Trump's Iran policy has been bought and paid for by the Israeli, Saudi, and defense industry lobbies, as well as mega donors like Sheldon Adelson. The US's national interest isn't even part of the equation...
2
It matters not what the people want. Our Republic is dead, replaced by an Empire ruled by an Imperial President. Our leaders have learned the secrets to unending war:
No draft - 'volunteers' only.
Keep it out of the news, No deaths at dinnertime.
Minimize combat deaths. Use 'contractors (mercenaries)'. Body armor and armored vehicles. Drones and missiles for remote kills. Keep the wounded alive at any cost.
Only positive stories about the wounded. Amputee runners, wheelchair basketball.
Demonize our 'enemies' - use media to continually remind the public of the 'evil' we are fighting.
3
Trump has started regime change wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Ukraine, Yemen, N.Korea, Libya, Hong Kong and throughout Southeast Asia. Millions of Americans are at war all over the globe. Tens of thousands are coming home in body bags. And for who? For what? Just so trump can call himself a “wartime president.” He has assumed dictatorial powers and is waging illegal wars of aggression. We need immediate abdication in favor of Speaker Pelosi until such time as Bernie can take power and transform America into a Socialist Workers’ Democratic Republic.
1
The time for America to shoulder the burden of world security is over. We are over-committed everywhere around the globe and our adversaries know it.
It's time for democracies around the world to commit to a mutual security framework where each nation contributes soldiers, equipment, decision making, and finances that are proportional to the size of their respective economies so that all the countries enjoying security also share its burdens.
The only thing stopping us from moving this direction is that US politicians and generals don't want to relinquish power, and the US military industrial complex doesn't want to lose revenue.
1
Three words, Military Industrial Complex. Once it began, it never truly stopped. It's not much more complicated than that. September 11th solidified the MIC and gave Cheney a scared and angry America and used it to foist his "Patriot Act" and declare war not only on the Middle East, but also on the entire country.
1
Edward, Edward you simple man.
You think it matters what Americans want or "demand"?
How about the 90%+ who demand some form or other of gun legislation?
Where is that fool Lamar Alexander on that one, the doddering, complicit boob?
Or Mitch McConnell, who overthrew centuries of practice to install idiots on the courts, candidates so dim and bigoted they wouldn't know where to find the law books they hold in such contempt, all the while wondering how Young Biden was qualified to sit on a corporate board?
Besides, Real Americans, the rich ones, the only ones with voices to be heard (thank you, Traitor Roberts), love these wars. The want more, bigger, louder, more explosive, and they mean to get them, as Trump means to provide them. Its good to be "a wartime President..."
Unless you count the benighted, spineless Susan Collins, the duplicitous Handsome Portman, and their sodden ilk there is no "bipartisan" criticism of Trump's policies; just inane yammering, sure to evaporate at the first whisper of an actual vote.
4
Not a whisper about the background: America’s economy has been on a war footing since the end of WWII, the profiteers grow more powerful with each passing decade, and we aren’t willing to transition to an economy based on peace and addressing our real and urgent problems when we can just blame outside malevolent forces and keep sacrificing our soldiers and churning out the machinery of death.
We “can not afford” even trying to lift ourselves above near-third world status but we can fund $2 trillion and get nothing in return? Did someone beat America with the stupid stick?
3
Listen, New York Times, you are writing an article against the CIA and they will come and get you if you keep it up.
No Democrat candidate has a real anti-forever wars foreign policy except Tulsi Gabbard, who you have squashed at the request of we know who.
Finally, we would lose a ton of jobs if we reduced the armed forces and all of those people in the MIC who make guns and tanks and mach 3 aerial spinners that go too fast to fight. Who would hire them?
1
They are wrong.
We are in "forever wars" because our Islamist enemies, both Sunni (ISIS) and Shiite (Iran) are planning to make war on us forever, or until we surrender and let them turn us into an Islamist theocracy.
1
@Jonathan Katz The Sunnis and Shiites are happy battling each other, as they have for a thousand years, and only turn their attention to us when we decide to intervene in the Middle East. They will never cross an ocean to turn us into an Islamic "thoracrasy"
Ask any LEO about domestic disputes. Husband and wife beating the tar out of one another will both turn against anyone trying to break up their fight.
4
The US and the whole world would be better off if the military budget were cut by half and then half again.
Spend all the freed up money on infrastructure, education, healthcare, etc etc.
76
@ken G
Sure, as long as everyone in the world promised to pay nice and not use or threaten force to impose their agenda on others.
1
@Bob Krantz
1/2 of our current military would still be as effective as the bloated one we now pay for - to enrich military industrial complex.
16
@ken G
Completely agree. 1/2 over 10 years. But, to pull it off, we somehow have to a confront the enormous economic motivation to maintain our military at the ridiculous size of today. The military-industrial complex has so much at stake and has bought off the politicians needed to accomplish the reduction.
Then there is the constant glorification of all things military. The majority of Americans probably believe any cut at all would put them in grave danger.
11
Sad, but the United States was built on blood. How many years has it been at war in its history? Such a waste for something that should be gift.
1
No mention was made of Truman's recognition of Israel
and the continued support of Israel of rate last 72 years.
Nor the overthrow of the Iranian Government by the US and
the UK in 1953 and the establishment of the Shah.
The US did not carpet bomb in Vietnam, if you mean the same type of bombing that occurred in World War II.
If you study the history of the Middle East you learn that
there has been wars there, on an off, since before the Bronze Age.
2
The Shock is that We are Still over there. The Awe is the amount of money we’ve spent. Until we roll wheelchairs instead of tanks down Pennsylvania Ave. the cost of these wars are hidden. Every Red Cent and Every Red Blood Cell have been a terrible waste.
6
"whether any of the wars are still justified given the tolls — psychological, physical and spiritual — they have exacted on the United States. And how about the money wasted? Six trillion dollars and growing.
2
Where is Congress here? (The same place the Senate was for impeachment)
1
Tell it to The "Defense" Industry. They lead our country, our youth to war to be slaughtered for profit, just like swine to a rendering plant.
Ditto, the Private Fast Food Industry. They fill our youth with sugars and salts and good knows what else and then, when sickened, pass them on to Big Pharma and The Private Health Care Industry, again, like swine through a rendering plant, for more profit.
Better wake up out there. Generally speaking, old, rich white men are destroying our country and our planet for their own purposes and profit.
As long as Americans believe that they are the "greatest nation on earth", that might makes right - as long as Americans wave the flag at every opportunity - these wars will continue.
American people really don't care about brown folks in other countries. They are the enemy.
The US military is a large contributor to many states by virtue of bases in these states.
As some here have stated, the money is too good to give up. You don't need roads, schools or hospitals if you can have shiny toys costing billions.
Do many Americans even have a clue where US troops are located around the world? There are troops in almost all of Europe and Asia, with the exception of Russia and China, all of the 'stans, most of Africa, SE Asia and others.
This will show you where they are and what role they play: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/map-shows-places-world-where-us-military-operates-180970997/
5
I live near a "joint" Army base and Japanese Self Defense Force. Imperialism is alive and well in Japan. The soldiers stationed here (the large majority)hate being here and the Japanese aren't exactly too keen on it either. We are all over Japan, a holdback from WWII and we aren't going anywhere. The amount of money and time to keep troops and their families and all of there stuff (the government pays to move there entire household goods) is not worth the scare tactics of having them deployed worldwide.
2
Glad to see this article in the Times. America’s endless war-making has a bloody cost in lost lives and wasted trillions that otherwise might have supported lives instead of death.
Senator Sanders has the most informed and longest standing anti-war position:
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/sanders-anti-war-iran/
1
We're in the Middle East due to oil and Israel, and not necessarily in that order. Which is most compelling is up to you.
2
Empire is as an Empire does.
5
Yes -- it needs to be over.
2
Well, think of the negative effects on shareholder value of Boeing, Raytheon, Haliburton, and the rest of the defense crowd. Terrible!
And by the way, what about the often US paid for military in these places which is often ineffective and thus prompting the thought "only a white man's army can do the job" whatever that may be?
2
The Taliban owns and controls Afghanistan. Why are we not admitting the obvious? We have given billions (trillions?) to the people and country. Thousands of our troops have been maimed and killed there. Close the door.
3
What would we do without NYTimes set piece journalism that reviews twenty years and fails to note the elephant in the room?
Any discussion of this issue without mentioning that President Trump campaigned against the forever war and American global military deployment is really absurd.
2
Campaigned does not equal governed. Can you inform us what great steps Trump has taken to stop these wars apart from assassinating Iranians and saber rattling at the Chinese?
2
Why is it that no one who rails against endless wars ever acknowledges the truly longest unended war, the Korean War - now 70 years since its outbreak and still held in abeyance by a mere truce? Is there not a lesson here about the true significance of endless wars - US hostility toward North Korea insures a permanent land base for its military and economic interests on the Asian peninsula and in the region. It has virtually nothing to do with US security as Wong's article emphasizes. In fact failing to end hostilities with North Korea for 7 decades has only intensified US insecurity. Even to begin to understand America's propensity for endless war, we have to go far beyond Wong's thesis that belief in overseas entanglements benefiting US national security accounts for it and recall Ike's departing warning about the ravenous interests of the US military industrial complex that feeds on warring conditions.
1
Eisenhower warned us of the power of the military industrial complex for a reason. Since 9/11, the US has been at war constantly. It serves the government well to have its population in constant fear. We are treated like criminals at the airport every single day because our government didn’t do it’s job and stop the terrorists on 9/11. It was a huge breakdown of the most basic military defense protocol. Now we are endlessly at war all over the globe.
6
I kept reading and reading this descriptive article, wondering when the main course would arrive, and it didn't come until I got to the comments that explored, if briefly, the underpinnings of the "forever war:" economics, domestic politics, ideology.
1
Had we not spent trillions for wars our national debt would be much smaller, maybe even paid off.
We'd be paying less interest on debt.
We could have invested in health, education, infrastructure and good living conditions for all Americans.
We could have lower taxes on the middle class.
And yet the wars continue. Cui bono?
6
I recently read a blistering critique of foreign policy plans of ALL the Democrat persident hopefuls. The conclusion -- there are none. Not surprisingly, tracking has shown that questions and concerns expressed for this issue among voters in Iowa amount to only about 5%. Yes, this is fly-over country where ordinary people don't consult maps. How can this issue gain traction when there is no military draft and actual deaths (not casualties) are low?
“America has become energy independent. And we’re not very good at achieving our preferred outcomes in the Middle East.” Actually, that's not quite correct. But even if it were, the truth is that America is not independent of many friends and allies in the international system. And they are not energy independent. What's more, if a determined adversary gains a strangle hold on Middle East energy resources, those friends and allies will be leveraged away from the US. By its very definition, "over extension" is not a good thing. The task of intelligent foreign policy making is to determine the kind and limits of "extension."
Instead of pushing other NATO countries to expand the percentage of GDP they spend on "defense" we should reduce our spending and take care of our people like they do.
3
One of the few things we as Americans have seemed to agree on forever is defense appropriations. Defense expenditures just keep rising as Congress busily funnels those funds into their districts/states, and the citizenry's interests are elsewhere. As an example, who has eleven aircraft carrier "groups", a group being a whole fleet around carriers, while the rest of the World has none? America. Congress keeps funding equipment our Armed Forces do not want or nee, like tanks. We are the World's largest producer of munitions and military equipment. Meanwhile we have our own societal problems on which there seems little agreement. It seems, "American interests" include everything, everywhere while keeping the entire World stirred up?
2
The US is a country without inherent culture and the war is what kept the US together. Without wars, the US will fall apart and forever war is a necessary remedy for lacking of cultural cohesion. For that, an enemy has to be invested to keep us going in maintaining world hegemony.
3
What is not being said is that a significant portion of our economy has become dependent on wars, and now we can't stop without economic pain- which no national politician is going to inflict.
The only way I can see to bring these wars to an end is to re-institute the draft. When America's families begin to see their sons and daughters taken from them, and sent to fight and die in wars for which there is no conceivable reason, other than corporate profit, they will, politically, put a stop to them. Until then, they remain mostly invisible, and will never end.
3
All the Presidents since 9/11 have had to factor in the political consequences of the potential cost of withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Middle East. What if, for example, a peremptory end declared to our involvement in the former led to public hangings of Taliban opponents and the use of its territory for terrorist day camps once again? The political price to be paid for the Presidential or Congressional decision that resulted in such a situation would be very high. Those polls that show "more Americans" believing that our military activities create more dangers for the U.S. would turn around in a heartbeat, and people would start losing elections. That is a major reason for our unending wars, and it's not going to change anytime soon.
Could it be the time for an American "East of Suez" moment? Consequently, a national call to service, all Americans of age xx to yy serve 24-36 months in some national capacity, be it military, civilian occupation. Upon completion, a GI Bill educational stipend. The 1% who serve are truly unrepresentative of the countries demographics.
Make it difficult for "Police Actions" or warpower act subversions.
1
“One of the very odd pathologies of Washington and the defense establishment is this enthrallment with the Middle East, which just isn’t that important,” said Elbridge Colby, a former senior Pentagon official in the Trump administration. “America has become energy independent. ..."
I'm 78, and for as long as I can remember our Middle East policy has been about oil. Why else would we be friendly with the medieval regime in Saudi Arabia? That hardly makes us a "force for good" in the region. Or, why else did we overthrow the secular and progressive government of Mohammad Mosaddegh in Iran in the early 1950s?
War is not the answer and never was. Make the Peace Corp the size of the military and put State back in charge of foreign policy. Care about the people of other countries. Love the World.
Probably no money in that line of thinking. But a better future.
We should listen to Eisenhower and dismantle the military industrial congressional complex. No more wars.
1
I am not going to be one of those people who say a war should never be fought, there really are bad people in the world. I am going to say that we should not fight a war unless our national survival is at stake and then we should do whatever it takes to win the war, up to and including Nukes. If it is not worth that, then we shouldn't be fighting.
As things stand now we enter into a war at the drop of a hat, as a result we are not very good at it. We have not won a war since WW II, except for Grenada, we are death on small Caribbean nations. Other than that we have tied, lost outright, walked away, or are still fighting all of our wars. We are paying
$ Billions for a Defense (War) Department that cannot perform its most basic function.
As a beginning let us end the wars we are currently fighting: The Middle East, Afghanistan, and Iraq. We have been fighting for almost two decades and accomplished nothing. There is nothing in the region we need, let us come home. Let them find their own way to peace, they are the only ones who can.
Revoking the authorizations, while a good first step, would not go far enough to contain US foreign adventurism. Two other acts would pretty much do the trick.
First, a limited draft. The nearest relative of military age of every Congresscritter, the President, the Vice President, and the entire cabinet should be drafted into a special intervention brigade; this would be the first unit deployed and the last withdrawn any time US troops are to be sent into harm's way.
Second, in order to allow for reaction to unexpected events, The President should have the power to deploy troops on his own initiative overseas. However, within 30 days he must receive Congressional approval for the specific deployment, not a general dispensation like the current authorizations; and should he fail to get that the troops must be withdrawn and cannot be redeployed to that area for at least 90 days.
These acts, or something like them, would do wonders towards keeping US troops out of future forever wars.
I remember, back in college in the 60s, an ROTC teacher, an Army sergeant, said about the Vietnam war: "Don't knock it, it's the only war we got". That says it all, and helps explain our endless wars. We have a trillion dollar military budget, if everything is included. It's a jobs program, corporate welfare, that needs constant justification.
13
Glad you remember something from college.
Articles like this tend to reinforce American isolationism, what to me is more dangerous than remaining "bogged down" in "America's longest war". We have fewer troops in Afghanistan than in So. Korea. Tho there's a hotter war in Afghanistan, there's also the ever-present threat of one in So. Korea. We have to keep our commitments to those in these nations who fight against terrorism and brutal tyranny.
Let's drop this strawman argument about supporting wars of nation-building--few support those now--and non-useful usages of our military--the threat of whose use is the basis of commended diplomacy everywhere. The US needs to live out our best values by supporting popular sovereignty and republicanism (small "r") everywhere in the world. Trump won't do it, and most potential Dem leaders are ambivalent about it because of "America First" egocentrism. But there are creative uses of our outrageously expensive DoD (whose expenses yet need radical cutbacks vis waste) that can help make our nation a leader in actual peacekeeping.
Too late.
The military-industrial complex has a firm grip on the members of Congress, just as Eisenhower warned us many years ago.
Note that even Democratic candidates are generally too scared to even mention the possibility of cutting the defense budget.
Hasn't even been mentioned once, as far as I can tell, during the primaries, and despite endless formal debates, I don't recall there being a single question about defense spending.
8
The interest group that lobbies most effectively for continual military engagement in the Middle East, in Asia and elsewhere is the military itself. Why? Partly for budgetary reasons, because all these far-flung commitments provide support for the out-sized national security budget, but also for careerist reasons, because rotations into these combat areas provide officers with resumes that justify advancement. The military has far too much influence over our foreign policy.
19
One reason we started out as a nation without a standing military. In turn, that was used to justify the Second Amendment, describing a country in which, if it became necessary, militias could be called up from every Middlesex village and farm, the men would grab their trusty blunderbusses from the wall above the fireplace, and run off to defend our nation.
So, here’s the deal: you can have your gun rights as they now exist (virtually unlimited)... but, we need to get rid of our standing military. Or, keep the military as is (and keep it busy) but give up individual gun rights as they stand, because we no longer require a well-ordered militia.
But, this being America, we demand our cake and want to eat it, too.
I decided to vote GOP until the USA is in a war with everyone.
Only the GOP and Trump will deliver this area,.
1
@gratis
Please, the Dems never met a war they didn't like. Drone strikes have now made it even cleaner, less personal, less expensive, and easier to hide. Remember that Obama's picture is on the plaque for "Most Drone Missions - Ever."
1
Why not impose mandatory conscription? With most of America having children, grandchildren, neighbors in military, there would be significant pressure from the electorate to not get involved in "Forever Wars". Not only that, it would solve the education debt problem and health care issues as "Veterans" would be eligible for government-sponsored tuition plans and health care. Multiple problems solved!!
12
@AS
Exactly!
And that’s exactly why the Elites of the Military Industrial Complex will never allow conscription. Peace is not good for profit.
History confirms, again and again, among a number of reasons, once any empire starts to over extend itself financially and does it by sacrificing the needs of its own people, it eventually collapses and America is definitely no exception, Dwight D. Eisenhower said it when he left the Presidency and emphasized it even more in later speeches.
Sadly, if the Supreme Allied commander in Europe during WWll didn't convince both the leaders of America and its citizens who keep electing these same "do nothing" politicians, the dangers of the influence of the military/industrial complex, what will?
33
As Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is reported to have noted before we invaded Iraq, it is a lot easier to get into a war than to get out of one. Further, we can stop our military engagements but that may only encourage our adversaries to view our disengagement as a surrender and double down on besting us militarily on those matters of great interest to them.
2
It is not possible to accomplish a mission if you don’t know what it is.
15
And the country is a mess. What business did we have there?
2
We are slow learners. In fact, we do not learn. I just finished "Embers of War" by Longvale. It details the post WWII Vietnam and how we supported the colonial policy of France post war and our taking over the war in the early 50's. For anyone who has taken the time to read this column it should be required reading. I am following that with Max Boot's, "The Road Not Taken" which sequences nicely, and sadly, with the former. It is easier for Presidents to use the hammer than to do the hard work necessary for peace and understanding. American's expect that the military is called first. Look at our current reduction in an effective State Dept. It too, is now a hammer. It will take a President with a backbone to stand against forward military projection who can articulate the reasons for restraint. Yes, an effectively trained, equipped, housed in American barracks and respected military. It is ridiculous if you think of it. Why are we sending troops all over the world while we are at war here!
3
Having just given Trump a pass to do whatever he wants, the Senate, at least has zero credibility to exercise restraint on him now. Being a rubber stamp has consequences.
7
Our wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan are nothing more than Vietnam 2.0. We can fight there forever and we will accomplish nothing more than we already have, which is essentially nothing. We cannot get out of these wars fast enough.
4
As long as we keep denying history, the endless wars will continue. The dire predictions of what would happen in Asia if we lost Viet Nam turned out to be completely wrong. Now Viet Nam is a tourist destination. The Iraqis want us out of Iraq, we should leave. As noted in the article, Isis and AlQuida are not going to sit at negotiating tables with us and work out a peace agreement. It’s well past time for a two state solution in Israel. Give the Palestinians a homeland to make of it what they will. And not the ridiculous division proposed by the Trump/Netanyahu people. Yes, I know the history of the region but a fair solution at this point is the only way to short circuit 70 years of war.
2
Now wait a minute. War is a major support to our economic well-being. Think of all the lawyers and lobbyists who spend their lives pushing the agendas of Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Northrup Grumman, et al. Think of all those criminals in the Congress who would be kicked out of office if their constituents suddenly lost their jobs. Why Trump's toady Secretary of Defense made his bones as Raytheon's chief lobbyist.
Say it ain't so, Joe.
28
@george eliot
Exactly! And remember, with the growth of the military fighter contractors, mercenary princes, like Eric Prince, have a great interest in Forever War as a Forever Business.
11
world is full of new Hitler's and Stalin's. our military have to be very strong in ready to meet new challenges.
@val So true. The USA with bone spurs trump at the helm seems to be the new challenge.
2
The period of American colonization of the Philippines lasted 48 years. We kept troops in there over 30 years. So, some things take a long time.
5
@VaBlueRidgeYou forgot the time before WW2, when we seized it from Spain based upon a war based upon a war started upon, you guessed it, false pretenses.
1
It seems a willingness to confine our defense to territorial limits, including wise relations with our neighbors, will get a big boost at the moment of the collapse of our economy. To forestall that, many are willing to pass the buck for military enforcement of economic interests to the discretion of the complex. The idea of national borders might get a fresh look then. Maybe we will learn more about the known and unknown knowns and unknowns, as we try to adapt our foreign policy to the new reality.
1
What I wonder is, how will this malfeasance rebound on us? And I wonder how many foreign lives we've made a pit of despair and pain? How much hatred have we gained?
18
Our foreign policy in the Middle East and surrounds is not ours. It’s has been captured and is that of Israel. Professors Mersheimer of Chicago and Walt of Harvard have started to show how this is so.
28
Aggressive intervention abroad, forward deployments and fighting perceived enemies “over there” keep all world and the United States safe.
America has been an imperialist country since TR and that is not about to stop. Despite our moralistic posturing, the fact is we love to throw our weight around.
23
@Tom
Well, you may want to throw your weight around, but, ultimately, it creates more problems than it solves and the American taxpayer sacrifices many important every day needs to pay for it all.
2
Wars are good for the economy. That is all that matters. Our wealthy people do not have enough money and they desperately need more. So we should send young people to die for them and their money, because after all, that is what we really care about.
We will be no different than Iraq or Iran or any other country run by religious fanatics. I'll admit that Trump doesn't believe in god, but those who support him do and it is their religious policies that he implements. They too want to kill the infidels, just like Iraq and Iran.
Technically you can include all middle eastern countries in the list of those who want constant war, including Israel.
13
@Chris
Follow the money trail . Disgusting
2
The distortions and accusations heaped on Pres. Obama's action in withdrawing from Iraq were part of the publicly-declared Republican campaign to deny that president any achievement.
Republicans cared more about denigrating a black president than they did about the on-the-ground reality of the Iraq situation. It was politics over functional governing.
Sound familiar?
13
@Karen Owsowitz
Lindsay Graham, Bolton and company (Hillary included) just seem to love war. These folks (Rs and Ds) are warmongers, no need to lay down the race card.
Thankfully Congress and Obama had no appetite and we avoided putting US troops in Libya and Syria.
These forever wars contributed significantly to the election of Mr. Trump.
It is shocking to read comments from supposedly informed voters who genuinely appear to believe that the Republicans are entirely to blame for our military disasters abroad.
President Obama could have told Americans the truth about Afghanistan, but instead he obediently adopted the establishment line that we were making progress.
American complicity in the disaster of Yemen began in 2015, while Obama was president.
And the catastrophic failure in Libya also happened on Obama’s watch.
Of course the Republicans openly salivate at the prospect of yet another war, while the Democrats try to make it appear that they were left with no options, but the end result is still the same: the bipartisan support for endless military adventures continues unimpeded without any regard for the human beings in the targeted countries.
Frank Zappa was right, the Democratic and Republican parties are the entertainment division of the Military Industrial Complex.
President Eisenhower tried to warn us of this before I was even born, but now that most Americans can see it, it appears that it’s too late for us to do anything about it.
19
As long as corporate interests are allowed to buy politicians, the U. S. will continue to make war. America must choose politicians who will put the welfare of the country above profits for the military-industrial complex in order for policy and legislation to be changed.
35
@DD
The "corporatists" just love war, both republican and democrat, just as long as their children don't have to go to the front lines to fight it.
11
Isolationism runs contrary to a world in which China emerges a superpower, Russia continues to exert influence, and the world (and the US) continue to be dependent on Middle East oil, whether directly or indirectly through trade. It also runs counter to a world facing climate change challenges that will only exacerbate issues from radicalism and unstable governments.
As much as we all hope for peace and remaining uninvolved, that threshold has long since been crossed. The real question is how best to utilize our strategic resources in a non-isolationist manner. This is a more important debate than simply relying on labels, like 'endless wars', which after consideration, may sometimes -- in some cases, but not all -- be the least-worst option.
5
If I recall correctly the Times was all behind our war on terror and didn't do their job.
33
There is a wide gap between agreeing with the thesis and actually preventing it from occurring. The article says nothing about the practical difficulty of assessing foreign policy issues that might require commitment of troops, the difficulty of determining, a priori, that the commitment will be drawn out, and the difficulty of withdrawing from a foreign policy commitment once begun. No one disagrees with the thesis, the devil is in the details.
2
America’s post WWII military involvements in Korea, Vietnam and the mid-east have cost the lives of over 100,000 Americans, much larger numbers of civilians, outlays exceeding a trillion dollars. Our enormous military is tempting for Presidents of all persuasions. And the hundreds of thousands employed in the Defense Industries does not go unnoticed.
History suggests no nation with a world class military remains “inactive” when it comes to foreign involvements. So it will take great courage for our President and Congress to draw down our global military commitments. And to appreciate that the so called “War on Terror” focused in the mid-east will take generations to wind down if it ever does.
With only 1% of American families involved in military service the temptation for foreign involvements is oft overpowering. Had we maintained a draft the temptation for such involvements would surely be less. But its unlikely a draft will re-emerge.
One can only imagine how much better the lives of all Americans would have been had most of the enormous resources used in our foreign adventures since WWII been used at home. We’re talking of trillions of dollars used at home.
At day’s end Americans have the most formidable military ever imagined. Just one of our dozens of nuclear subs has enough firepower to destroy every one of the world’s major cities. Surely its time to retrench our military foreign adventures and huge military outlays. And focus on our domestic needs.
39
The real problem is not "endless wars" but the lies told by U.S. administrations to justify them. Many would not have been started or would have ended a lot earlier if our government had not lied to us. As long as there is no accountability for government officials who lie, they will continue to do so. And congressional oversight of this administration, headed by a pathological liar abetted by a GOP-controlled Senate, has become a sick joke.
55
The changing nature of conflict has not led to a rethinking of what conflicts are called or how they do or do not end. Terror will never sign a peace treaty or surrender, and more than Poverty was capable of being defeated in LBJs was on the same. We need new tools and strategies to deal with asymmetrical conflicts against stateless groups. Policing is not sufficient and military approaches too ham handed, putting civilians more often than not at risk. I don’t have the answer, but I also don’t know whether the right people are looking at the right questions.
5
it is a fair assessment of the problem. And it's look like Trump's actions is working in right directions.
"On Tuesday, Mr. Trump is expected to articulate the direction of American foreign policy in his State of the Union address."
On Wednesday, you can ignore the preceding sentence. The policy will have changed.
20
@JSH Just have "Mr. Trump" in the same sentence as "articulate" is pretty funny.
16
The Chinese government rewrote the history of Tiananmen Square. G.W. Bush is seen as well intentioned and naive invading Iraq but the real story, how he was manipulated and who the real culprits were/are in 9/11 is ignored.
I grew up believing that the United States is the world's police. A young, forward looking country with resources and courage to help those caught in the horrors and atrocities perpetrated by greed and hatred.
Now, the American way of life is so tied into oil, guns and some kind of "make hay while the sun shines" denial of any kind of optimal future for the earth that I question those in power in the US. What's really going on? Who benefits from this endless carnage?
43
Everything in the U.S. goes back to “follow the money.” We need more reporting on who is getting rich(er) from huge profits on contracts for weapons, uniforms, etc., in our expensive taxpayer-funded conflicts. And whose palms they grease. Congress, I’m looking at you.
32
@rixax Look up: United Fruits, Blackwater, Standard Oil, Halliburton, and these usual suspects: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/03/10/10-companies-profiting-most-from-war/1970997/
1
Only Congress has the power to: To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water.
If this was enforced there would be no forever wars.
Reminder to Congress: when you start doing this again, please include an “end date”: so Congress needs to regularly review any on-going war.
also a draft would also help “spread the burden” of war.
4
Where have all the flowers gone.
9