Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.

- Eisenhower

We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.

We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people

@vwbusguy

Ack! I looked to follow you, because of that post, which gets to the fundamental truths in so few words, BUT, I was already following you! ❗

@vwbusguy it must have been nice to have a president who was not only soberly weighing the issues, but who could express himself clearly and eloquently.

@petes_bread_eqn_xls I'm not gonna defend Eisenhower on immigration, but there's a great many things he should be remembered fondly for. FDR has a similar mixed legacy.

(Before Trump, we had Eisenhower's "Operation Wetback" and that's unfortunately the official name of it.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback

Operation Wetback - Wikipedia

@vwbusguy
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

—Smedley Butler

@vwbusguy the sentiment is commendable.
the statement ignores an essential differentiation between murder and protection, both of which take the form of killing.

every blessed weapon in service to Ukraine is essential for people to be able to eat or be housed at all.

it is invasion, and the tools of invasion, that are unconditionally evil.

not defense, or tools and acts of defense.

those are in the most literal term opposites: one evil and unnecessary. the other good and necessary.

@falcennial the overall speech is called “A Chance for Peace,” and it explains that the military buildup at the beginning of the Cold War was necessary and preferable to war with the Soviet Union, but emphasized that “necessary and better than war” is still not “good.”
@standev @falcennial I think he missed the important detail that Eisenhower's speech was aimed at Russia, but he also blocked me right after replying so he'll probably never see this.
@vwbusguy I think both audiences applied, but “we (the West) have to respond, but we (US & USSR) should not continue down this path” is certainly the overriding theme
@standev A very fair point, and one that remains relevant to both parties.
@vwbusguy “We’ve saved Iran” by overthrowing their elected leader and installing a brutal dictatorship. Also Eisenhower.
@anewc2 Oof. Touche. I forgot that happened under Eisenhower. This might be a do as he said not as he did moment.
@vwbusguy That's the same Eisenhower who supported the 1953 CIA-orchestrated coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran.

"Cada arma que se fabrica, cada buque de guerra que se lanza, cada cohete que se dispara, significa, en última instancia, un robo a quienes padecen hambre y no tienen alimento, a quienes pasan frío y no tienen ropa. Este mundo en armas no solo gasta dinero. Gasta el sudor de sus trabajadores, el ingenio de sus científicos, las esperanzas de sus hijos. Esto no es una forma de vida en absoluto, en el verdadero sentido de la palabra. Bajo las nubes de la guerra, la humanidad pende de una cruz de hierro.

- Eisenhower"

@vwbusguy

@vwbusguy
Why do you think they're choosing to destroy lives through wars instead of saving them through feeding the hungry and financing medication?