Follow workers.org on
RED HOT: TRAYVON MARTIN
AFGHANISTAN, FIGHTING RACISM, OCCUPY WALL STREET,
PEOPLE'S POWER, SAVE OUR POST OFFICES, WOMEN, AFRICA,
LIBYA, WISCONSIN WORKERS FIGHT BACK, SUPPORT STATE & LOCAL WORKERS,
EGYPT, NORTH AFRICA & MIDDLE EAST,
STOP FBI REPRESSION, RESIST ARIZONA RACISM, NO TO FRACKING, DEFEND PUBLIC EDUCATION, ANTI-WAR,
CUBA, CLIMATE CHANGE,
JOBS JOBS JOBS,
STOP FORECLOSURES, IRAN,
IRAQ, CAPITALIST CRISIS,
IMMIGRANTS, LGBT, POLITICAL PRISONERS,
Time to mobilize anti-war forces
Big firms get rich as Iraq war escalates
Published Jul 19, 2007 9:24 AM
The debate over the war in Iraq has finally made it onto the agenda of the
Senate! But not at a time when funding for the war is up for a vote. A majority
of Congress, including most Democrats, already voted to approve those hundreds
of billions of dollars.
The current debate is over an amendment, put forward
by Democratic Senators Carl Levin of Michigan and Jack Reed of Rhode Island, to a new appropriations bill. The amendment would begin to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 180 days (six months)
of enactment and complete a reduction of troop strength—but not a total
withdrawal—by April 30, 2008.
This debate is finally happening after the electorate has in many, many ways
expressed its utter disgust with the war, the occupation and both political
parties for letting the carnage drag on despite the immense pain and suffering
it has meant for the Iraqi people and many in the U.S. Especially hit here is
the working class, which pays for wars in blood and taxes while the rich
generally do quite well as war spending oozes through the upper layers of the
The senators also must know that calls are heard more and more frequently to
impeach George W. Bush and Dick Cheney because these two lied to the world
about Iraq’s mythical weapons of mass destruction. Every online
discussion having to do with the war or the White House—except those on
bizarrely ultra-right Web sites—rings with colorful denunciations of
these political figures.
However, there’s an elephant in the room that still seems to elude most
of the lawmakers and the media. It concerns what the war is really all
Not just personalities
There are criticisms galore of Bush’s IQ, his lack of tact, his cowboy
style, his refusal to compromise or bend to bring others on board. Cheney is
raked over the coals for his Machiavellian manipulations. Other administration
figures from the klavern of neocons are excoriated for being too
But you seldom hear the issue that gets raised at every anti-war demonstration.
What about the immense oil profits that Bush and Cheney promised their wealthy
backers would flow into their coffers once Iraq had fallen? How much is being
said about that in Congress, or on prime time?
The world understands very well what this war is about, but it’s a
non-subject in official Washington and Medialand.
For example, here’s an item you probably didn’t see on
On July 16, about 300 oil industry workers in the port city of Basra, Iraq,
took their lives into their hands to protest a proposed new law—drafted
by U.S. “specialists” and “advisers”—that these
workers say would allow foreigners to “pillage the country’s
This important demonstration got no coverage in the U.S. media, but was
reported by the French press agency AFP.
“To compensate for the military and political failure of the U.S.
administration in Iraq, this administration is trying to control the
country’s wealth,” the organizers said in a statement distributed
to reporters, as they carried black coffins labeled “freedom.”
“If this is endorsed by the parliament it would abolish sovereignty and
hand over the wealth of this generation and the generations to come as a gift
to the occupier,” the statement said. “This law, in fact destroys
the achievements of the Iraqi masses and especially the Law number 80 of 1961
and the nationalization of 1973”—legislation that sharply limited
foreign involvement in the oil sector, enacted after Iraq broke free of
The very same social forces that had hoped to profit immensely off this war own
the politicians and the media. Their failure to talk about this is not because
of some narrow conspiracy hatched by a few individuals—it is the way
everything functions in a society where money capital reigns supreme.
The immense popularity of the film “Sicko” shows that millions now
realize that health care is a mess because of the profit motive. Is there any
reason to think that warfare is somehow more altruistic?
In fact, this war and the many other imperialist interventions known
euphemistically as “national defense” represent an immense feeding
trough for the well-connected.
Web of industry, gov’t & military
This was illustrated most graphically in a story that did break into the media
in a very limited way recently. It is the story of a corporation that most
people never heard of but that is awarded more lucrative government contracts
for “defense” and “national security” than any
The company is Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC). Right, you say,
never heard of it. But you’ve heard of Boeing, right? General Electric?
Halliburton? Lockheed Martin? Well, SAIC gets more government contracts than
any of them. Last year it sucked up over $8 billion in public money. And it has
more than 44,000 employees.
SAIC provides “experts,” especially in high-tech fields. It was
SAIC employees who tried to create economic chaos and bring down the government
of Venezuela in 2003 by sabotaging the terminals where the oil was loaded onto
tankers for export. The media here called it a “strike” by oil
workers, but in fact the real workers—not the high-paid managers on
SAIC’s payroll—were the ones who figured out how to manually put
the oil facilities back online after their bosses had shut down the computers
that controlled everything.
In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, one of the most vociferous and
ubiquitous figures arguing on television for “regime change” to get
rid of “Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction” was David A.
Kay, identified as an expert on counterterrorism. Kay was an executive of
Two investigative journalists—Donald L. Barlett and James B.
Steele—dug out information about SAIC and wrote it up for the March 2007
issue of Vanity Fair. Recently, the PBS program Exposé ran a half-hour
special on the company.
In the Vanity Fair article, entitled “Washington’s $8 Billion
Shadow,” Barlett and Steele wrote that “SAIC executives have been
involved at every stage of the life cycle of the war in Iraq. SAIC personnel
were instrumental in pressing the case that weapons of mass destruction existed
in Iraq in the first place, and that war was the only way to get rid of them.
Then, as war became inevitable, SAIC secured contracts for a broad range of
operations in soon-to-be-occupied Iraq. When no weapons of mass destruction
were found, SAIC personnel staffed the commission that was set up to
investigate how American intelligence could have been so disastrously
This article explains that much of the running of the U.S. imperialist
government’s “dirty tricks” and its military adventures
abroad has been privatized. Operations that used to be handled by the CIA or
the Pentagon are now farmed out to companies like SAIC, which pull in billions
of dollars every year devising and carrying out plans to control the economies
of oppressed countries and, if necessary, use military force against them so
U.S. big business can exploit their resources and labor.
They are not subject to congressional oversight and can operate pretty much as
they please. In Iraq, SAIC got the U.S. contract to build a “democratic
media” after the overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime. Its Iraqi Media
Network became such an obvious mouthpiece for the Pentagon, says the Vanity
Fair article, that soon Iraqis “openly snickered at the
These companies have close relations with the oil monopolies, the big banks,
defense contractors and all the government agencies in the business of warfare
and “counterterrorism.” In fact, SAIC set up its Center for
Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis several years before 9/11, describing
it to potential investors as a growth industry.
SAIC is much bigger than just the neocons in the Bush administration. Its
bipartisan board of directors has included former CIA directors like John M.
Deutsch, appointed by Bill Clinton, and Robert M. Gates, appointed by the
current Bush’s father. In the present Bush administration, Gates is now
secretary of defense, having replaced Donald Rumsfeld.
Other members of the SAIC board have included Melvin Laird, Richard
Nixon’s secretary of defense, and Rear Adm. Bobby Ray Inman, director of
the National Security Agency under President Jimmy Carter and a deputy director
of the CIA under Ronald Reagan. Inman was also on the board of the
Rockefeller-founded Council on Foreign Relations. The Rockefellers, let it
never be forgotten, originally got their money from Standard Oil and then
spread out into banking.
It is this unholy trinity of big business, the government and the
military/intelligence establishment that continues to drive the war in
Iraq—or Iran or Afghanistan or Palestine or wherever it suits their
SAIC not affected by elections
One former SAIC manager said in a recent blog posting: “My observation is
that the impact of national elections on the business climate for SAIC has been
minimal. The emphasis on where federal spending occurs usually shifts, but
total federal spending never decreases. SAIC has always continued to grow
despite changes in the political leadership in Washington.”
Marine Gen. Peter Pace said on July 16 that the Joint Chiefs of Staff is
weighing a range of possible new directions in Iraq, including an even bigger
troop buildup, if Bush deems it necessary.
The U.S. Air Force has been building up its equipment inside Iraq, including
the monster B1-B bomber. It has sharply stepped up bombing and has laid a
foundation for a sustained air campaign, according to a July 15 AP dispatch.
Already, there is an increase in “collateral damage” among Iraqi
Half the warships in the U.S. Navy are now in the waters around Iran and Iraq.
When one of those ships, the USS Nimitz, made a five-day port call to Chenai in
southern India in early July, it was met by massive protests.
Keeping their eyes on these hard facts and not being diverted by false hopes
about change in Washington, some anti-war groups are now planning militant
actions for the fall.
In both D.C. and Los Angeles, the week of Sept. 22-29 will see encampments,
called by the Troops Out Now Coalition (troopsoutnow.org) and endorsed by
hundreds more, that will take the anti-war struggle back to the streets and
link it to the growing war at home of racism, poverty and repression. On
Saturday, Sept. 29, massive mobilizations are planned in both cities.
The time could not be more critical. The power to stop the carnage lies with
the people, not the politicians.
Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Support independent news DONATE