $30 Billions etc.). The deplorable truth is: last year 46.6 % of the national tax dollars went to the Pentagon...

With compelling reasoning Prof. Hossein-Zadeh unveils an unheard and horrifying sphere of everlasting darkness. Stunned we learn that there are OTHERS who perceive peace as a pernicious threat and consider pacifism as something bordering treason, whereas patriotism is touted as simply meaning a readiness to go to war! The others have declared war on peace, since they believe it is a curse. What a cursed belief!

As beneficiaries of war and militarization these "others" are wretchedly LOST in their nightmares of market driven need for increase of profits, flowing out of streams of shed blood and from under piles of rubbles. They are captured by the incubus of greed for increasing "war dividends" and economic growth through militarization - warfare - rebuilding - and then more wars - more rebuilding - more wars - and so on... leading to unspeakable devastations and deaths mainly among defenseless civilians (heartlessly labeled as "collateral damage"). And "the others" remain pitiably trapped in a vicious circle fuelled by mammonism - the capital SIN they have possibly never heard of, while they were merely focusing on CAPITAL and its accumulation.

Since arms production is not dictated anymore by war requirements, but solely by market or profit imperatives the war on peace must go on and on, unending, being solely a war OF terror, FOR terror, and nothing else. And that's the stratagem well thought-out in the chilly cave of everlasting darkness where wars are designed and tears freeze.

"The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism" reveals - as many similar books do - a realm of deception, corruption, death and devastation executed by people with a good conscience and a consciousness devoid of empathy and repentance, since "war is big business".

While many just want to make a decent living by executing their jobs, they (help) execute lives, being executioners themselves or henchmen of "creative destruction". And who cares that in May 2001 the deputy inspector general at the Pentagon "admitted ... that $1.1 TRILLION ... was simply gone and no one can be sure of when, where or to whom the money went"?

You didn't know?

It's even worse: just one day before 9/11 Rumsfeld admitted that $2.3 Trillions couldn't be tracked...

Yes, it's unbelievable, but who cares? Who cares? For sure not the brotherhood of death! They know the value and price of full spectrum dominance through nuclear first strike capability and US-$- worlddominance!

"The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism" exposes how these unending wars are based on fears of the public over manufactured or imaginary security threats. The official justifications for wars have over the last decade become increasingly nebulous: humanitarian concerns, international drug trafficking, global terrorism, militant Islam, or democratic ideals - all smoke screens.

The truth again: America's "need" for military spending and warfare is mainly not driven by "national interests" or "security needs" but rather by a network of "weapons makers, lobbyists and elected officials", largely wasting and plundering the citizens' tax dollars appropriated by the Pentagon.

Sadly many Americans and many academic institutions are in vicious economic dependence on military spending. Millions of hard working people who try to make a decent living have acquired a vested interest in an economy geared to murderous illicit wars fought for business reasons: You shall not murder - You shall not steal - You shall not desire your neighbor's goods - have no meaning anymore in the land of freedom (from awareness and empathy). Shall the mantra "kill and torture; spare not!" really be all of the Law?

The U.S. has succumbed to the force of scrounging militarism that now "tends to undermine the economic base it is supposed to nurture. Furthermore, control of the massive amounts of national resources by the military-industrial complex tends to undermine democratic values, pervert republican principles, and curtail civil liberties. It also tends to corrupt both policy and politics at home and abroad." The perverse dynamics of the business of war has transformed the U.S. into the greatest debtor nation in the world, a consumptive Empire facing bankruptcy...

Prof. Hossein-Zadeh's analysis gives an explanation why U.S. militarism and warfare are the essence of a black hole imprisoning all sunrays of hope for a more peaceful world, a desirable world in lasting peace with the United States freed from suicidal imperial hubris.

For now that's just a dream, a good dream, yes.

But as long as the hearts are not redirected to the spirit of truth, compassion and generosity and the MIC is not confined to the levels necessary for purely defensive purposes and profits are taken OUT of war and arms production, we will be lost in reverie, forever menaced by the chilly black hole where wars are designed and the world is deceived.

Don't believe me?

Listen to General S. D. Butler - one of the most decorated military men in U.S. history:

"There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket."

Anymore questions in the land of the free where the Military Commissions Act annulled that Bill and NSPD 51-"Continuty of Government"-Tyranny is looming?

God bless those who truly love peace, since it is war (not profit loss) that is to be feared!

Said Huber, attorney, former officer of Artillery of the Swiss Armed Forces, currently Major of Military Justice (clerk of the Military Supreme Court of Switzerland)