World News


Posted by:

Date: Tuesday, 13 February 2024


Eric Zuesse (blogs at

Already the U.S. Government’s spending that is annually authorized by Congress and signed into law by the President goes over 50% of it to the military (some of which is funded by other Departments so as to deceive the U.S. public that ‘only’ $886 billion per year — the Pentagon’s share of the actual $1.5 trillion-dollar total for the military — goes to the military), but for most members of Congress, that’s not enough; and, so, on February 12th, there was passed in the Senate on a 70-29 vote an “Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024’’, which adds $60 billion to Ukraine, $14 billion to Israel, and it adds $8 billion more in order to start a war between China and its Province of Taiwan (the U.S. Government officially acknowledges that it’s that but wants it to declare itself independent so that there will be a war between Taiwan and China), plus another $13 billion for wars in Yemen and elsewhere — all of this being ‘Emergency’ money, which therefore must be spent immediately.

Here were the opposite sides of the U.S. Senate’s floor debate that preceded the 70-29 passage of the bill:


REPUBLICAN MITT ROMNEY: The vote we will soon take to provide military weapons for Ukraine is the most


important vote we will ever take as United States senators. REPUBLICAN JOSH HAWLEY: We have enough


money to make hundreds of millions of dollars of our taxpayer funds available to the private sector in Ukraine. We are


now literally funding their businesses, their banks, Lord knows what. We've got money without


end. We've got enough money to pay for bureaucrats’ salaries [in Ukraine], we've got enough money to pay for Ukrainian government


officials’ pensions. We've got enough money for so-called humanitarian aid that gets funneled away from, siphoned


off into, any manner of corrupt uses. We won't know because we don't have a special Inspector General to oversee


this money, but that's a different story. Oh, no, we've got plenty of money and I have listened carefully, carefully, to


colleague after colleague of mine come to this floor and stand where I am now and say it's so important


that we spend this money on these overseas wars. We must spend the money. If


we don't spend this money now, why it may cost us more money in the future. No, it’s, it's imperative. It's imperative that we


spend this money. Meanwhile these same people turn to the citizens of Missouri and say


you're not worth a dime. They say you can't have a penny. They turn to the residents of Kentucky


and Tennessee and Alaska and New Mexico and Arizona and Utah and Texas and they


say we don't care that you were poisoned. We don't have a dime for you, we have unlimited money for Ukraine, we're going


to rebuild the borders of Ukraine, that's in this bill, but we don't have anything for you.


That’s as honest a summary of this debate as you are likely to find, because those are the sides for public consumption and not the (secret) sides from the political megadonors, whom the now extensive scentific research on how the U.S. Government ACTUALLY runs proves to actually control America’s Presidents and members of Congress and the laws that they pass and the ones that they refuse to pass.

So: though in the current fiscal year the U.S. Government is paying $1.5T for its military, 70% of America’s Senators voted for this “Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024’’ to add yet another $95 billion to that, and they claim that the $1.5T which they had already authorized for the military wasn’t actually enough in order to satisfy the people who fund their political careers (although these 70 Senators don’t use that as their excuse but instead, as Romney said in the same speech: “We are not being asked to send American troops into war. We are asked to help the Ukrainians defend themselves” “If we fail to help Ukraine, Putin will invade a NATO nation." "Ukraine is not the end. It is a step.” Or, as they said during Vietnam-War times, it is a “domino.” So: that’s the public case. However, as things turned out, Vietnam wasn’t actually any domino at all: America’s loss to Vietnam wasn’t followed by any other “domino.” One can only speculate whether the U.S. Government believed the “domino theory” then, and whether they believe the domino theory now. But the domino theory is the dominant ‘theory’ now, not only in the Government of America, but also in the Governments of its colonies (‘allies’) in NATO, today. One might therefore reasonably wonder whether it was cooked-up both times in the executive offices of firms such as Lockheed Martin and ExxonMobil. It was certainly false back in the 1970s, but it was enormously profitable for America’s mega-corporations then, and has remained so now, long after the Soviet Union and its communism ended. For propagandists, truth isn’t actually relevant, but only dollars are — and this is just as true today, as it was in the 1970s.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

EmbassyMedia - ራብዓይ ግንባር!

Dehai Events