The Military Railroad System of the United States

1864 ◽  
Vol 11 (23) ◽  
pp. 355-355
2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 2103-2123
Author(s):  
V.L. Gladyshevskii ◽  
E.V. Gorgola ◽  
D.V. Khudyakov

Subject. In the twentieth century, the most developed countries formed a permanent military economy represented by military-industrial complexes, which began to perform almost a system-forming role in national economies, acting as the basis for ensuring national security, and being an independent military and political force. The United States is pursuing a pronounced militaristic policy, has almost begun to unleash a new "cold war" against Russia and to unwind the arms race, on the one hand, trying to exhaust the enemy's economy, on the other hand, to reindustrialize its own economy, relying on the military-industrial complex. Objectives. We examine the evolution, main features and operational distinctions of the military-industrial complex of the United States and that of the Russian Federation, revealing sources of their military-technological and military-economic advancement in comparison with other countries. Methods. The study uses military-economic analysis, scientific and methodological apparatus of modern institutionalism. Results. Regulating the national economy and constant monitoring of budget financing contribute to the rise of military production, especially in the context of austerity and crisis phenomena, which, in particular, justifies the irrelevance of institutionalists' conclusions about increasing transaction costs and intensifying centralization in the industrial production management with respect to to the military-industrial complex. Conclusions. Proving to be much more efficient, the domestic military-industrial complex, without having such access to finance as the U.S. military monopolies, should certainly evolve and progress, strengthening the coordination, manageability, planning, maximum cost reduction, increasing labor productivity, and implementing an internal quality system with the active involvement of the State and its resources.


2020 ◽  
pp. 088626052097031
Author(s):  
Cary Leonard Klemmer ◽  
Ashley C. Schuyler ◽  
Mary Rose Mamey ◽  
Sheree M. Schrager ◽  
Carl Andrew Castro ◽  
...  

Prior research among military personnel has indicated that sexual harassment, stalking, and sexual assault during military service are related to negative health sequelae. However, research specific to LGBT U.S. service members is limited. The current study aimed to explore the health, service utilization, and service-related impact of stalking and sexual victimization experiences in a sample of active-duty LGBT U.S. service members ( N = 248). Respondent-driven sampling was used to recruit study participants. U.S. service members were eligible to participate if they were 18 years or older and active-duty members of the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, or U.S. Air Force. This study included a sizeable portion of transgender service members ( N = 58, 23.4%). Sociodemographic characteristics, characteristics of military service, health, and sexual and stalking victimization in the military were assessed. Regression was used to examine relationships between health and service outcomes and sexual and stalking victimization during military service. Final adjusted models showed that experiencing multiple forms of victimization in the military increased the odds of visiting a mental health clinician and having elevated somatic symptoms, posttraumatic stress disorder symptomatology, anxiety, and suicidality. Sexual and stalking victimization during U.S. military service was statistically significantly related to the mental and physical health of LGBT U.S. service members. Interventions to reduce victimization experiences and support LGBT U.S. service members who experience these types of violence are indicated. Research that examines the role of LGBT individuals’ experiences and organizational and peer factors, including social support, leadership characteristics, and institutional policies in the United States military is needed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda J. Bilmes

AbstractThe United States has traditionally defined national security in the context of military threats and addressed them through military spending. This article considers whether the United States will rethink this mindset following the disruption of the Covid19 pandemic, during which a non-military actor has inflicted widespread harm. The author argues that the US will not redefine national security explicitly due to the importance of the military in the US economy and the bipartisan trend toward growing the military budget since 2001. However, the pandemic has opened the floodgates with respect to federal spending. This shift will enable the next administration to allocate greater resources to non-military threats such as climate change and emerging diseases, even as it continues to increase defense spending to address traditionally defined military threats such as hypersonics and cyberterrorism.


2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (3) ◽  
pp. 558-567

On February 1, 2021, the military in Burma overthrew the democratically elected government, declared a one-year state of emergency, and installed Senior General Min Aung Hlaing as the head of government. Since the coup, the military has cracked down on protestors, killing over 800 people and detaining many more. Numerous countries and international organizations, including the United States and the United Nations, have condemned the coup and ensuing violence and called for the restoration of a democratic government. The United States and other countries have also imposed rigorous sanctions on the Burmese military, its officials and affiliated corporations, and social media companies have imposed content restrictions to prevent the spread of pro-military propaganda.


1898 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 148
Author(s):  
S. H. ◽  
George B. Davis

1957 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 546-547 ◽  

The Council of the Baghdad Pact held its annual meeting in Karachi from June 3 through 6, 1957. Representatives were present from the five member countries—Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and the United Kingdom—and the United States was represented by an observer delegation. The Council had been scheduled to meet months earlier, but Iraq originally refused to meet with the United Kingdom. At the opening session, presided over by Mr. Suhrawardy, Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Prime Minister of Iraq, Nuri es Said, was reported to have spoken forcefully about the dangers implicit in the problems of Israel, Algeria, Kashmir and Cyprus. Mr. Lloyd, Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom, was reported to have followed Mr. Nuri es Said's remarks with a speech in which he announced his government's offer of a contribution of £500,000 a year in cash and in kind for building up the minimum military infra-structure in member countries. The speeches of other delegates were reported to be noteworthy for their frank recognition of past weaknesses in the Baghdad Pact organization and the need to give it new effectiveness. In the course of the first session the United States formally accepted an invitation to join the Pact's Military Committee; and a United States military delegation headed by General Nathan F. Twining started participating in a separate concurrent meeting of the Military Committee. The United States thus became a member of the Pact's three main committees, but had still not become a formal member of the Pact.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document