If President Dwight D. “Ike” Eisenhower returned from the grave, he would be appalled by today’s Military-Industrial Complex, a/k/a, “The Complex.” In 1961, the old warrior, warned the nation about the “unwarranted influence” of that insidious combination of forces: the Pentagon, Defense contractors and the Congress. Nick Turse’s new book, “The Complex: How The Military Invades Our Everyday Lives,” is a wake up call about that current danger.

"The key point that emerges from considering these very different electoral experiences is that elections on their own signify very little. The institutional framework and political context in which they take place are everything. In America, the economic-military-political elites are so secure in their dominance that they can allow the people a full role in their maneuverings, confident that whoever wins will represent their interests before anyone else’s. In Pakistan the US has a similar role; in Malaysia UMNO is so entrenched in the institutions of power and the state that the elections by which it legitimises its position have become only measures of dissatisfaction with it."

"...it is the international intervention in the region, driven by the ‘war on terrorism', and not the Sudanese government, that is responsible for the unrest in the region, and should therefore be blamed for the expected impending failure of the Dakar peace deal. Leading Muslim countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, that could have helped to bring peace to the region but defer to Bush, must also accept a share of the blame."

"...the problematical hyperactive U.S. foreign policy did not arise with President George W. Bush, but has existed through Democratic and Republican administrations since Harry S Truman was president. Although George W. Bush was especially gullible and incompetent in attempting his armed, nation-building fiasco in Iraq, the hyperactivity in U.S. foreign affairs is mainly structural."

"There can be no better demonstration of the futility of the current peace process than the Olmert government's failure to begin seriously rolling back the settlement movement. Given Olmert's clear understanding that the settlers' excesses constitute a genuine danger to Israel's future as a Jewish and democratic state, this is in many ways even more troubling than Palestinian leadership and security failings and the absence of a genuine American commitment to this process."

"Making gestures is not illegitimate. But there is great danger in making gestures that have no impact on peoples' lives. Such gestures simply serve to erode the credibility and the public standing of those involved in negotiations on the Palestinian side. At the same time they make life easy for groups like Hamas who stand ready to exploit empty words that only serve to prove their arguments."

"Contrary to their gown-wearing counterparts, the suit-wearing extremists are more sophisticated and more illusive. They consult with image-makers and PR specialists and speak the language of the dominant with seductive eloquence. As such, the suit-wearing extremists are more prone to fly under the radar of public sensibilities and media scrutiny, and this not only gives them the leverage but the impunity to go for the kill- painting all Muslims and Islam on one broad negative paintbrush."

"In Israel, 25 per cent of the population is non-Jewish, severely discriminated against and denied basic democratic and social rights. The bill prompted Israel's newspaper, Ha'aretz, to publish an editorial titled, "A racist Jewish state".