For all their talk of national security, it becomes clear that Republicans, and in particular, Mitt RMoney, do not understand the meaning of keeping our country secure. The Republicans, with Mitt Rmoney in the lead, opposed the auto assistance program. Had our auto industry fallen to global market competition, the impact on our national security would have been heavy.
We need our automobile industry in this country for reasons that are not obvious to many. We need manufacturing in this country for national security. It is far easier to pivot from a peace time economy to a war time economy if you already have the means to manufacture in place. It takes time to build assembly lines and train people. If we lose our manufacturing capability and hostilities were to break out, it would take longer to restore and implement a munitions capability than the war itself would take. This would be disastrous to our country.
When World War II broke out, we already had the automobile and aircraft manufacturers in place. We were able to convert these lines to wartime manufacturing and quickly gain the advantage. These lines quickly changed over from building cars and commercial aircraft to building jeeps, tanks, fighter jets and bombers. Because we had trains in place, we were able to transport the manufacturing supplies to the manufacturing facilities and the final products could be efficiently shipped. In addition, we were able to transport our troops from one side of the country (or world) to another. The infrastructure was there.
If we cede this capability to other countries, whose companies, with their own governments' help, are able to outcompete our own companies, we lose this infrastructure. Should hostilities break out (and you can't predict years in advance who will be on our side), we may lose access to the production we need to conduct the war. If China is making all the cars, or Korea, or anybody else, we will need to establish the means of production from scratch and train the workers to man these facilities. From concept definition through design and implementation into test and delivery, this could take years. In the meantime, we could be losing.
By helping our auto industry, we managed to retain the facilities to manufacture. We retained the human capital to design and test. We retained the people to run the lines. It was a matter of national security to do this.
Helping the auto industry was only a first step. We still need to ensure the supply line. We saw that when the tsunami hit Japan, Chrysler and Ford could not get paint for a number of models of their cars and their production was seriously impacted. What happens when we can't get engines? Or the circuits for those engines?
We also need to ensure the infrastructure to transport the products. Our bridges and roads are not in the kind of shape to handle heavy transport convoys. How about our airports? Many runways need rework. We need to ensure the parts manufacture. Worst, we no longer have the lead in steel, cement, aluminum or other factors of production. This could haunt us in the event of hostilities.
All these were part of the Stimulus package that the Republicans voted down. I did not hear word one about the loss of manufacturing capability. Yes, the jobs were important. But the national security aspect was as important. The Republicans voted against our national security and I did not hear one word about that.
The Rmoney foreign policy and national security seems to be built on a piecemeal plan focusing on Israel and Iran. But we need a cohesive policy that also addresses our readiness in case of emergency. I don't see that.
So ... shall we outsource our national security? Shall we hand over the factors of production to foreign companies? Shall our national security be based on our trust that our current allies remain our friends? Or shall we bring the production and supply chain home, employ our people and ensure our own people.