Dennis Kucinich’s Extraordinary Warning on D.C.’s Think Tank Warmongers

Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

screen-shot-2016-10-27-at-12-59-40-pm

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

– From Major General Smedley Butler’s War is a Rackett

Former Congressman Dennis Kucinich has just penned an extremely powerful warning about the warmongers in Washington D.C. Who funds them, what their motives are, and why it is imperative for the American people to stop them.

The piece was published at The Nation and is titled: Why Is the Foreign Policy Establishment Spoiling for More War? Look at Their Donors.

Read it and share it with everyone you know.

Washington, DC, may be the only place in the world where people openly flaunt their pseudo-intellectuality by banding together, declaring themselves “think tanks,” and raising money from external interests, including foreign governments, to compile reports that advance policies inimical to the real-life concerns of the American people.

As a former member of the House of Representatives, I remember 16 years of congressional hearings where pedigreed experts came to advocate wars in testimony based on circular, rococo thinking devoid of depth, reality, and truth. I remember other hearings where the Pentagon was unable to reconcile over $1 trillion in accounts, lost track of $12 billion in cash sent to Iraq, and rigged a missile-defense test so that an interceptor could easily home in on a target. War is first and foremost a profitable racket.

How else to explain that in the past 15 years this city’s so called bipartisan foreign policy elite has promoted wars in Iraq and Libya, and interventions in Syria and Yemen, which have opened Pandora’s box to a trusting world, to the tune of trillions of dollars, a windfall for military contractors. DC’s think “tanks” should rightly be included in the taxonomy of armored war vehicles and not as gathering places for refugees from academia.

According to the front page of this past Friday’s Washington Post, the bipartisan foreign-policy elite recommends the next president show less restraint than President Obama. Acting at the urging of “liberal” hawks brandishing humanitarian intervention, read war, the Obama administration attacked Libya along with allied powers working through NATO.

Indeed, I warned about this in last week’s piece: U.S. Foreign Policy ‘Elite’ Eagerly Await an Expansion of Overseas Wars Under Hillary Clinton.

The think tankers fell in line with the Iraq invasion. Not being in the tank, I did my own analysis of the call for war in October of 2002, based on readily accessible information, and easily concluded that there was no justification for war. I distributed it widely in Congress and led 125 Democrats in voting against the Iraq war resolution. There was no money to be made from a conclusion that war was uncalled for, so, against millions protesting in the United States and worldwide, our government launched into an abyss, with a lot of armchair generals waving combat pennants. The marching band and chowder society of DC think tanks learned nothing from the Iraq and Libya experience.

The only winners were arms dealers, oil companies, and jihadists. Immediately after the fall of Libya, the black flag of Al Qaeda was raised over a municipal building in Benghazi, Gadhafi’s murder was soon to follow, with Secretary Clinton quipping with a laugh, “We came, we saw, he died.” President Obama apparently learned from this misadventure, but not the Washington policy establishment, which is spoiling for more war.

The self-identified liberal Center for American Progress (CAP) is now calling for Syria to be bombed, and estimates America’s current military adventures will be tidied up by 2025, a tardy twist on “mission accomplished.” CAP, according to a report in The Nation, has received funding from war contractors Lockheed Martin and Boeing, who make the bombers that CAP wants to rain hellfire on Syria.

The Brookings Institute has taken tens of millions from foreign governments, notably Qatar, a key player in the military campaign to oust Assad. Retired four-star Marine general John Allen is now a Brookings senior fellow. Charles Lister is a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, which has received funding from Saudi Arabia, the major financial force providing billions in arms to upend Assad and install a Sunni caliphate stretching across Iraq and Syria. Foreign-government money is driving our foreign policy.

As the drumbeat for an expanded war gets louder, Allen and Lister jointly signed an op-ed in the Sunday Washington Post, calling for an attack on Syria. The Brookings Institute, in a report to Congress, admitted it received $250,000 from the US Central Command, Centcom, where General Allen shared leadership duties with General David Petraeus. Pentagon money to think tanks that endorse war? This is academic integrity, DC-style.

And why is Central Command, as well as the Food and Drug Administration, the US Department of transportation, and the US Department of Health and Human Services giving money to Brookings?

Former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, who famously told Colin Powell, “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it,” predictably says of this current moment, “We do think there needs to be more American action.” A former Bush administration top adviser is also calling forthe United States to launch a cruise missile attack on Syria.

The American people are fed up with war, but a concerted effort is being made through fearmongering, propaganda, and lies to prepare our country for a dangerous confrontation, with Russia in Syria.

The demonization of Russia is a calculated plan to resurrect a raison d’être for stone-cold warriors trying to escape from the dustbin of history by evoking the specter of Russian world domination.

It’s infectious. Earlier this year the BBC broadcast a fictional show that contemplated WWIII, beginning with a Russian invasion of Latvia (where 26 percent of the population is ethnic Russian and 34 percent of Latvians speak Russian at home).

The imaginary WWIII scenario conjures Russia’s targeting London for a nuclear strike. No wonder that by the summer of 2016 a poll showed two-thirds of UK citizens approved the new British PM’s launching a nuclear strike in retaliation. So much for learning the lessons detailed in the Chilcot report.

As this year’s presidential election comes to a conclusion, the Washington ideologues are regurgitating the same bipartisan consensus that has kept America at war since 9/11 and made the world a decidedly more dangerous place.

The DC think tanks provide cover for the political establishment, a political safety net, with a fictive analytical framework providing a moral rationale for intervention, capitol casuistry. I’m fed up with the DC policy elite who cash in on war while presenting themselves as experts, at the cost of other people’s lives, our national fortune, and the sacred honor of our country.

Any report advocating war that comes from any alleged think tank ought to be accompanied by a list of the think tank’s sponsors and donors and a statement of the lobbying connections of the report’s authors.

It is our patriotic duty to expose why the DC foreign-policy establishment and its sponsors have not learned from their failures and instead are repeating them, with the acquiescence of the political class and sleepwalkers with press passes.

It is also time for a new peace movement in America, one that includes progressives and libertarians alike, both in and out of Congress, to organize on campuses, in cities, and towns across America, to serve as an effective counterbalance to the Demuplican war party, its think tanks, and its media cheerleaders. The work begins now, not after the Inauguration. We must not accept war as inevitable, and those leaders who would lead us in that direction, whether in Congress or the White House, must face visible opposition.

Thank you Mr. Kucinich, I couldn’t agree more.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Silverado

    So out of the two candidates that have a realistic chance at being elected which one do you think would have the fortitude and brass balls to do here what needs to be done? Crooked Hillary the warmonger or the non-politician & non-warmonger Donald Trump who probably hasn’t killed one human unlike her? That’s what I thought. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and that’s why he’ll get my vote. Here’s more on what I and millions of others really think about Trump – http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/10/trumps_invisible_shield.html

  • Jun 29, 2016 Neoconservatives Endorse Hillary Clinton for President Because They Know She’s One of Them

    Neoconservatives like Iraq warmonger Robert Kagan aren’t endorsing Hillary Clinton for president merely because they want rid of Donald Trump, but because she’s one of them, writes Trevor Timm at The Guardian.

    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/neoconservatives_endorse_hillary_clinton_for_president_because_they_know_sh/

    • Silverado

      I agree. Basically it’s the “neverTrumper’s” who are the warmongering neocons. They’re RINO’s (The Bush clan, John McCain and Lindsey Graham come to mind) and they’re DemocRATs and if they’re pro-war and support all this military adventurism besides needing to be locked up for their many ongoing crimes, they are also traitorous in their support of the criminal globalist leaning crooked Hillary and her cronies.

      • If you have seen this link before my apologies ahead of time, and if not please share anywhere so folks can have a clear view and understanding Silverado.

        June 13, 2016 Which Corporations Control The World?

        A surprisingly small number of corporations control massive global market shares. How many of the brands below do you use?

        http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44864.htm

  • plumplum

    If these fools take the world to war, they will have to live in it .. until they are eaten by survivors or die under a nuclear winter sky. I think it only fitting that they will be some of the last to die.
    I hope very very painfully and over a lingering period.
    Of course, if the militaries of the world refused to attack each other on the whim of these blood soaked warwhores, we might stand a chance.

  • SkipR

    If Trump sticks to his campaign rhetoric and keeps the delusional neocons at arm’s length he could be JFKed and/or 911ed if an intentional currency crash doesn’t work. It worked with Mandela when he tried to nationalize the South African banks.

    This reminds me of an interview I saw of the neocon Richard Pearle back in the mid-80s. With an insane look on his face he talked about how easy it would be to totally take over the USSR with a fleet of aircraft carriers that would sail over and around Scandinavia. I wonder if he would have become one of giggling Hillary’s advisors if she had won.

    The ongoing propaganda tsunami reminds me of a scene out of the funny movie Thank You for Smoking. When the tobacco’s industry chief propagandist described his methods to his intelligent son, he responded by saying how stupid they were. The father then said that they were not aimed at people like him but at “them.” There are a lot of marching “thems” on TV these days.

Navigation