The Neocons Are Back -- With a Big War Budget and Big War Plans
March 28, 2018
Ron Paul / The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity & Patrick J. Buchanan / AntiWar.com
Commentary: "Trump signed the omnibus spending bill for 2018. The $1.3 trillion bill was so monstrous that it would have made the biggest spender in the Obama Administration blush. This is why I often say: forget about needing a third political party -- we need a second political party! Trump is admitting that to fuel the warfare state and enrich the military-industrial complex, it was necessary to dump endless tax dollars into the welfare state."
Trump Prepares for Costly Aggression
Neocons Are Back
With a Big War Budget and Big War Plans
Ron Paul / The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
(March 27, 2018) -- On Friday, President Trump signed the omnibus spending bill for 2018. The $1.3 trillion bill was so monstrous that it would have made the biggest spender in the Obama Administration blush. The image of leading Congressional Democrats Pelosi and Schumer grinning and gloating over getting everything they wanted -- and then some -- will likely come back to haunt Republicans at the midterm elections. If so, they will deserve it.
Even President Trump admitted the bill was horrible. As he said in the signing ceremony, "there are a lot of things that we shouldn't have had in this bill, but we were, in a sense, forced -- if we want to build our military . . . "
This is why I often say: forget about needing a third political party -- we need a second political party! Trump is admitting that to fuel the warfare state and enrich the military-industrial complex, it was necessary to dump endless tax dollars into the welfare state.
But no one "forced" President Trump to sign the bill. His party controls both houses of Congress. He knows that no one in Washington cares about deficits so he was more than willing to spread some Fed-created money at home to get his massive war spending boost.
And about the militarism funded by the bill? Defense Secretary James Mattis said at the same press conference that, "As the President noted, today we received the largest military budget in history, reversing many years of decline and unpredictable funding."
He's right and wrong at the same time. Yes it is another big increase in military spending. In fact the US continues to spend more than at least the next seven or so largest countries combined.
But his statement is misleading. Where are these several years of decline? Did we somehow miss a massive reduction in military spending under President Obama? Did the last Administration close the thousands of military bases in more than 150 countries while we weren't looking?
Of course not.
On militarism, the Obama Administration was just an extension of the Bush Administration, which was an extension of the militarism of the Clinton Administration. And so on. The military-industrial complex continues to generate record profits from fictitious enemies. The mainstream media continues to play the game, amplifying the war propaganda produced by the think tanks, which are funded by the big defense contractors.
This isn't a conspiracy theory. This is conspiracy fact. Enemies must be created to keep Washington rich, even as the rest of the country suffers from the destruction of the dollar. That is why the neocons continue to do very well in this Administration.
While Trump and Mattis were celebrating big military spending increases, the president announced that John Bolton, one of the chief architects of the Iraq war debacle, would become his national security advisor. As former CIA analyst Paul Pillar has written, this is a man who, while at the State Department, demanded that intelligence analysts reach predetermined conclusions about Iraq and WMDs. He cooked the books for war.
Bolton is on the record calling for war with Iran, North Korea, even Cuba! His return to a senior position in government is a return to the unconstitutional, immoral, and failed policies of preemptive war.
Make no mistake: the neocons are back and looking for another war. They've got the president's ear. Iran? North Korea? Russia? China? Who's next for the warmongers?
Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity
Is Trump Assembling a War Cabinet?
Patrick J. Buchanan / AntiWar.com
(March 27, 2018) -- The last man standing between the US and war with Iran may be a four-star general affectionately known to his Marines as "Mad Dog."
Gen. James Mattis, the secretary of defense, appears to be the last man in the Situation Room who believes the Iran nuclear deal may be worth preserving and that war with Iran is a dreadful idea. Yet, other than Mattis, President Donald Trump seems to be creating a war cabinet.
Trump himself has pledged to walk away from the Iran nuclear deal -- "the worst deal ever" -- and reimpose sanctions in May. His new national security adviser John Bolton, who wrote an op-ed titled "To Stop Iran's Bomb, Bomb Iran," has called for preemptive strikes and "regime change."
Secretary of State-designate Mike Pompeo calls Iran "a thuggish police state," a "despotic theocracy," and "the vanguard of a pernicious empire that is expanding its power and influence across the Middle East."
Trump's favorite Arab ruler, 32-year-old Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman, calls Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei "the Hitler of the Middle East."
Bibi Netanyahu is monomaniacal on Iran, calling the nuclear deal a threat to Israel's survival and Iran "the greatest threat to our world." UN Ambassador Nikki Haley echoes them all.
Yet Iran appears not to want a war. UN inspectors routinely confirm that Iran is strictly abiding by the terms of the nuclear deal.
While US warships in the Persian Gulf often encountered Iranian "fast attack" boats and drones between January 2016 and August 2017, that has stopped. Vessels of both nations have operated virtually without incident.
What would be the result of Trump's trashing of the nuclear deal?
First would be the isolation of the United States.
China and Russia would not abrogate the deal but would welcome Iran into their camp. England, France and Germany would have to choose between the deal and the US And if Airbus were obligated to spurn Iran's orders for hundreds of new planes, how would that sit with the Europeans?
How would North Korea react if the US trashed a deal where Iran, after accepting severe restrictions on its nuclear program and allowing intrusive inspections, were cheated of the benefits the Americans promised?
Why would Pyongyang, having seen us attack Iraq, which had no WMD, and Libya, which had given up its WMD to mollify us, ever consider given up its nuclear weapons -- especially after seeing the leaders of both nations executed?
And, should the five other signatories to the Iran deal continue with it despite us, and Iran agree to abide by its terms, what do we do then? Find a casus belli to go to war? Why? How does Iran threaten us?
A war, which would involve US warships against swarms of Iranian torpedo boats could shut down the Persian Gulf to oil traffic and produce a crisis in the global economy. Anti-American Shiite jihadists in Beirut, Baghdad and Bahrain could attack US civilian and military personnel.
As the Army and Marine Corps do not have the troops to invade and occupy Iran, would we have to reinstate the draft?
And if we decided to blockade and bomb Iran, we would have to take out all its anti-ship missiles, submarines, navy, air force, ballistic missiles and air defense system.
And would not a pre-emptive strike on Iran unite its people in hatred of us, just as Japan's pre-emptive strike on Pearl Harbor united us in a determination to annihilate her empire?
What would the Dow Jones average look like after an attack on Iran?
Trump was nominated because he promised to keep us out of stupid wars like those into which folks like John Bolton and the Bush Republicans plunged us.
After 17 years, we are still mired in Afghanistan, trying to keep the Taliban we overthrew in 2001 from returning to Kabul. Following our 2003 invasion, Iraq, once a bulwark against Iran, became a Shiite ally of Iran.
The rebels we supported in Syria have been routed. And Bashar Assad -- thanks to backing from Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and Shiite militias from the Middle East and Central Asia -- has secured his throne.
The Kurds who trusted us have been hammered by our NATO ally Turkey in Syria, and by the Iraqi Army we trained in Iraq.
What is Trump, who assured us there would be no more stupid wars, thinking? Truman and LBJ got us into wars they could not end, and both lost their presidencies. Eisenhower and Nixon ended those wars and were rewarded with landslides.
After his smashing victory in Desert Storm, Bush I was denied a second term. After invading Iraq, Bush II lost both houses of Congress in 2006, and his party lost the presidency in 2008 to the antiwar Barack Obama.
Once Trump seemed to understand this history.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World. To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, visit the Creators Web page at www.creators.com. Copyright 2017 Creators.com
Posted in accordance with Title 17, Section 107, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.