Here’s What the Media Won’t Tell You About the 2016 NDAA

November 13, 2015   |   Derrick Broze

Derrick Broze
November 13, 2015

(ANTIMEDIA) The annual military budget has been approved by U.S. lawmakers and is expected to be signed by President Obama, but what are we not being told?

On Tuesday the U.S. Senate approved the latest version of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2016. Voting 91 to 3 last week, the Senate approved the revised bill, which includes $607 billion in defense spending as well as $5 billion in cuts. The bill then passed the U.S. House of Representatives.

Obama vetoed the previous version of the bill because it would have limited the transfer of detainees from the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to the United States. However, the new version of the bill retained provisions which will likely prevent Obama from keeping his promise to close Guantanamo.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said he expects the president to sign the bill, stating, “That certainly does not reflect a change in our position, or the intensity of our position, about the need to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay.”

Obama also battled Republicans, not over limiting the military budget and focusing on domestic programs, but over whether they were raising defense spending limits high enough. When you look closer at Obama’s actions, you see he is actually voting in line with the rest of the war hawks. He is not demanding military budget cuts, nor that the United States begin winding down the global American empire. In fact, President Obama is simply asking for yet more money to continue to launch wars of aggression based on lies and fear.

Many of you may remember that President Obama had no problem signing the NDAA 2012, which legalized the indefinite detention of American citizens suspected of ties to terrorism. It should be noted that the indefinite detention provision is still contained in the NDAA, and has been approved by Congress and signed by President Obama every year since it first passed.

So what’s hiding in the latest version?

The current edition of the NDAA will continue to ensure United States involvement in the conflict in eastern Ukraine by offering lethal aid to the Ukrainians fighting Russia in Crimea. Section 1250 of the Senate version, titled UKRAINE SECURITY ASSISTANCE INITIATIVE, and will authorize $300,000,000 to “provide appropriate security assistance and intelligence support, including training, equipment, and logistics support, supplies and services, to military and other security forces of the Government of Ukraine.”

That same section also grants funds for “Lethal assistance such as anti-armor weapon systems, mortars, crew-served weapons and ammunition, grenade launchers and ammunition, and small arms and ammunition.” Some of the weapons types the U.S. is offering to Ukraine include “Counter-artillery radars, including medium-range and long-range counter-artillery radars that can detect and locate long-range artillery, Unmanned aerial tactical surveillance systems and Cyber capabilities.”

However, Ukraine will not be the only recipient of weapons funded by U.S. taxpayers. The U.S. Congress is happy to continue supporting conflict in Syria by funding so-called “moderate” rebels who are allegedly fighting against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. All signs indicate the Syrian civil war has become another U.S.-led proxy war against Russia.

Section 1225 of the Senate bill, titled MATTERS RELATING TO SUPPORT FOR THE VETTED SYRIAN OPPOSITION, allocates resources for logistical support including “Defensive supportive fire, Intelligence, and Medical support.”

While the media focused on the battle between the White House and Republicans, it completely failed to mention that all current proposed versions of the 2016 NDAA will continue the proxy war between the United States and Russia — which could potentially accelerate the push towards outright conflict.


This article (Here’s What the Media Won’t Tell You About the 2016 NDAA) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Derrick Broze and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

Author: Derrick Broze

Derrick Broze joined Anti-Media as an independent journalist in July of 2014. His topics of interest include solutions to the police state, the surveillance state, economic inequality, attacks on Native communities, and oppression in all its forms. He was born in Houston, Texas.

Share This Post On

9 Comments

  1. my friend's sister makes $61 hourly on the laptop . She has been out of a job for eight months but last month her check was $21010 just working on the laptop for a few hours.
    Visit Website >>>>> ᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵ­­­­­­­­­­­­­w­­­­­w­­­­­w.­­­­­­7­­­­­8­­­­­b­­­­­u­­­­­z­­­­­z­­­­­­.­­­c­­­­­o­­­­­­­­­m­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵ

    Post a Reply
  2. Does Obama think talking big and sending aid to Ukraine, threatining a no fly zone and firing on Russian planes; will make Putin even least bit nervess, just stirring up the hornets nest!

    Post a Reply
  3. The Patriot Act in 2001 allowed for any us citizen to be detained way before the 2012 NDAA. Get your facts straight.

    Post a Reply
  4. "It should be noted that the indefinite detention provision is still contained in the NDAA, and has been approved by Congress and signed by President Obama every year since it first passed."

    Which by the way first passed in the NDAAs of Bush's first term. The 2006 one also said (and I imagine still says this or something like it) that the president can "take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy", with the definition of any of those being left to the president's discretion. But when a Republican was doing it we kept having it beaten over our heads how necessary it was. Along with being reminded over and over that Paul said in the BIble that we had to obey authorities because they got their authority from God.

    Post a Reply
  5. "However, Ukraine will not be the only recipient of weapons funded by U.S. taxpayers. The U.S. Congress is happy to continue supporting conflict in Syria by funding so-called “moderate” rebels who are allegedly fighting against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. All signs indicate the Syrian civil war has become another U.S.-led proxy war against Russia."

    However the push to disarm the American people for the Greater Good is this administarations top priority…

    Post a Reply
  6. He never said that was the first of it nor is it the same law. Get your context straight.

    Post a Reply
  7. The Ukraine is a huge Isis recruiting grounds. Thats why Obama is supporting them and the proxy war with Russia.

    Post a Reply
  8. President Obama vetoed this bill in October of 2015. The real threat to American's isn't this peripheral bill that failed to gain Obama's signature into law, the real threat is AUMF (Authorized Use of Military Force). This legislation STILL exists today. It provides the President (whomever he/she may be) with Congressional overreach, and the ability to make unilateral decisions regarding warlike measures against foreign and domestic civilians who are deemed "enemies" or "threats" to national security. That's a BROAD fucking scope, and way too open to interpretation. There's a list of "authorized military action" that has been compiled since the passing of the AUMF, and it's terrifying. Radiolab even did a special on the AUMF, which was just an updated version of the same legislation passed by the Johnson era that got us into the Vietnam conflict. If you want to kill the beast at the source, we need to get that shit REPEALED!

    http://www.radiolab.org/story/60-words/

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *