Thankfully, although Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak has called out the army in response to the mounting protests against his government, so far the tanks have become a meeting place for protesters and the troops, not a tool of repression. Let's hope it stays that way, and that the military throws itself to the side of democracy rather than propping up Mubarak's corrupt regime.
But even as the political situation unfolds on the streets of Cairo, the question of U.S. support for Mubarak's 30-year rule looms large. And much of that support has come in the form of military aid, $1.3 billion per year like clockwork throughout that entire period. And as Middle East expert Juan Cole noted in a recent appearance on Democracy Now!, most of that aid has been simply a pass through that goes to Egypt and then right back into the coffers of U.S. corporations.
According to lists of arms sales notifications compiled by the Pentagon's Defense Security Assistance Agency, in the last decade alone, the Department of Defense has brokered over $11 billion in U.S. arms offers to the Egyptian regime on behalf of weapons makers like Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing, Raytheon, and General Electric. Aside from some leftover Soviet equipment from the pre-Camp David era (before 1979), the Egyptian military is virtually made in the USA. Fighter planes (Lockheed Martin F-16s), tanks (General Dynamics's M-1A1s), missiles (Harpoon, TOW, Hellfire, and Stinger, made by Boeing, Raytheon, and Lockheed Martin), howitzers (United Defense), aircraft engines (General Electric) have all been purchased for the Egyptian armed forces with U.S. taxpayer dollars. The biggest winners have been Lockheed Martin ($3.8 billion); General Dynamics ($2.5 billion); Boeing ($1.7 billion); Raytheon ($750 million); and GE ($750 million).
Now that the Obama administration has at least suggested that U.S. aid may be reconsidered based on how harshly the Mubarak regime continues to crack down on democracy protesters, it is possible that this gravy train for contractors could come to an end. Post-Mubarak, the question will arise as to whether a new government wants to keep such close military ties to the U.S., and even if it does, whether it wants to maintain Mubarak's bloated, made-in-the-U.S.A. arsenal. But there will no doubt be efforts by Washington to use its ties to the military in Egypt to shape the potential outcome there, and dangling more weapons deals while selling support services and spare parts to maintain Egypt's existing weapons might become part of that strategy.
Most likely, even after all those years of supplying weapons and training, the Egyptian military will take its own course, independently of what Washington may want. And if an anti-U.S. regime comes into power, it will be extremely well armed with U.S.-supplied weapons. Could the same happen in Saudi Arabia, which Washington is furiously arming as we speak, with a record $60 billion weapons deal in the works? Perhaps the White House and the Pentagon should take a breather from pouring weapons into the region and allow the democratic currents there to play out.
U.S. total debt $55.6 trillion and rising ... U.S. federal debt $14.1 trillion and rising ... U.S. federal deficit $1.5 trillion and rising ... U.S. dollar rapidly losing world reserve currency status ... as U.S. politicians bought and paid for by multinational corporations (legalized by Citizens United vs. FEC) cut education, close schools, convert asphalt roads to gravel and accelerate America's descent into oblivion just so they can dole out millions daily to Lockheed Martin and other repeat-offender federal contractors for Rube Goldberg weapons systems and myriad military and non-defense boondoggles as unnecessary, unaffordable and unjustifiable as our unending wars for oil and profit:
http://watchingfrogsboil.com/dod-daily-doles-to-lockheed-martin-first-in-f
"(Prior to WWII) the United States had no armaments industry. We have (since) been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions...this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government.
We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all U.S. corporations. We must not fail to comprehend the grave implications...Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence... by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes."
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Farewell Address - January, 1961
In spite of the level of US defense spending at that time, John Kennedy ran on a plank that accused the Eisenhower administration of allowing us to fall behind the Russians in military technology. Eisenhower and Nixon both knew that was BS based on the intelligence from U2 overflights but couldn't reveal that information.
The cumulative increase in the base defense budget is estimated to reach $1.46 trillion by the end of fiscal year 2011, while the total spending for the wars is approximately $1.22 trillion, a combined total of $2.68 trillion.
No accounting slight of hand will diminish the non-productive impact of these staggering sums, be they 5%, 7% or 10% of our declining GDP measured in other than U.S. dollars. In hindsight, we will find the severity of the direct threat posed by Islamic extremism extremely overblown - our reactions woefully ineffective and the added deficit serving only to bankrupt the nation.
We always fail abroad because we always support the worst to attack mythical powers. Iran for example is not remotely a threat but we insist it is. Like the old Soviet Union.
America has always been the same, boasting about freedom while keeping slaves, teaching about Lincoln while ignoring he did not think "Negros" were equal to Whites and fighting fascism with segregated troops and anti-Semitic generals. Lincoln would have been dismayed to see Obama in the White House and given all the Birthers in America we are either a stupid nation or racist.
We have never been different and we will never change.
How shallow Obama's Cairo speech looks now as he tries his best to support a tyrant but events forced him to side with "peaceful change". What right does he have to insist it is peaceful? What right do Americans who would not know an honest system of government if it dropped on their heads have to insist the people of Egypt do not seek revenge? There are American styled gated communities full of Mubarak's beneficiaries and we have allowed that from Nixon onwards.
The least we could do is provide them weapons to protect themselves from Oligarchs.
And yet you list several examples of how we have changed. When our country was founded only white men could vote and we enslaved people. Since that time we abolished slavery, freed those enslaved and eventually granted them the same rights as all other citizens. Women were granted the right to vote and restrictions on their role in society have been removed as well.
We may not have a perfect democracy but we have made tremendous strides in our over 230 years of existance.
As for Egypt, Mubarek is the latest leader of a military dictatorship which overthrew a corrupt monarchy in 1952. For most of it's existence this military regime pursued a strategy of conflict with Israel, received military aid from the Soviet Union and was not a friend of the US. With the Camp David accords we agreed to replace the Soviet Union as their supplier of military equipment and provide $1-1.5 bil/yr in aid. Egypt has played a very constructive role in the Middle East since that time and is one of our most important allies. However, we didn't put this regime in place, we haven't kept the regime in power and we don't have and never have had the power to change the regime.
http://books.google.com/books?id=7v-g21ksdVsC&lpg=PP1&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false
And now the largest bank in Kabul is in trouble - sound familiar?
Just because you support the merchants of death - as long as it's not anyone on your side.
http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2011/01/us-hegemony-and-the-crises-called-egypt/
These are wars of choice that we were forced into because of our Israel Lobby-dominated foreign policy that supports the Neocon/Israeli Clean Break Plan for the Middle East, and the blowback from the pro-Israel policies that the Israeli Lobby has been bullying American politicians into supporting (if they are not already members of the Israeli Lobby themselves like a Kyl or Lieberman or Graham pushing Neocon wars) and have inflicted on the Middle East for decades
These wars have bankrupted the US - they haven't given America jobs.
Wars that we are manipulated into by Israel to destroy her enemies in the ME for her are by definition warcrimes - just as the Israeli occupation of Palestine that she manages to get the US to support for her is thoroughly illegal and is itself a warcrime
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-oceans-of-blood-and-profits-for-the-mongers-of-war-2145037.html