National Security Implications of Bush Meltdown Are Grim

Even as Bush's boy Henry Paulson (you might remember him from such bailouts as Bear Sterns and AIG) considers radical measures:

"I don't wish to spread alarm on the line people but the big issue confronting the market is I'm afraid the health and sustainability of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs," Hugh Hendry, Partner and CIO at Eclectica, told CNBC. "It is unimaginable that they can be allowed to go, I suspect that they will nationalized at some point today or over the weekend," he add.

Some say the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008's vague language gives Paulson almost unlimited power to intervene.

Boy that's reassuring ain't it. The guy who used to be the CEO of Goldman Sachs is now about to step in and use our money to nationalize them.

Paulson is, of course, the architect of both Goldman's failed strategy and the utter disaster that has been the last two years of Bush administration financial policies (since his appointment as Treasury Secretary in 2006.)

But don't forget, its not really the U.S. taxpayers who are financing this bailout. From a a NewsDay Op-Ed by James Ludes and Bernard Finel:

Yet too little attention has been paid to who is financing that debt and what it means for the national security of our country.

The United States was already dangerously indebted before the housing crisis forced the government to slip even further into the red. Since January 2001, the U.S. national debt has increased from $5.71 trillion to more than $9.64 trillion in August. Our foreign debt has increased even faster, from $1.01 trillion in January 2001 to $2.67 trillion today.

The debt we owe to countries that do not share our interests or whose interests may run at odds with our own has grown even faster than that.

In 2001, we owed oil-exporting nations $48.5 billion - we now owe them $173.9 billion. In 2001, China held $61.5 billion in U.S. debt; it now holds $518.7. In 2001, Russia held less than $10 billion; it now holds $74.1 billion.

And owing money to "our friends" has serious implications:

The new debt we are assuming in this crisis needs to be understood as a potential strategic vulnerability. Clearly, those governments buying our debt are investing in America, but they are also gaining leverage that we might wish they did not have.

They go on to outline the Suez Crisis of 1956 when President Dwight Eisenhower used America's financial power over Britain and France to force them to pull their troops out of the Suez Canal. Now we're the ones with global strategic delusions of grandeur that we're letting other countries pay for. As Ludes and Finel conclude:

In the past eight years, we have financed two wars and massive tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans by mortgaging not just our children's future, but their very security to the highest bidders around the world.

Debt-financed tax cuts and overly zealous deregulation have proven to be a failed social experiment with potentially dire national security consequences. We have long recognized that cuts to defense spending can sometimes hurt national security; so too must we acknowledge, once and for all, that tax cuts and runaway spending can do the same.

The United States is a rich and powerful country. It is criminal that we have weakened our own fiscal health so gravely that we are left to consider the national security consequences of restoring liquidity to credit markets. But we must.



Display:


You forgot about mentioning Nixon (none / 0)

can we still pull out of the gold standard? ;-)

The last war we didn't pay for, we told France to go to hell, and blew off our debt by inflating our currency.


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 12:14:14 PM EST

Yet the Congress had 1 billion (none / 0)

for Neocon puppet and warmonger Saakashvili.

Until that type of thing is taboo, America will never pull out of its tailspin.


by Paul Goodman on Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 01:00:48 PM EST

This is Getting Surreal (none / 0)

This could be the biggest weekly percentage loss on the Dow ever. Unbelievable. Worse than the week of October 19, 1987 and October 28, 1929. This is totally unbelievable.

The good news is that pretty soon stocks will be so low that it won't be able to crash any further. I actually think we are getting close to that point. Also, this has been a wake up call that Hoover-Reagan-Bush economics don't work.


Dizzy Zzyzzy
by Zzyzzy on Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 01:33:26 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.