Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Trumping Hillary: The Same Old Pol-Mil Game

Will the 2016 Election Change America’s Militarized Foreign Policy?

By Chuck Spinney | The Blaster | June 27, 2016

Pro-Israel Neocons have said they will jump off the Republican ship and vote for Hillary Clinton, because she will continue business as usual with regard to our militarized foreign policy.  Apologists for Donald Trump argue that he will pursue a more restrained and less warlike foreign policy, including a more balanced policy toward Israel.

But recent  report by Stuart Winer in the Times of Israel suggests Trump’s bombastic ‘art of the deal,’ at least when applied to pol-mil policy, will turn out to be yet another politician’s distinction without a difference — to wit:

A senior adviser to Donald Trump said Wednesday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should wait for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee to win the White House before signing a military aid deal with Washington, because Trump would offer a better deal than the Obama administration.

In an interview with Channel 2 television David Friedman said that a Trump administration would maintain Israel’s military advantage over its neighbors. He said Trump would not reduce defense aid to Israel but “in all likelihood will increase it significantly.”

“The aid package will certainly not go down in all likelihood it will go up in a material amount because Israel must maintain a technological and military superiority within the region,” Freidman said. “I can’t give advice how Israel should bargain and develop its own strategy.”

Friedman’s suggestion that Trump would increase aid to Israel apparently ran contrary to the GOP candidate’s call to make Israel pay back foreign aid. In March, Trump said he believed Israel should pay for defense aid it receives from the US.

Could it be that the choice for President in 2016 will have no effect on America’s militarized foreign policy, and if so, would this be something new and different?

As with most political questions in Versailles on the Potomac, the pathway to answering this question is less one of Ivory-tower policy analysis than a gritty one of following the money  — in this case the money flowing through the triangular relations of the Military – Industrial – Congressional Complex. It is a question that goes to the heart of President Eisenhower’s prophetic warning, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.”

More on this question later.

June 29, 2016 - Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , ,

2 Comments »

  1. It seems that, when it comes to American priorities, the American people come a distant last, while Israel’s needs are foremost. How can this be possible, and why do the American people seem to accept it??
    What has happened to the United States of Israel?

    Like

    Comment by Brian Harry, Australia | June 29, 2016 | Reply

    • We no longer live in a democratic republic, but a tyranny that serves Israel and the banksters. Our nation’s infrastructure is in pathetic shape, busted up highways; bridges closed or falling down; 50,000 or so dams that need immediate repair; and electrical grid in woeful shape; crowded and outdated public schools; so many wounded vets that got that way fighting ‘Wars for Wall Street and Israel’ that the VA is overwhelmed, yet when our needs come up, we’re told there’s no money. But when Israel snaps its fingers, politicians fight to be the first one to offer up a handsome package of free money and weapons to Israel.

      Palestine isn’t the only country under occupation, but at least they fight it. Most Americans bend over and beg for another load.

      Like

      Comment by Greg Bacon | June 29, 2016 | Reply


Leave a reply to Brian Harry, Australia Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.