Name: The true cost of the military-industrial complex.
Uploaded: 2021-06-12T11:58:11.000Z
Duration: 9 min 47 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Basic passive voice

It's time to talk about the elephant in the room. The single most polluting industry

Adverbs of manner

in the world. The military. Specifically, the U.S. military, because the U.S. war machine

currently has a yearly budget of over $700 billion, which dwarfs the military spending

of the next 8 countries combined in 2018. The U.S. military is a behemoth, and the environmental

consequences of its massive size and global presence are equally immense. Indeed, if the

American military was a country it would rank 47th, right in between Peru and Portugal,

for highest global greenhouse gas emissions, and that's only based on military fuel use.

Despite this, we're very rarely exposed to the idea of the U.S. military-industrial

complex as a possible contributor to climate change. Instead, individual actions, like

taking shorter showers or composting food waste, seem to be the primary push of the

environmental movement. So the big question is: what are the consequences of this massive

U.S. military machine? And ultimately, what are the connections between militarism and

The environmental cost of the U.S. military is so large because the country has continuously

piled money into the Department of Defence ever since the 1980s Reagan Era push for military

spending transformed the world's biggest lender into the biggest debtor. A recently

approved defense budget of $738 billion for the 2020 fiscal year only cements this lust

for U.S. military growth around the globe. And to be clear, the U.S. military is a global

entity. It has established roughly 800 military bases in 80 countries around the world according

to David Vine, author of Base Nation. To put that in perspective, all other countries combined

have established roughly 70 foreign bases. So, the U.S. military is gargantuan, and to

fuel that machine, they need, well, fuel. From 2001 to 2017, the U.S. military emitted

an estimated 1.2 billion metric tons of CO2 equivalent according to the Watson Institute

for International and Public Affairs. That's the same as putting an additional 257 million

cars, or roughly the current amount of passenger cars currently in operation, on the road in

the U.S. for a whole year. From Humvees running at 4 miles per gallon, or gas-guzzling F-22

fighter jets, the machines of war that the Department of Defense purchases and maintains

require a lot of fuel. In the realm of 85 million barrels of fuel in 2017. But the U.S.

military pollution doesn't stop and end at emissions. The military has blazed a sharp

trail of environmental and chemical pollution across the world, racking up 39,000 contaminated

sites according to a Newsweek interview with the former head of environmental programs

at the Pentagon. 143 of the Superfund sites in the United States are military bases, and

900 of the 1344 total sites are areas that previously supported military needs according

to the same Newsweek interview. At Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, for example, the drinking

water servicing over 170,000 people is so polluted with cancer-causing chemical solvents

like trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene that it's been called “the worst example

of water contamination this world has ever seen.” In short, the U.S. military has a

long track record of pollution and emissions that often is tacitly accepted by otherwise

environmentally-minded people in the name of national defense and military preparedness.

But let's be clear here, the majority of the wars the U.S. has fought, and the massive

military structure it's built has rarely been in the name of peace or safety. More

often than not it's centered around profit and control. The United States has a long

history of using military power to assert dominance over potentially strategic or profitable

entities. Like in Panama in 1989, when George H. W. Bush deployed 25,000 troops to oust

the military leader and previous CIA “asset,” General Noriega, who began acting against

U.S. interests. In Noriega's stead, Bush propped up Guillermo Endara, who was much

more loyal to the U.S. global agenda and willing to allow the U.S. to maintain control over

the Panama Canal. Or in 1973 when the United States supported a coup to overthrow democratically-elected

Chilean socialist leader Salvador Allende, replacing him with ruthless dictator Augusto

Pinochet, who in the months following his rise to power imprisoned, tortured and killed

thousands of supposed leftist-sympathizers in order to establish an economy that a New

York Times reporter called “a banker's delight.” Or the U.S. backed indiscriminate

slaughter of East Timorese by Indonesian forces, or the multi-decade war razing Iraq to the

ground to protect the flow of fuel from Middle Eastern oil fields into American cars. The

same oil fields, which Vice President Dick Cheney's former company, Halliburton, secured

a noncompetitive contract for up to seven billion dollars to rebuild. The list drags

on. The point here is this: in many cases, the U.S. military has guzzled millions of

barrels of fuel and killed thousands to establish and maintain control of profitable international

interests. One of the most decorated marines in U.S. history, Major General Smedley Butler

rams this reality home in his book, War is a Racket: “I spent 33 years and four months

in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high-class

muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer,

Ironically, the Department of Defence has released reports characterizing climate change

as a security risk, but of course, their solution is not to scale back their own emissions-intensive

operations but instead it's doing more of the same. So, when we're trying to understand

the connections between environmentalism and demilitarization, we have to recognize a simple

reality: War is always an environmental hazard. There is no such thing as a responsible military

or green war. It is, in fact, irresponsible to suggest that it's possible to “green

the military,” as Elizabeth Warren has proposed. Though it is admirable to try to find solutions

within a corrupt and irredeemable system, the 2018 IPCC report has made clear that we

have no time for slow change, and small reforms prevent us from focusing on and investing

in the larger, more radical changes that need to happen. Demilitarization is a lofty goal;

in the United States, it is not unreasonable to feel despair about the possibility of ever

demilitarizing a country with such a fetish for violence and control. But dire circumstances

require radical solutions. Keep in mind that even if the current military budget is slashed

in half, the U.S. would still spend more than double the amount China does. So, the military-industrial

complex is beyond bloated. And as we look towards a future marked by climate change,

to me it's clear where taxpayer money needs to go. If the United States can pour $4.79

trillion into the wars in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, they certainly can extract themselves

from a fossil-fuel centric economy. The money doesn't need to be piled into the over-polluting

and violent machine that is the U.S. military, it instead needs to be invested in strong,

publically-favored initiatives like the Green New Deal, which would supply dignified low-carbon

jobs to thousands, reinvest in the U.S.'s crumbling infrastructure, and establish an

The gift-giving season is upon us, and usually that means a lot of material-centric presents

that either get left in the closet or thrown out. Because, let's face it, finding the

right present to show your love is hard, especially if you are trying to avoid waste or create

less of an impact. Luckily Brilliant has made it easy this year. You can now give the gift

of learning with a Brilliant Premium Subscription. If someone you know loves problem-solving

or learning scientific concepts then this is a great non-materialistic gift. Brilliant

is a perfect way to nurture curiosity, build confidence, and develop problem-solving skills

crucial to school, job interviews, or your career. And Brilliant's thought-provoking

content breaks up complexities into bite-sized understandable chunks that will lead you from

So if you're looking for ideas for presents this year, consider heading over to brilliant

dot org slash OCC to grab a gift subscription to help your loved ones spark a lifelong love

Hey Everyone! Charlie here. Thanks for making it all the way to the end of the video. If

Subtitles ListPlay Video

The true cost of the military-industrial complex.

massive

general

brilliant

amount