Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Fri

09

May

2008

Is the United States of America Addicted to War?
Friday, 09 May 2008 23:48
by Walter C. Uhler
 
Mikhail Gorbachev is not a frivolous man. He was the Soviet leader who introduced the conceptual breakthrough of "mutual security" to Soviet-American relations, as well as the man who did more than any other individual to bring the Cold War to a peaceful conclusion (See here). In my opinion, he ranks as the greatest statesman of the twentieth century (something I was able to tell him personally, when we talked in St. Petersburg, Russia in May 2006).

So, when Mr. Gorbachev says, "Every US president has to have a war," and "I sometimes have the feeling that the United States is going to wage war against the entire world," - as was reported by the Telegraph.co.uk on May 7, 2008 — I take him seriously. More to the point, Gorbachev's assertions probably elicited widespread agreement, not only in Russia, but also across Europe, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

For, as historian Michael Sherry has put it: "Measured by its actions rather than its self-image, the United States is a warrior nation more than any other modern power is." Lawrence R. Velvel has been blunter still: "The United States is a nation which seeks war." As evidence, Velvel adds: "Since Hitler invaded Poland, we have fought World War II, the Korean War, the Viet Nam war, secret wars in Laos and Cambodia, the first Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, and the second Gulf War. We have invaded, bombed, or 'quarantined,' among other places, Panama, Grenada, Cuba, Haiti, Somalia, the Sudan, Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia, and Libya. We have 'declared' a world wide war on terrorists. We spend more on our military, some say, than all the rest of the world put together. "["Why We Seek War," The Long Term View Spring 2004]

Even worse, many of America's wars were unnecessary. According to historian John L. Harper: "History shows that the United States has had a strong propensity to become involved in conflicts which, though it would be misleading to call them 'wars of choice,' were unnecessary wars." In Professor Harper's interpretation, the U.S. has fought only five wars that strictly were "wars of necessity": the War of Independence, the Civil War, World War II, the initial phase of the Korean war, and the Afghanistan War (following the September 11, 2001, al Qaeda terrorist attacks).

After identifying two "borderline" wars - World War I and the first Gulf War - the U.S. still fought six wars that Professor Harper believes were unnecessary: the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, the second phase of the Korean War, the Vietnam war and Bush's invasion of Iraq. [John L. Harper, "Anatomy of a Habit: America's Unnecessary Wars," Survival, Summer 2005, pp. 58-59]

Moreover, each of "American's unnecessary wars adhere to a basic five-part pattern: (1) Each has been fought in the name of a broader mission that Providence has allegedly chosen the United States to carry out, (2) Self-deception has been at the heart of the decision to go to war, (3) each has been the handiwork "of a small, determined 'war party,'" (4) congressional opposition has been weak and the party in power calculates "that successful military action…[would] pay dividends at the polls," and (5) "More often than not, they have failed to advance the interests of the individuals and political parties who have advanced them." [Harper, pp. 59, 63, 69, 73, 76]

As Professor Harper concludes, "It should be a cause for serious reflection when contemplating military action in the future that the premises on which the United States decided to go to war in 1812, 1846, 1898, 1917, 1950, 1964-65 and 2002-03, were mainly false." [p. 79] Unfortunately, Harper's conclusion assumes that America's addiction to war is not the inevitable product of the very national characteristics that make Americans a uniquely warrior nation. More likely, as Geoffrey Perrett demonstrated in his book, A Country Made By War, America's wars "molded and mirrored its national identity."

Yet, consider the statement made in the May 2008 issue of Current History by a Russian scholar, Dmitri Trenin. "In recent years, Washington's attention has been largely focused on Russia's domestic evolution." Why? Because, "A country's external behavior is without question informed by its economic system, political order and system of values."

As "Exhibit One," supporting Trenin's observation, consider the assertions about Russia made by Republican presidential candidate, John McCain: "A decade and a half ago, the Russian people threw off the tyranny of communism and seemed determined to build a democracy and a free market and to join the West. Today, we see in Russia diminishing political freedoms, a leadership dominated by a clique of former intelligence officers, efforts to bully democratic neighbors, such as Georgia, and attempts to manipulate Europe's dependence on Russian oil and gas. We need a new Western approach to this revanchist Russia. We should start by ensuring that the G-8, the group of eight highly industrialized states, becomes again a club of leading market democracies: it should include Brazil and India but exclude Russia. Rather than tolerate Russia's nuclear blackmail or cyberattacks, Western nations should make clear that the solidarity of NATO, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, is indivisible and that the organization's doors remain open to all democracies committed to the defense of freedom. We must also increase our programs supporting freedom and the rule of law in Russia and emphasize that genuine partnership remains open to Moscow if it desires it but that such a partnership would involve a commitment to being a responsible actor, internationally and domestically." [John McCain, Foreign Affairs, November/December 2007]

Imagine that! The very Arizona Senator (the son and grandson of swashbuckling U.S. Navy Admirals) who irresponsibly voted to authorize the Bush administration's illegal, immoral, preventive-war invasion of Iraq — and who still defends his immoral vote today — also hypocritically insists that Russia must become a "responsible actor, internationally and domestically." Like most warmongering Americans, McCain hypocritically whitewashes America's many sins, but is quick to spot sins elsewhere.

Curiously, so does Professor Michael Cox, while excoriating "Europe's Enduring Anti-Americanism," in that very same issue of Current History. Professor Cox specifically condemns Europeans who attempt to explain America's invasion of Iraq - or any of its many other sins — "as merely the external manifestation of forces lying at the root of American society." According to Professor Cox, "Despite its rationality, there can be little doubt that such thinking is "anti-American," in that it condemns precisely what it identifies as the defining features of American society."

Yet, the overwhelming evidence presented above suggests there's a recurring method to America's military madness - a method suggesting addiction. Not only in the number of wars fought and the number of unnecessary wars fought, but also in the five-part pattern detected in America's wars.

Professor Cox, himself, acknowledges the widespread belief among Europeans that one of the defining features of American society is the deeply embedded and nearly universal (and obnoxious) belief that the United States is the greatest country in the world. Such a belief not only has given the U.S. its often exercised excuse to promote its superior values abroad, but also the obligation to enforce them at gunpoint, if necessary.

Witness the warmongering implicit in the Bush administration's assertion that America's national security depends upon its ability to advance American-style freedom abroad. It differs little from the rationale used by President James Polk, when he sent forces to invade and occupy parts of Mexico. He was simply extending "the area of freedom."

Thus, it's little wonder that wise men, such as Mikhail Gorbachev, see something more permanent and nefarious at work. Is Iran next?



Walter C. Uhler is an independent scholar and freelance writer whose work has been published in numerous publications, including The Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Journal of Military History, the Moscow Times and the San Francisco Chronicle. He also is President of the Russian-American International Studies Association (RAISA).
More from this author:
The South Continues to "Make" Race: Will the Supreme Court Follow? (6557 Hits)
by Walter C. Uhler A Review of How Race is Made: Slavery, Segregation, and the Senses, by Mark M. Smith (University of North Carolina Press,...
Put on the Spot, Our Punk President Lies Yet Again (5851 Hits)
by Walter C. Uhler Whenever I hear President Bush tell another lie (or read that he has told another lie) I'm reminded of the Liar-in-Chief's...
Bringing the "Perps," Bush and Cheney, to Justice (5199 Hits)
by Walter C. Uhler A Review of U.S. v. Bush By Elizabeth de la Vega According to President Bush, Saddam Hussein was brought to...
FOX News Fascist, Gretchen Carlson, Swift-boats Sen. Kennedy's Opposition to Bush's "Surge" (5605 Hits)
by Walter C. Uhler Although none of the following news nuggets were found in the speech that President Bush delivered tonight, recently, we...
Hoover Institution Hack from Ann Coulter's School of History Slimes "Left" for 9/11 (5863 Hits)
by Walter C. Uhler Incredibly, on January 18, 2007, the Lost Angeles Times (no typo) published Dinesh D'Souza's thoroughly biased Op-Ed,...
Related Articles:
America the Tyranny (10886 Hits)
Behold and bear witness to what has become of America, in this era of uncertainty and bewilderment, in this time of fear and intimidation, that...
The Dumbing Down of America (14390 Hits)
Something is amiss in the great nation called America. Ominous sirens warning this reality can be heard emanating loudly through invisible winds...
America is No Longer Free (11393 Hits)
by Paul Lehto Habeas corpus -- it's your most fundamental legal right, your right to go to a court and get an order requiring the...
Godzilla vs. The Condoleezzard (Celebrating Halloween in the United States of Anxiety) (11052 Hits)
by Mickey Z. Halloween is an odd holiday. The ostensible concept, as it has evolved to become, is to shock, startle, frighten, petrify,...
James Petras' New Book: The Power of Israel in the United States - Book Review by Stephen Lendman (21378 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman James Petras is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. He's a noted academic figure on the US...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (3)add comment

Paul M said:

0
War is wealth transfer
The primary function of war is to transfer wealth from the working taxpayers to the asset owning industrial and financial elites. The US is constantly at war to keep this process functioning.
 
May 10, 2008
Votes: +0

Project Humanbeingsfirst said:

0
Beware of the "wise men" of opposition
Hi -

There isn't much on the surface that one can disagree with in Walter C. Uhler's exposition, even the statement: “Mikhail Gorbachev is not a frivolous man.”

Though one might mildly quibble over the characterization of the word “peaceful”, as in “the man who did more than any other individual to bring the Cold War to a peaceful conclusion” if one overlooks the destruction of Afghanistan and the gift of “giving to the USSR its Vietnam War” at the expense of shattering the tabula rasa of an innocent peoples and their entire civilization, one would certainly not argue with the main thesis being propounded.

That yes indeed, this man was responsible for seeding the pivotal prime-mover transformation “From Balance of Terror to Unilateral Terror”[1] which today fuels the unilateralist quest for “full spectrum dominance”.

One would certainly also not argue with the spectrum of opinions quoted from the scholars of empire themselves, expounding upon the unfettered penchant for “imperial mobilization” of the neo-colonial legatee of the former colonial empire upon whom, once upon a time, the sun never set!

The characterization that does puzzle one though, is that of the “such wise men” as in “little wonder that wise men, such as Mikhail Gorbachev, see something more permanent and nefarious at work”

What is this profound wisdom of “such wise men” that they deserve to be quoted to assert what is obvious to all and sundry: “Is Iran next?” It is hardly even a question today, nor has it been since at least 2002, if not earlier, when the NPR was revealed wherein Iran was identified for 'preemptive' nuclear strikes!

Is such a designation of “wise men” for rehashing the palpable truisms of war? Many have tread that path far more astutely:


“War is a Racket” – Maj. Gen Smedley Butler, circa 1930s.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf

“War is a Force that gives Us Meaning” – Chris Hedges, circa 2002.


Or is such a designation of “wise men” for the feigned surprise of 'Nature Boy' winning the Noora-Kushti*, as was expressed by the famed Iraq Study Group when it ex post facto noted:

“We conclude that the intelligence community was dead wrong in almost all of its prewar judgments about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. This was a major intelligence failure” – just as Mr. Walter C. Uhler too notes of his favorite hero “the greatest statesman of the twentieth century”:

“In speeches delivered to the State of the World Forum in September 2000, Mikhail Gorbachev blamed the United States for squandering unique post-cold war opportunities to bring "new thinking" (novoe myshlenie) to the problems of globalization, arms reduction and nuclear disarmament. He's entitled. For, paradoxically, it was Gorbachev--the product of an ostensibly moribund, so-called totalitarian regime--whose idealism and dynamism went farthest in demilitarizing the cold war, assuring its peaceful resolution and ushering in those very opportunities.”


Or is it indeed for the wisdom that is only visible on that one real 'birthday' when 'Alice' is wide awake and far removed from the 24x7 364-day influence of the 'Mad Hatter' at the 'unbirthday party' – the real wisdom of one “whose idealism and dynamism went farthest in demilitarizing the cold war”, of having eagerly partaken at the Globalists' table and having been rewarded for it with the Nobel Peace Prize? The wisdom that is now ushering in the New World Order of “namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign”?

This was surely entirely un-obvious to a world statesman unattuned to absolute power and its incantations – not having read George Kennan's PPS-23 from 1948:

'Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.

We should dispense with the aspiration to "be liked" or to be regarded as the repository of a high-minded international altruism. We should stop putting ourselves in the position of being our brothers' keeper and refrain from offering moral and ideological advice. We should cease to talk about vague and--for the Far East--unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.'


Why do such Hegelian dialectics and the 'technique of infamy'** spun by the brilliant scholars of empire all of which so very cleverly attempt to juxtapose conquests with its fake opposition, still fail to impress the ordinary plebeian mind?


Perhaps that's why we still remain pretty much the 'plebeians'.


Thank you.

Zahir Ebrahim
the plebeian
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

[1] http://atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3831/81/

*Noora-Kushti – an Urdu language expression that denotes a 'fixed-match', like WWF.

**technique of infamy – Ezra Pound's exposition of a brilliant Machiavellian construction. See http://humanbeingsfirst.org


Caveat Lector - who knows what is true and what is false anymore! Taking things at face is considered rational and wise today, and foolishness and conspiratorial otherwise.
 
May 14, 2008
Votes: +0

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org said:

0
Cleaned-up: Beware of the 'wise men' of opposition

The slightly revised and properly re-formatted earlier comment above can also be read as an article at: http://humanbeingsfirst.blogsp...ition.html



Thank you.

Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
http://humanbeingsfirst.org


 
May 14, 2008
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top