This video from the USA says about itself:
Trump Adds Another Former Goldman Sachs Official to His Administration
19 March 2017
James Donovan’s area of expertise, like most Goldman Sachs folks, is not economics or finance, but law – because that’s how Goldman Sachs makes its money: by evading, controlling and writing the laws.
By Miriam Pemberton in the USA:
More money for wars, less for everything else
Monday 20th March 2016
Trump’s $54 billion increase on military spending is causing plenty of anxiety in the US, writes MIRIAM PEMBERTON
MILLIONS of Americans are feeling uneasy, disgruntled, and insecure. That message sounded loud and clear throughout the turbulent election year.
The Donald Trump administration’s latest budget proposal isn’t likely to placate that.
It comes down to this: lots more money — $54 billion (£43.5bn) in fact — for the military bringing the total up to $639 billion.
That’s “one of the largest increases in defence spending in US history,” as the president put it in his recent speech to the United States Congress. And less money for pretty much everything else.
Giving the military more money seems like a no-brainer way to increase security. But apply a little brain power and you quickly see what’s wrong with this idea.
It’s true, as Trump says, that our troops are having trouble “winning wars” like they used to.
But the Pentagon that sent them into war already has more money than it did during the George W Bush or the Ronald Reagan build-up years. And more money than the next seven countries put together. Besides, what will the military do with all that extra money?
It’s hard to say, because the Defence Department’s accounting systems are so poor that it’s the only federal agency that still can’t pass an audit. Its own Defence Business Board identified $125bn (£100.8bn) in Pentagon waste without breaking a sweat — though the Pentagon made sure to bury this report.
I’m suspicious of the $54 billion figure on other grounds, too. It happens to be 10 per cent of the current budget.
Did they arrive at this number based upon careful consideration of threats and the necessary tools to respond to them? Or did they come up with a nice big, round number to throw at the Pentagon and let them figure out how to spend it?
I think it’s the latter and that doesn’t make me feel safer.
Now let’s look at where they want to cut. Start with the State Department, whose total budget ($29bn) is dwarfed by the extra money they want to give to the Pentagon.
More than 100 retired generals recently put out a statement saying that cutting the diplomacy budget is a bad idea that threatens our security. After all, we’re more likely to go to war if we’re depriving ourselves of the tools to avoid it.
As general Jim Mattis put it back in 2013: “If you don’t fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition.” Mattis now heads the Pentagon.
Further, the military itself says climate change is an “urgent and growing” threat to our security.
The Trump budget would slash funding for the lead agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, in charge of protecting us from that threat.
It’s also hard to feel secure if you think the air you’re breathing and the water you’re drinking might be making you sick.
The same day Trump was telling Congress he’d protect our air and water, he was axing a Barack Obama administration clean water rule.
Another common source of anxiety and anger is the feeling you’ve been ripped off by some bank or retailer and there’s nothing you can do about it. Let’s watch those feelings multiply if the administration succeeds in zeroing out the budget for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
And the list goes on. Imagine the rise in anxiety caused by cuts to the Labour Department’s efforts to protect US workers.
This Insecurity Budget is far from a done deal — the fight over it is likely to go on all year. We’ll need to stand up for a budget that protects our real security priorities every step of the way.
Miriam Pemberton is a Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and directs its Peace Economy Transitions Project.
Trump and his obscene war machine. The U.S. spends billions on un-winnable wars, sacrificing our safety: here.
TRUMP’S MILITARY BUILD-UP ‘PROMISES LITTLE FOR THE WORKING GRUNTS’ David Wood reports on how the big money appears to be going to the fancy weapons, while the troops carry old rifles. [HuffPost]
Pingback: French politician Macron wants forced military conscription back | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Billionaires richer than ever | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States, from Andrew Jackson to Donald Trump | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Kill African child soldiers, Canadian general says | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Tuesday 28th March 2017
posted by Morning Star in Features
Were Trump to launch his own disastrous war today, it’s hard to imagine that Theresa May would take a different path to the unilateral one taken by Tony Blair, writes LINDSEY GERMAN
THE damning of Tony Blair in last summer’s Chilcot report might have led some people to think that this would draw a line under the illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq and stand as a warning to future prime ministers not to go down the same path as Blair. Unfortunately, this is not the case.
A recent report by a parliamentary Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee claims that it is still too easy for a prime minister to disregard Cabinet procedures over foreign and military policy.
Blair’s love note to former US president George W Bush before the war began — “We will be with you, whatever” — was sent against the advice of his officials.
However, the committee concluded that there was no mechanism for anyone, even the high-up civil servant the Cabinet Secretary, to prevent this from happening or to enforce greater involvement of the Cabinet or Parliament.
This is just one way in which the findings, let alone the spirit, of Chilcot are being disregarded.
An unrepentant Blair is attempting to re-establish a political career and is feted throughout the media as journalists demand his opinions on everything from Brexit to Martin McGuinness.
While journalists and editors have lost their jobs, while the reputations of those politicians who went along with Blair’s wars have been damaged, Blair and his henchman Alastair Campbell carry on with a perfect sense that they have been right all along.
The truth is that if there were a situation like Iraq arising again, any British prime minister would be able to act with impunity.
Given the traditions of both parliament and the Civil Service, as well as the fundamentally conservative nature of British establishment institutions, opposition would not even be brought out into the open of parliamentary debate, let alone wider society.
That in itself is a travesty of democracy and a denial of all the suffering brought about by the war, all the campaigning and protesting which was ignored, all the illegality which clearly accompanied Blair’s actions.
But this report shows it’s much worse than that. Let’s look at the situation today.
Thankfully, despite his pretensions and the aspirations of his fan club at the BBC and the Guardian, Blair is not in a position to start new wars and the millstone around his neck is Iraq and always will be.
But we have an unelected prime minister who has already done her utmost to act unilaterally, to ignore any discussion in Parliament and to enforce a “hard Brexit” on right-wing Tory terms.
The counterpart of Bush now in the White House is, of course, Donald Trump.
Theresa May’s obsequious desire to follow Trump’s every move was demonstrated by her rush to the White House for a hand-holding session where she ignored the Muslim ban that he was about to impose and instead offered him a state visit to Britain later this year — a visit which has provoked outraged objections across the political spectrum.
The “special relationship” between Britain and the US — a relationship which demands that Britain follows the US in all things military, including spending — was a major factor in Blair following Bush so closely.
So that even when, in February 2003, US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Britain that it could sit out the war, given the huge scale of opposition to it domestically, the offer was refused and Blair determined Britain should be fully involved.
It is hard to imagine that May would take a different attitude today. And this isn’t just an abstract question. Trump is already showing himself to be far from the non-interventionist president that some hoped.
He has sent troops into Syria to fight around Raqqa, he is responsible for the heavy bombing of Mosul, with many civilian casualties and he is heading very directly for conflict with North Korea, which also means major conflict with China.
The possibility of future war is therefore real and everything points towards uncritical backing as well as probable direct involvement by the British government.
Take events last week. On Monday, Trump announced a ban on laptops and other electronic equipment in the cabins of planes flying from nine Middle Eastern countries. On Tuesday, the British government added its own ban on planes from six Middle Eastern countries including Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. On Wednesday, Trump held a Washington meeting for a wide range of countries to discuss defeating Isis. Perhaps more bans will follow.
These bans are extremely controversial and will be widely opposed. Justified as helping the fight against terrorism, they conveniently ignore the dramatic spread of terrorism since the start of US and British wars in 2001.
The balance sheet of the last 16 years of war has been catastrophic. This latest report demonstrates that we cannot rely on the parliamentary system to prevent further catastrophes, or to hold those culpable to account.
The Stop the War Coalition has been campaigning to break the special relationship with Trump.
This campaign is becoming more urgent as May’s support for Trump becomes clearer and as Trump sets himself on a war path.
The movement should mobilise now — with meetings, protests and petitions — to stop this happening. Campaigners nearly stopped the war in 2003 and mobilised in unprecedented numbers.
Tony Blair may not have learned any lessons from his warmongering but public opinion has been increasingly opposed to further interventions.
That is in large part due to the work of anti-war campaigners. We must be prepared to do what it takes this time round.
The Stop the War Coalition holds its annual general meeting in London on April 22, which is open to members and delegates from groups and affiliates. For further details and campaigning materials, or to join or donate, visit stopwar.org.uk or phone (0207) 561-4830.
Pingback: Donald Trump’s attack on art | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump profiting from his warmongering | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump escalating United States endless wars | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: ‘Nuclear war would kill everyone’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Big anti-Trump demonstration in Brussels | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: European Union becomes more militarist | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: New York Times opposes war profiteers, but only Russian ones | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump squanders billions on warship | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump’s transphobia, Frank Sinatra parody song | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Hungry school children in the USA | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Dutch socialists not Trump’s poodles for Venezuela regime change | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Guam poet against Trump’s nuclear warmongering | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Charlottesville, USA murderous nazism, Donald Trump, many protests | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: British Conservatives, Trump’s poodles on nuclear war | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States war profiteers getting richer | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump, a dangerous warmonger | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States expensive militarism | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Puerto Rico, over 100 days after Hurricane Maria | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump Tower on fire, no to President Pence | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Stop Trump’s militarism, petition | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Stop Trump’s militarist parade plan, petition | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: More money for the Pentagon, less for health care | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States austerity for hurricane-destroyed Puerto Rico | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: West Virginia, USA, teachers on strike | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump brings Iraq war ‘mastermind’ Bolton back | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: More United States taxpayers’ money for wars, less for hungry children | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Massive March for our Lives in the USA | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Belgian action against militarism | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: British billions for wars, poverty for people | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Noam Chomsky on corporate media’s ‘Russia’ obsession | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump says militarism first, workers a poor second | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Rain on Trump’s military parade | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Life expectancy declines in USA, Britain | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Big Okinawa demonstration against US military base | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: No money for US hurricane survivors, money for wars | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump, towards military dictatorship? | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump supports racist Republican in Mississipi election | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Life expectancy in the USA going down | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump spending more taxpayers’ money on militarism | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump’s air force attacks Iraq, Syria, Somalia | Dear Kitty. Some blog