Not really.
MIC was something he recognized and respected and acknowledged as a need. He cautioned politico’s and The People to make good use because the days of changing from making washing-machines to war machines overnight was no more.
His real admonishment was directed at academia.
(I’ve read his notes and drafts and they provide true insight about what his thoughts truly were. He was not hostile to the defense industry).
His real admonishment was directed at academia.
************
Why then does he refer to ‘military’ nine times in his address and ‘research’ only four times?
He also cites the “immense military establishment and a large arms industry” noting that we must comprehend the total influence and “grave implications” of same.
His notes may indicate a concern with academia but the actual address does not seem to reflect much of that since it was only mentioned half as much as the defense industry was.
Moreover (and to one of your points) hostility toward the defense industry was not the issue. Rather it was about a well founded concern about its “unwarranted influence”.