Money, Power, and the Military

I was hanging out with my cousins last night and we ended up watching Iron Man 2, a movie with many references to the weapons industry and the power it has. The movie made me think about the Military Industrial Complex, which we talked about in class this past week.

In an article I found titled “Iron Man: A Cinematic View on the Military Industrial Complex” (the link for which is http://netage.org/2010/05/10/iron-man-cinematic-view-on-the-military-industrial-complex/) the author not only provides a great summary and analysis of the movie, but he also explains how it is connected to the MIC. He talks about the movie’s “direct reference” to the U.S. military and the war in Afghanistan. The writer, Rizzotti, also explains that Tony Starks’ dilemma about whether or not his company should continue to manufacture weapons and have close ties with the government is “akin to the military industrial complex spelled out by a career military officer and former President.”

The president that Rizzotti referenced was Dwight Eisenhower, who worried about the relationship between the military and industry becoming too close.  In another article that I found (the link for which is http://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/what-is-the-military-industrial-complex.asp), titled “Attempting to define Military Industrial Complex,” the author talks about the MIC, defining it as an “unofficial phrase used to signify the comfortable relationship that can develop between government forces and defense-minded organizations.” This article also referenced the quote by Eisenhower, saying that Ike was warning us about the relationship between industry and the military becoming too strong and controlling our actions as a nation.

But has the relationship already become too comfortable? Are we at that point that Ike warned about, where “the enemy is no longer another nation per se, but any organization not in line with presented ideals” (Attempting to define the “Military Industrial Complex”)? In fact, this is exactly what happens in Iron Man; the Stark company became too strong and its weapons were being used by the enemy, therefore making the company and Tony Stark a threat to the United States.

Personally, I do believe that we have let the relationship become too comfortable. For example, in 2013, the world’s top fifteen military spenders (nations) spent a total of 1562.3 billion dollars, as shown in the image below. As you can see from the picture, the U.S. alone spent 682 billion dollars, almost three times the amount that the second place country spent. Is it really necessary to spend THIS much on military and defense systems? And what are the effects of spending so much on our military?

Because of the massive investment in our military, we are more likely to get into wars - our military gives us the ability to do so. In addition, as the size of our military and the amount invested in it grows, this part of our government attains more power.  Engagement in conflicts benefits those in leadership roles in the Defense Department, as well as the industries that have contracts with the Defense Department. As the power of those who stand to benefit in some way from use of the military grows, we are clearly more likely to use military force.  These facts make us more likely to become involved in a wider range of conflicts, some of which may not be of critical importance to the interests of our nation.  Was our involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan promoted by special interests in the MIC or based primarily on what was in the best interest of our nation?  The same question could be asked about Vietnam.

The influence of the MIC is reflected in American culture. The obsession that Americans have with power and military is evident in movies and even with the videogames that kids play. So many of Hollywood’s biggest hits are action-packed violent films in which every other scene involves someone’s head being blown off. How unfortunate that our country accepts the prioritizing of power over many of the other qualities that make a great nation.  The excess of money spent on military and weapons could be used instead on other federal programs that could strengthen our nation in a variety of ways. For example, education, infrastructure, research – areas that have a potential to improve overall quality of life for Americans. As feared by Eisenhower, the MIC has its own agenda that does not necessarily overlap with what is best for our nation.