Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
dwight eisenhower inagual speech
dwight eisenhower's inauguration speech
eisenhower farewell address in words
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: dwight eisenhower inagual speech
Fifty years ago, on January 17, 1961 President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave his farewell address to the nation. He talked about the dangers of deficit spending and of future planning. But, the main point that Eisenhower made that caused his farewell address to become famous was his valid concern and warning of the military-industry complex and it’s ability to destroy our security and liberty. Based on research and past events Eisenhower was correct in doing so because of America’s need for success and their ability to pay any cost to do so.
In his speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower forewarned the American people about the development of a 'military-industrial complex,' and the threats it might pose. He said, "The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." (Eisenhower, 1961) His fears were warranted by the extreme development of the US Armed Forces after two world wars, and by the development of a "permanent arms industry of vast proportions". Today, both the military and the industry that succumbs to the military’s needs are vaster than ever. From present uneasy perspective, the 1950s are thought of as a time when everything had some order, ease and assurance. And, even though when President Eisenhower first gave his farewell address, he was thought to have been senile for his apparent animosity towards his country, now he though to be an intelligent and revered statesman who would never consider leading the U.S. into the situations we are currently in. Eisenhower was correct when he warned and forecast that the military-industry complex was “economic, political, even spiritual” and it was “felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government.” (Ledbetter, 2011)
A large ...
... middle of paper ...
...arty controls the Congress and the White House one common thing remains: the military-industrial complex, or maybe (as we later found out how Eisenhower described it in a rough draft of his farewell address that was later changed) the military-industrial-congressional complex.
Works Cited
Eisenhower, D. (1961). Farewell address. 5407. Retrieved from http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5407.htm
Hari, J. (2011). Ike was right all along: the danger of the military-industrial complex. The Independent, Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ike-was-right-all-along-the-danger-of-the-militaryindustrial-complex-2186133.html
Ledbetter, J. (2011). 50 year's ago. New York Times, Retrieved from http://www.zerohedge.com/article/all-all-it-appears-eisenhower%E2%80%99s-worst-fears-have-been-realized-and-his-remarkable-and-unique
On the date of December 8, 1953, in New York, President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave his speech, Atoms for Peace. 1 This speech was addressed to the United Nations Assembly. 2 To this large audience of well-established political leaders, Eisenhower addressed the root of the most pressing fear to envelop the Cold War. This fear was of a possible atomic annihilation that would have resulted from the tensions held between the United States and the U.S.S.R. The root of this fear that was addressed was the continued advancement and storage of atomic and nuclear weapons. Eisenhower presented this speech with the hope that he might have been able to turn the United States away from a possible war with the Soviets. Shawn J. Parry-Giles of the University
Eisenhower served as the President of United States for a period of eight years. On January 17, 1961 he gave a memorable farewell speech which was broadcasted on TV. The speech is known for the vision of Eisenhower who predicted the strong influence that military-industrial complex will be created on the citizens of Unites States in future. His speech narrates his fears on the massive spending, concerns on planning and deficit spending. He is concerned for the Federal funding that might be more towards the technological and scientific developments. The basis of the speech is to achieve peace in the world and warn the nation for not being excited with the prosperous state and not live for the moment in the youth and glamour while aiming at an easy life. According to him, there are big chances that the power will be misplaced and this might persist but the nation must strive for a balance between the freedom and democratic processes. I think the standpoint of Eisenhower is not consistent with that of a military man as he wants the expenditure on the defense strategies to be lessened and want to promote the growth of the country by sparing the federal funds on other things than national defense. Though he believes that the country cannot risk the emergency improvisation, which is required for national defense. As he said that that “the country is compelled to create permanent armaments of vast proportions”
The early 1950s was a time of tension and uncertainty in the world. The Cold War replaced ‘hot’ war. Humankind had gone from the terror of actual war to the terror of the potential of nuclear war. The situation was aggravated by the ongoing conflict in Korea which pitted the forces of the ‘Free World’ against the specter of international Communism. Anticommunist hysteria gripped the US political scene, mirroring many of the excesses of the Stalinist enemy that it was in struggle with in the international arena.
Unfortunately, the President’s consistency with Republican principles in matters of political power was not nearly as strong as his resolve to reduce the national debt. Under Jefferson and Madison, the federal government assumed political powers that the Constitution did not allot for. While prior to his presidency, Jefferson, then a strict constructionist had argued that the government should not assume any power unless specifically provided for in the Constitution, the Louisiana Purchase where America purchased a vast tract of land for $15 million, compromised these lofty ideals. In terms of the military, Thomas Jefferson had come to power vowing to reduce military size and power. Contrary to those principles, the Barbary War, where for nearly three years the American military exercised a naval blockade of the North African coast wasted millions of dollars of the people’s money and unconstitutionally violated states rights and strict constructionist principles, in their place asserting an alien un-Republican nationalism.
Eisenhower’s military experience (one of the key reasons for him leading the Allies into Operations Overlord, Torch, and Avalanche) started when he was sent to boot camps around the U.S. to prepare troops for World War I. Eisenhower, despite his wishes, never saw foreign action in World War I, but he did have many stations where he trained. He was assigned to deploy to France, but a week before he was set for departure, the armistice ending World War I was signed. In turn, h...
The Cold War was a time of fear for the American people in the aftermath of the second World War, but also was a key period in which different presidents began and led various programs to fight Communism, both at home and abroad. President Eisenhower was elected in 1952, and various actions he took throughout his two term administration both assuaged and increased American fears related to Cold War problems. Eisenhower’s policies and programs of the Cold War included MAD and McCarthyism, which caused domestic fears, Brinksmanship and the creation of highways to carry military equipment through the Federal Highway of 1956 in case of foreign war, and his creation of NASA and the National Defense Education Act of 1958 for a technology race with the Soviet Union.
The Paradox of Professionalism: Eisenhower, Ridgway, and the Challenge to Civilian Control, 1953-1955, by A.J. Bacevich
“However, it seems he ¬¬–Eisenhower, never considered how easily our leaders would turn to borrowing to continue feeding the military-industrial complex war beast. Look at America's financial and social conditions today and consider the validity of Eisenhower's warnings expressed more than five decades ago. One truly unfortunate side effect of the military industry's quest for growth is that wars must be fought to justify and increase demand for its products.”
Military industrial complex is a country’s establishment and military materials, regarded as a powerful vested interest. In his farewell address President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex, he warns Americans to keep an eye on military-industrial complex. Eisenhower was concerned about how expensive the American defense establishment was becoming. President Eisenhower mentions in his speech that “in the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” He continues by saying that we should not let this endanger our liberties.
Glynn, Patrick. Closing Pandora's Box "Arms Races, Arms Control, and the History of the Cold War". New York: HarperCollinsPublishers, Inc. 1992.
2. Clarefield, Gerard. Security with Solvency: Dwight D. Eisenhower and the Shaping of the American Military Establishment. Westport, CT, Praeger, 1999.
According to Dwight D. Eisenhower‘s statement, nuclear warfare caused widespread panic throughout the globe about the possibilities of a nuclear holocaust. He stated, “If men can develop weapons that are so terrifying as to make the thought of global war include almost a sentence for suicide, you would think that man's intelligence and his comprehension... would include also his ability to find a peaceful solution” (“Biography of Dwight Eisenhower” ). The Cold War was nothing more than a rivalry that developed between the United States and the Soviet Union, at the...
Aside from national security interests domestic thirst for oil boomed. The war brought us out of the Great Depression. During the Depression a traditionally capitalist American society embraced a kind of socialism with the New Deal. WWII transformed the bear turned in a raging bull. Capitalism was back with a vengeance, charging forward stronger than it had ever been before. The heavy industry built up to sustain the war effort was retooled to meet the demands of the emerging consumerist culture of the 1950s. The new explosion of industrial output became so pervasive that the decade ended with President Eisenhower warning of the dangers of the growing “Military-Industrial Complex.”
Should the government decrease military spending or should it increase military spending? This is a question that many Americans wrestle with, and politically speaking, is a point of great contention since to many, military might evokes a sense of security. However, when considering this question from a foreign policy standpoint, does current military spending really match the current level of threats faced by the United States, or are too many dollars being allocated for an unnecessary level of military strength? There are certainly cons in making the decision to drastically lower military spending, but they are minimal when compared to the positive ramifications such a decision would have. This paper aims to explore these pros and cons
The growing Western threat caused the Soviets to modify their military strategy. In the 1960s, the primary feature of their military doctrine and strategy was the assumption that future war against capitalism would be inevitable, and it would be nuclear war. During that time, the Soviet’s military doctrine and strategy, particularly the intentions and objectives, were the most important and perplexing issues confronting the coalition of the United States and NATO. As a socialist state, the Soviet Union viewed American capitalism as a threat to its socialist society and other parts of the globe. William T. Lee and Richard F. Starr argued that the Soviet military doctrine primary objective was to claim victory over American capitalism, and shift the global power in favor of socialism.