Committee Opposed to Militarism and the Draft (COMD)

: Carol Jahnkow; Articles Archive; 01 August 2001; Hits: 206

Two War or Not Two War? New Doctrine Perpetuates U.S. Hegemony

From Draft NOtices, August-September-October 2001

— Carol Jahnkow

Once in office, George W. Bush quickly followed up on his presidential campaign promises to set in motion "an immediate, comprehensive review of our military" and to give the Secretary of Defense "a broad mandate to challenge the status quo." Beginning in February, media stories began to report that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had begun this new broad review of the military.

Rumsfeld's review will bring significant changes in policy. U.S. military strategy since 1993 has revolved around maintaining the capacity to simultaneously fight two major wars. But according to Rumsfeld, the U.S. military has been "living a lie," with the two-war strategy stretching the military thin and preventing needed investment in equipment and strategy to help wage the wars of the future. This strategy has, he says, "brought us to a point where we don't have the forces to do it. It has brought us to a point where, because of the efforts to do it, we have slighted modernization and took a prolonged procurement holiday; we have slighted, in my view, transformation; and we have slighted things that affect the quality of our force."

: Molly Morgan; Articles Archive; 01 August 2001; Hits: 204

Biowarfare: The Darkest Side of Genetic Engineering

From Draft NOtices, August-September-October 2001

— Molly Morgan

In June, San Diego was host to BIO2001, an annual conference for the biotechnology industry. As a result it also became the host for Beyond Biodevastation, the fifth grassroots gathering to celebrate biodiversity and question genetic engineering. Events included a two-day teach-in featuring world-class speakers from nearly every continent; a colorful, spirited march of about 800 people protesting various aspects of genetically modified organisms; and a variety of creative direct actions designed to educate the public and challenge conventional thinking about genetic engineering.

"Biowarfare" was the title of a presentation at the teach-in by Edward Hammond and Susana Pimiento from the Sunshine Project, a nonprofit organization that works to stop the development and use of biological weapons. Hammond, a U.S. policy researcher, Pimiento, a Colombian lawyer working in the U.S., and Jan van Aken, a German biologist, formed the organization last year upon discovering their mutual concern about biological weapons and their intense commitment to avert the dangers of new weapons stemming from advances in biotechnology. The name of the Sunshine Project refers to the fact that many biological weapons are quickly broken down and rendered harmless by exposure to bright sunlight.

: Ray Wolf; Articles Archive; 01 May 2001; Hits: 201

The Bush Regime: Militarism’s "Finest" Hour

From Draft NOtices, May-June-July 2001

— Ray Wolf

Well, the reign of King George II certainly started off in an interesting fashion — the first person in over a century to take the White House without winning the popular vote. So what can we expect from him? Of course, there will be the usual stuff — you know, lies to the American people, assaults on welfare for people while quietly increasing corporate welfare, blatant disregard for international law except when it benefits the U.S. economic agenda, and, if needed, inventing an enemy and then bombing the hell out of that country’s civilians and infrastructure. That having been said, let’s take a look at how the Bush regime will affect those of us working for peace and social justice as well as the world at large. In this article, five primary areas of concern will be covered: military spending, North Korea, the Middle East, Colombia, and education reform.

Bush has consistently said that he will increase the Pentagon’s budget. In his inaugural address he said, "We will build our defenses beyond challenge, lest weakness invite challenge. We will confront weapons of mass destruction, so that a new century is spared new horrors." Who exactly is going to seriously challenge the United States with anything but Saddam Hussein–style saber rattling? The U.S. military is already the most powerful and technologically advanced in the world, possesses the most nuclear weapons and probably the most biological and chemical weapons, and is arguably the most active and well trained. Nearly fifty percent of the federal discretionary budget goes to support past and present military expenses. How would building U.S. defenses "beyond challenge" prevent "new horrors" in this century? Many of the world’s horrors in the last 50 years were initiated or covertly instigated by this powerful military, so building it up should invoke only more of the same.