Dwight D. Eisenhower Summary

Dwight D. Eisenhower, the 34th President of the United States, at the end of his second Presidential term, delivered his farewell address to the nation. The generation of the day was apparently more focused on the up and coming next President, John F. Kennedy then they were of the warning that President Eisenhower issued. The President brought forth a potent message on the need to have a strong and responsive military supported by an enduring weapons industry; however, he also stated that we must guard against the inappropriate influence by the military-industrial complex . Since President Eisenhower’s final speech as the President of the United States, people like R. Fuller and Andrew J. Bacevich have latched on to industries unfitting …show more content…
Furthermore, Basevich discusses how once senior officers retire from active duty military service some are enticed by well-paying jobs to join the defense industry and sell the latest defense weapons and technology. This issue is truly a slippery slope. The retired senior officer can exploit his vast network of relationships and connections within the military and exercise his/her influence especially with those he may have mentored that are in key acquisition positions. On the other hand there are benefits of having retired officer employed by the defense industry such as just knowing how that particular branch works and the 20-30 years of established people network. Bacevich implies that the unemployment rate, trillion-dollar deficit and the number of people below the poverty line are directly related to the out of control industrial-military complex and its incestuous relationship across the spectrum and its use of scare tactics. There appears to be no balance to Bacevich’s article. He highlighted the undue power and influence wielded by the industrial-military industry without addressing the need to be ready to defend ourselves from our enemies in order to promote peace and this is where his viewpoint is in direct contrast to President Eisenhower’s …show more content…
He highlights the fact that we can no longer “affordably produce the cutting-edge military systems that once gave the American military an unassailable advantage.” According to Carafano our arms are not mighty and are not ready for instant action; the opposite of what President Eisenhower said we needed. Furthermore, he lines out that the Pentagon has “under-funded procurement by about $50 billion a year.” Moreover, the U.S. government restricts defense companies ability to sell their wares oversees. In essence Carafano views the military-industrial complex on the verge of collapse and in his article provides steps to remedy this scenario. Carafano is in clear agreement with President Eisenhower on the need to be mighty and ready for instant action and the need for a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions, however; Carafano’s article does not cover or address the other side of the