Monday, September 10, 2007

A coup in the US future

From today's New York TIMES:

>>September 10, 2007

Americans Feel Military Is Best at Ending the War

Americans trust military commanders far more than the Bush administration or Congress to bring the war in Iraq to a successful end, and while most favor a withdrawal of American troops beginning next year, they suggested they were open to doing so at a measured pace, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll. ...

The poll found that both Congress, whose approval rating now stands at its lowest level since Democrats took control from the Republicans last year, and Mr. Bush enter the debate with little public confidence in their ability to deal with Iraq. Only 5 percent of Americans — a strikingly low number for a sitting president’s handling of such a dominant issue — said they most trusted the Bush administration to resolve the war, the poll found. Asked to choose among the administration, Congress and military commanders, 21 percent said they would most trust Congress and 68 percent expressed most trust in military commanders.<<

COMMENT: if these numbers continue and start to apply to more and more issues in US politics, we should expect a military coup d'etat in the future (in a decade or two?) After all, neoliberalism and especially the Bush 2 version of that disease have messed up the economy and made it almost impossible for the "loyal opposition" (the Dems) to do better. The country's becoming more and more like Latin America, so it may come a time when a golpe del estado is a normal event.
Jim

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

jim

i was wondering if the army would refuse to attack iran if so ordered.

seems a big big question.

Econoclast said...

OOOPS, I forgot to put the question mark at the end of the title of this entry.

But it may be worthwhile to look at the old -- 1970s? -- article by Edward Luttwak about the possibility of a coup in the U.S. The odds were low -- and they still are. But the odds of a coup are rising.
Jim

Econoclast said...

Oh, yes: the question is NOT "if the army would refuse to attack Iran if so ordered." Rather, it's whether the Air Force would obey or not. The army and Marines are totally tied down already, in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Jim

Anonymous said...

With so little press coverage being allocated to Air Force activities and brass it seems a good bet that the fly boys will be feeling their oats, chomping at the bit so to speak, for a chance to prove their mettle. Isn't "shock and awe" an Air Force trade marked event? Air Force generals deserve their place in the spot light so I'm throwing my weight behind a thorough and devastating display of aerial destruction. What better place to carry out the show than the mountains and plains of Iran? It's been too long a time since the Persians devastated the ancient Spartans in a lop-sided battle commemorated by that crocumentary, The 300. Besides those Revolutionary Guards are the very same terrorists that plucked the feathers from the Peacock Thrown and sent our good pal the Shah running. His escape from the horde of the discontented beasts was hampered only by the weight of the gold bricks packed into his luggage.

So onward to Iran. Avenge our fallen hero, the Shah. Give the Air Force a chance to squander a gazillion $$ worth of armaments in defense of liberty across the near and middle east. Of course those Chinese guys to the north east might be a tad bit upset if we end up screwing up yet another oil supply line. Maybe George and Dick better think this escapade over a bit more. I sure hope that Noam is wrong in his latest assessment of just how nuts, aaah make that desperate, the boys at the helm really are.

Myrtle Blackwood said...

A coup in the past in the US? Logically a mindset that supports coups in other nations would look to coups at home.

1963 – Assassination of President Kennedy. Kennedy declares his intention to reform the central banking system of the US not long before he was killed. VP Johnson implicated (See Oliver Stone's move 'JFK' for details).
One of the last things John F. Kennedy did before he was assassinated was [apart from state his intention to end the Vietnam military engagement] declare his intention to reform the central banking system of the United States. No connection between these events?
Congressman Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee from 1927-33, opposed the Federal Reserve System. There were three reported attempts on his life before he finally died of "heart failure."
Here's what he said about the Federal Reserve from the floor of Congress:
"Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of these United States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the defects of the law under which it operates, through the mal-administration of that law by the Fed and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it."

1964 – The war in Vietnam is ramped up. Resulting financial problems for the US.

1964 – $9 billion Eurodollar market
“During LBJ’s term, the Eurodollar market mushroomed from $9 billion in 1964 to more than $40 billion, forcing the administration to step away from at least some of its hegemonic burden as “reserve banker to the world.”

1965 – US supported coup in Indonesia by General Suharto
“When General Suharto staged his bloody coup in Indonesia in 1965, he did so with cooperation from the United States and Europe.

1967 – 1973 – pressure from the Air Force and military-industrial complex to create worst-case scenarios on the Soviet threat.

1968 – Assassination of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy and Black Civil Rights leader. (Vietnam War)
1968 – Economic Hit Man visits Ecuador. Oil. Texaco

1968 – The last vestige of legal reserve and reserve ratio requirements (against the US Federal Reserve Note, demand deposit and inter-bank demand deposit (IBDD) liabilities of the Reserve banks) eliminated. (Vietnam War)

1968 – Interest rates raised to levels unparalleled for forty years. Caused as JK Galbraith said by the eccentric enterprise of the Vietnam War and the long delay by Congress in raising taxes to offset the increased expenditure from the war. An unparalled reliance on monetary policy.

YouNotSneaky! said...

Uh. What does Bush have to do with neoliberalism?

Very nice blog, BTW.

Econoclast said...

>Uh. What does Bush have to do with neoliberalism?<

Neoliberalism is Bush's official economic ideology. Faith-based initiatives are supposed to dull the sharp edge of the laissez-faire knife, replacing the Welfare state.

But he's a politician, so in practice he doesn't follow the neoliberal party line completely. In 2002, for example, he imposed restrictions on imported steel. That's a neoliberal no-no. Also, officially neoliberals are against "crony capitalism." But Bushie has appointed large numbers of his cronies to run government agencies (such people as Michael Brown at FEMA or Gonzo at the Department of Justice -- and he wanted Harriet Miers to be on the Supreme Court).
Jim

Anonymous said...

with politicians, ideology is a song to sing to the masses.

Anonymous said...

if we're thinking of u.s. civil-military relations in terms of lat am, we should probably consider the possibility of indirect military governance, i.e. behind and through the facade of elected civilians who themselves tend to become 'militarized'.