The Ruses for War
Published
by: Prometheus Books
Hardcover
On Sale 978-0-87975-767-0 More Info...
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
Synopsis
As a prelude to war in 2003, the
administration of George W. Bush did its utmost to convince the public that
Saddam Hussein’s Iraq U.S.
invasion of Iraq this damning
indictment of U.S. the Bush administration’s actions fit a decades-old pattern of going
to war on a pretense rather than informing the public of the government’s
true intentions. This newly updated and revised
paperback edition of The Ruses for War analyzes each instance of military
intervention abroad by the United
States Korea Dominican
Republic Grenada War , Somalia a
tale of coverups, distortions, and manipulation of the media by our country's
leaders for the purpose of gaining public support.
American
imperialism
From Wikipedia, the
free encyclopedia
Spheres of influence during the final phase of the Cold War in the 1980s. The US and USSR
Imperialism and empire
Thomas Jefferson, in the
1790s, awaited the fall of the Spanish empire until “our population can be
sufficiently advanced to gain it from them piece by piece.”[5] [6] In turn, historian Sidney Lens notes that “the urge for
expansion – at the expense of other peoples – goes back to the
beginnings of the United
States [3]
Stuart Creighton Miller says that the public's sense of
innocence about Realpolitik impairs popular recognition of U.S. [7]
American exceptionalism
American exceptionalism is the theory that the United States [8] in terms of its national credo
Philosopher Douglas
Kellner traces the
identification of American exceptionalism as a distinct phenomenon back to
19th century French observer Alexis de Tocqueville [9]
American exceptionalism
is popular among people within the U.S. [10] but its validity and its
consequences are disputed.
As a Monthly Review editorial opines on the phenomenon,
"in Britain 'white man’s burden' United States [11]
Imperialism at the heart of U.S.
1898 political cartoon U.S.
domination (symbolized by a bald eagle Puerto Rico to the Philippines United States
Historian Donald W.
Meinig says that
imperial behavior for the United States
dates at least to the Louisiana Purchase U.S. [12]
Writers and academics of
the early 20th century, like Charles A.
Beard Pat Buchanan claims that the modern United States [13]
Andrew
Bacevich argues that
the U.S. foreign policy after the Cold War [14] As the surviving superpower at the
end of the Cold War, the U.S. Paul Wolfowitz in 1991.[15]
Views of American imperialism
Caricature showing Uncle Sam lecturing four children labelled Philippines , Hawaii ,Porto Rico [ sic ] and Cuba
in front of children holding books labelled with various U.S.
Journalist Ashley Smith
divides theories of the U.S. super-imperialism [17] page needed There is also a conservative,
anti-interventionist view as expressed by American journalistJohn T. Flynn
The enemy aggressor is
always pursuing a course of larceny, murder, rapine and barbarism. We are
always moving forward with high mission, a destiny imposed by the Deity to regenerate our victims, while
incidentally capturing their markets; to civilise savage and senile and
paranoid peoples, while blundering accidentally into their oil wells.[18]
A "social-democratic [attribution needed says that imperialistic U.S.
policies are the products of the excessive influence of certain sectors of
U.S. business and government—the arms industry in alliance with military and
political bureaucracies and sometimes other industries such as oil and
finance, a combination often referred to as the "military–industrial complex war profiteering and the looting of natural
resources [19] The proposed solution is typically
unceasing popular vigilance in order to apply counter-pressure.[20] Johnson holds a version of this
view.[citation needed
Alfred T. Mahan, who
served as an officer in the U.S. Navy during the late 19th century, supported
the notion of American imperialism in his 1890 book titled The Influence of Sea Power upon
History [21] page needed Mahan's argument provides a context
that also justifies imperialism by industrial nations such as the United
States.[citation needed
A theory of
"super-imperialism" says[attribution needed that imperialistic U.S. policies are
driven not simply by the interests of American businesses, but by the
interests of the economic elites of a global alliance of developed countries.[citation needed Capitalism in Europe, the U.S., and
Japan has become too entangled, in this view, to permit military or
geopolitical conflict between these countries, and the central conflict in
modern imperialism is between the global core and the global periphery rather than between imperialist
powers. Political scientists Leo Panitch and Samuel Gindin hold versions of
this view.[22] [23] [24] [25] Lenin argued this view was wishful
thinking.[26]
Empire
In the book "Empire Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri argue that "the decline of
Empire has begun".[27] Hardt says the Iraq War is a classically imperialist war,
and is the last gasp of a doomed strategy.[28] This new era still has colonizing
power, but it has moved from national military forces based on an economy of
physical goods to networked biopower based on an informational and affective economy.
The U.S. is central to the development and constitution of a new global
regime of international power and sovereignty [29] Hardt and Negri draw on the theories
of Spinoza Foucault Deleuze autonomist marxists [30] [31]
Geographer David Harvey says there has emerged a new type of
imperialism due to geographical distinctions as well as uneven levels of
development.[32] He says there has emerged three new
global economic and politics blocs: the United
States , the European Union China
and Russia [33] verification needed He says there are tensions between
the three major blocs over resources and economic power, citing the 2003 invasion of Iraq [34] Furthermore, Harvey [35] Politicians, on the other hand, live
in geographically fixed locations and are, in the U.S.
and Europe , accountable to the electorate.
The 'new' imperialism, then, has led to an alignment of the interests of
capitalists and politicians in order to prevent the rise and expansion of
possible economic and political rivals from challenging America [36]
Neoconservative Victor Davis Hanson dismisses the notion of an American
empire altogether, mockingly comparing it to other empires: "We do not
send out proconsuls to reside over client states, which in turn impose taxes
on coerced subjects to pay for the legions. Instead, American bases are
predicated on contractual obligations — costly to us and profitable to their
hosts. We do not see any profits in Korea ,
but instead accept the risk of losing almost 40,000 of our youth to ensure
that Kias can flood our shores and that shaggy students can protest outside
our embassy in Seoul [37]
U.S. military bases
While territories such as Guam United States Virgin Islands Northern Mariana Islands American Samoa Puerto Rico remain under U.S. control, the U.S.
allowed many of its overseas territories or occupations to gain independence
after World War II Philippines (1946), the Panama canal zone (1979), Palau (1981), the Federated States of Micronesia (1986), and the Marshall
Islands (1986). Most
of them still have U.S. Okinawa U.S.
administration after the battle of Okinawa during World War II, this happened
despite local popular opinion.[40] As of 2003, the United States [41]
Benevolent imperialism
Max Boot defends U.S.
imperialism by claiming: "U.S. United States [42] [43]
For instance, British
historian Niall Ferguson argues that the United States Ferguson
has drawn parallels between the British Empire and the imperial role of the United States in the late 20th and early 21st
centuries, though he describes the United
States ' political and social structures as more like
those of the Roman Empire than of the British. Ferguson argues that all these empires have had both
positive and negative aspects, but that the positive aspects of the U.S. [45] page needed
Another point of view
believes United States imperialism as a temporary phenomenon, a
corruption of American ideals or the relic of a past historical era.
Historian Samuel Flagg Bemis argues that Spanish–American War expansionism was a short-lived
imperialistic impulse and "a great aberration in American history",
a very different form of territorial growth than that of earlier American history.[46] HistorianWalter LaFeber sees the Spanish–American War
expansionism not as an aberration, but as a culmination of United States [47] But both agree that the end of the
occupation of the Philippines
marked the end of U.S.
empire, hence denying that present United States
Liberal internationalists argue that even though the present
world order is dominated by the United States John Ikenberry argues that international
institutions have taken the place of empire.[49]
International relations scholar Joseph Nye argues that U.S. soft power cultural hegemony rather than raw military or economic
force.[50] This includes such factors as the
widespread desire to emigrate to the United
States , the prestige and corresponding high proportion
of foreign students at U.S.
universities, and the spread of U.S. U.S.
Factors unique to the "Age of imperialism"
A variety of factors may
have coincided during the "Age of Imperialism United
States
·
Early in his career, as
Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Roosevelt was instrumental in preparing the
Navy for the Spanish–American War [52] and was an enthusiastic proponent of
testing the U.S. military in battle, at one point stating "I should
welcome almost any war, for I think this country needs one".[53] [54] [55]
Debate over U.S.
Some scholars defend the
historical role of the U.S.,[56] and certain prominent political
figures, such as former Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld [57]
Thorton wrote that
"[...]imperialism is more often the name of the emotion that reacts to a
series of events than a definition of the events themselves. Where
colonization finds analysts and analogies, imperialism must contend with
crusaders for and against."[58] Political theorist Michael Walzer argues that the termhegemony is better than empire to describe
the US's role in the world;[59] political scientist Robert Keohane agrees saying, a "balanced and
nuanced analysis is not aided...by the use of the phrase 'empire' to describe
United States hegemony, since 'empire' obscures rather than illuminates the
differences in form of rule between the United States and other Great Powers,
such as Great Britain in the 19th century or the Soviet Union in the twentieth."[60]
Other political
scientists, such as Daniel Nexon and Thomas Wright, argue that neither term
exclusively describes foreign relations of the United
States U.S. U.S. [61]
Cultural imperialism
“
[...], so influential has been the
discourse insisting on American specialness, altruism and opportunity, that
imperialism in the United States as a word or ideology has turned up only
rarely and recently in accounts of the United States culture, politics and
history. But the connection between imperial politics and culture in North
America, and in particular in the United States [62]
”
International relations
scholar David Rothkopf disagrees and argues that cultural imperialism is the
innocent result of globalization U.S. [63] Matthew Fraser has a similar analysis, but argues
further that the global cultural influence of the U.S. [64]
See also
This
section may be in need of reorganization to comply with
Wikipedia's layout guidelines . Please help by editing the
article to make improvements to the overall structure. (January 2013)
Notes and references
2.
^ However, regarding "American rule in Cuba ", the 1898 Teller
Amendment had
mandated that the U.S.
could not annex Cuba United
States occupied Cuba Platt
Amendment Elihu Root to replace the Teller Amendment, however,
important decisions of the government of Cuba
remained subject to override by the United States suzerainty bred resentment toward the U.S.
4.
^ Field, James A., Jr. (June 1978). "American
Imperialism: The Worst Chapter in Almost Any Book". The American Historical Review 83 (3): 644–668.doi 10.2307/1861842 JSTOR 1861842
7.
^ Johnson, Chalmers, Blowback: The Costs and Consequences
of American Empire (2000),
pp.72–9
10.
^ Edwords, Frederick The Humanist (p. 20-24, 36).
12.
^ Meinig, Donald
W. (1993). The Shaping of America :
A Geographical Perspective on 500 Years of History, Volume 2: Continental America . Yale University ISBN 0-300-05658-3
14.
^ Bacevich, Andrew (2004).American Empire:
The Realities and Consequences of U.S. . Harvard University ISBN 0-674-01375-1
15.
^ ERIC SCHMITT, "Washington
16.
^ Edward Hallett Carr, The Twenty Years'
Crisis 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations,
1939.
17.
^ Smith, Ashley (June 24, 2006).
"The Classical Marxist Theory of Imperialism". Socialism 2006 .Columbia University
19.
^ C. Wright
Mills The
Causes of World War Three , Simon and Schuster, 1958, pp. 52, 111
20.
^ Flynn, John T. (1944) As We Go Marching.
45.
^ Ferguson , Niall (June 2, 2005).Colossus: The
Rise and Fall of the American Empire . Penguin.ISBN 0-14-101700-7
47.
^ Lafeber, Walter (1975). The New Empire: An Interpretation of
American Expansion, 1860–1898 . Cornell University ISBN 0-8014-9048-0
50.
^ Cf. Nye, Joseph
Jr. 2005. Soft Power: The Means to Success in
World Politics .
Public Affairs. 208 pp.
51.
^ Thomas Friedman, "The Lexus and the
Olive Tree", p. 381, and Manfred Steger, "Globalism: The New Market
Ideology," and Jeff Faux, "Flat Note from the Pied Piper of
Globalization," Dissent, Fall 2005, pp. 64–67.
55.
^ Tilchin, William N. Theodore Roosevelt and
the British Empire
56.
^ See, for instance, Michael Mann (2005), Incoherent Empire (Verso); Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. (2005),
"The American Empire? Not so fast", World Policy , Volume XXII, No 1, Spring;
58.
^ Thornton, Archibald Paton (September 1978). Imperialism in the Twentieth Century . Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-24848-1
60.
^ Keohane,
Robert O. "The
United States The American Empire ) Journal of Peace Research , Vol. 28, No. 4 (November , 1991), p. 435
64.
^ Fraser, Matthew (2005).Weapons of Mass
Distraction: Soft Power and American Empire . St. Martin 's
Press.
Further reading
·
Callahan,
Patrick (2003). Logics of American Foreign Policy: Theories
of America . New York ISBN 0-321-08848-4
·
Gaddis, John Lewis (2005). Strategies of Containment: A Critical
Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy (2nd ed.). New York :
Oxford University ISBN 0-19-517447-X
·
Meyer,
William H. (2003). Security,
Economics, and Morality in American Foreign Policy: Contemporary Issues in
Historical Context . Upper Saddle River , NJ ISBN 0-13-086390-4
·
Patrick,
Stewart; Shepard Forman, eds. (2001). Multilateralism and U.S. . Boulder , CO ISBN 1-58826-042-9
·
Rapkin,
David P., ed. (1990). World
Leadership and Hegemony . Boulder , CO ISBN 1-55587-189-5
·
Smith,
Tony (1994). America 's Mission :
The United States . Princeton ,
NJ : Princeton University ISBN 0-691-03784-1
·
Tomlinson,
John (1991). Cultural Imperialism: A Critical
Introduction . Baltimore , MD : Johns Hopkins University ISBN 0-8018-4250-6
·
Zepezauer,
Mark (2002). Boomerang! : How Our Covert Wars Have
Created Enemies Across the Middle East and Brought Terror to America . Monroe ,
Maine ISBN 1-56751-222-4
Links to related articles
·
·
This page was last modified on 9 June 2013 at 17:00.
US NAVY ,
US
GOOGLE SEARCH JULY 3, 2013, PAGE ONE
[ See: US Westward Imperialism, Pacific, E.
Asia Newsletters. –Dick]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American _imperialism
Alfred T. Mahan, who served as an
officer in the U.S. Navy during the late 19th
century, supported the notion of American imperialism in his 1890 book
titled The ...
navsci.berkeley.edu/.../Lesson%208%20The%20US%20Navy %20and%2...
Lesson 8: The U.S. Navy and American Imperialism , 1898-1914. Learning
Objectives. Know the influence of the mass media in U.S. relations with Spain ...
The US switch to imperialist behavior that occurred
in 1898 has been a topic of great ... but because the island
provided room for a naval base from which the US ...
It's the only country other than Israel U.S. naval vessel and getting
away with complete impunity. In the Israeli ...
Apr 5, 2013 - The KCNA also
complained of the presence of U.S. Navy ships.... means of the U.S. imperialist aggressor
forces," according to the KCNA.
www.curiehs.org/ourpages/Web_based_instruction/us .../9-1.htm
... U.S. into imperialism ; Germany sought colonies in Africa, Asia, Latin
America ... U.S. should build large navy and build defensive
bases and refueling stations
web.pdx.edu/~kollinr/Portfolio/communication/imperialism .html
The U.S. military would be the
primary enforcer of President Roosevelt's imperialistic policies. To show the
world he meant what he said, he sent a naval task ...
www.slideshare.net/eben_cooke/american -imperialism -1867-1899
How was the US Navy used to justify
American Imperialism ? A modern navy needed
coaling stations around the world in order to refuel and power its boats.
www.slideshare.net/sauspelm/us -imperialism -sa2
US Imperialism SA2 Presentation
Transcript ... The US needed a powerful navy and military bases
throughout the world to protect its economic interests. Need a ...
www.ibiblio.org/uncpress/chapters/renda_taking.html
Military Occupation and the Culture
of U.S. Imperialism , 1915-1940 ... They pointed, for
example, to the work of the Navy Medical Corps and to
the construction of ...
Searches related to US Navy ,
US
IMPORTANCE OF US NAVY TO US EMPIRE: SUSTAINED AND QUICK SUPPORT OF US
An analysis of “Being
There Matters: Making the Case for a Strong Navy” by Rear Adm. (Res.) Luke M.
McCollum. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (June 29, 2013) . McCollum calls Bentonville his home.
“Maintaining a strong Navy is a
significant investment, but it is also a very prudent and sound one—one that
provides a valuable return in terms of protecting our nation’s security,
prosperity and the American way of life,” writes the McCollum. The US Navy is “patrolling what is
essentially the world’s interstate ocean highway system, ensuring the free
flow of global trade and, in turn, preserving America
Let me get this straight. The US Navy is the only highway patrol, as
if the Arkansas Highway Patrol would patrol the other states’ highways, or
the US Army would be the International Highway Patrol controlling speeding
cars in France or bicycles
in Sri Lanka
You also say the US Navy is there
“around the clock, far from our shores, defending America
at all times,” protecting “America
Slow down there Admiral. It sounds like you are saying our Highway
Patrol of international waters is there not for the nations of the world, but
for the US US
“When America
Hold on Admiral, you’re racing full
speed ahead. What do you mean by US
national security? What sort of
adversary are you referring to? A
nation that dislikes having a carrier battle group parked near their shore?
“Where these threats exist, chances are
high that Navy ships, submarines, aircraft, and special forces are very close
by, with the ability to mitigate the threat, even if the threat is hundreds
of miles inland.”
I asked you to slow down. Or do you think you are talking to a class
of midshipmen? What kind of threat
are you referring to? Are you saying that thanks to the US Navy full spectrum
dominance is generally available to attack any nation any time or place
regardless of the UN Charter and other treaties? That sounds like an irresponsible
bully. Like invasion. Like an act of war! Why I believe it would be. Who can, who can and would do such a
thing? And by the way, by “mitigate”
to you mean bombs, cluster bombs, cruise missiles?
“When the decision is made to act on one
of these threats, the solution may involve launching attack jets or unmanned
aircraft from aircraft carriers, firing cruise missiles from ships or
submarines, or inserting a team of Navy SEALS to do what only Navy SEALs can
do.”
You already made your point, but I
suppose an Admiral can’t be expected to overlook special praise for its
forces, even when illegal and unconstitutional, though does he really want to
praise the SEALs’ unique capability of murdering an unarmed man and dumping
his body in the ocean? But back to my
question, though I already guess the answer:
who can violate international law so extremely?
“The Navy can do all of these things,
and do them all from the sea, without the need to get another country’s
permission to operate within its borders.”
But what are we to say to Justice Jackson? "To initiate a war of aggression,
therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme
international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains
within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." -- Robert H. Jackson,
Chief U.S. Prosecutor, Nuremberg .
No comments:
Post a Comment