ON THE ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE

The White House was painted white after the Brits and Canadians burned it along with other government buildings in the great conflagration of August 24, 1814. This nation was conceived in war, war defined it, and 201 years later, war is its primary export.  

According to SIPRI, total world spending on military expenses in 2009 was $1.531 trillion US dollars, and 46.5% of this total, roughly $712 billion US dollars, was spent by the United States.

After military expenditures here's how USA exports stack up:

1. Machines, engines, pumps: $219,566,232,000 
2. Electronic equipment: $171,966,197,000 
3. Oil: $157,213,437,000 
4. Vehicles: $135,797,903,000 
5. Aircraft, spacecraft: $124,831,567,000 
6. Medical, technical equipment: $84,879,104,000 
7. Gems, precious metals, coins: $65,522,480,000 
8. Plastics: $63,025,216,000 
9. Pharmaceuticals: $43,967,977,000 
10. Organic chemicals: $42,255,264,000 

Does anyone wonder why none of the candidates in this race discuss the military-industrial complex, or the kind of money that feeds this sector, or why polls don't include foreign policy issues in their surveys? The answer should be quite clear: a militant foreign policy fuels the economy. And in order to feed the military industrial machine, money must be printed and the national debt must grow exponentially off the charts. And what candidate wants to discuss this reality? Instead, they'll whitewash foreign policy and focus on safe issues.  Could it possibly be that these politicians are paid and bought for by the military industrial complex?

Foreign policy has become the engine of the USA economy.

After exporting our manufacturing jobs to China and Mexico and outsourcing our service jobs to India, our only export of any significance is war. If armament is not exported to fight real or contrived wars fought by our forces or by proxy forces (such as ISIL), then the economy tanks. 

This is why politicians financed by the military-industrial complex are very careful to not discuss foreign policy.  

Would it maybe be a good idea to openly discuss foreign policy and judge candidates by their commitment to not further enrich the military-industrial complex?  

1991 – First Gulf War

1992 – Conflict in Iraq

1993 – Conflict in Iraq

1994 – Conflict in Iraq, U.S. invades Haiti

1995 – Conflict in Iraq, U.S. invades Haiti, NATO bombing of Bosnia and Herzegovina

1996 – Conflict in Iraq

1997 – No major war

1998 – Bombing of Iraq, Missile strikes against Afghanistan and Sudan

1999 – Kosovo War

2000 – No major war

2001 – War on Terror in Afghanistan

2002 – War on Terror in Afghanistan and Yemen

2003 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, and Iraq

2004 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

2005 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

2006 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

2007 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen

2008 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

2009 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

2010 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

2011 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen; Conflict in Libya (Libyan Civil War)

2012 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria and Yemen

2013 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria and Yemen

2014 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria and Yemen; Civil War in Ukraine

2015 – War on Terror in Somalia, Somalia, Syria and Yemen; Civil War in Ukraine, and arming of ISIL by leaving behind arms and equipment in Iraq.

What are your thoughts?