Skip to comments.An extraordinary turn against military intervention: Americans usually embrace war
Posted on 09/10/2013 7:21:38 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Decisions about what action the United States should take against Syria will decisively affect Syria and much of the Middle East. The biggest impact, however, may be felt inside the US.
The negative reaction in Congress and among the American people to President Obamas proposal of military intervention has been sharp. U.S. receptiveness to Russias proposal to sequester Syrias chemical weapons shows how eager Washington is to avoid a military response.
Neither this turn nor the potential no vote in Congress would represent a full rejection of Obamas plan. It would, however, be something extraordinary even historic. It would suggest that a substantial percentage of Americans believe that a proposed war is a bad idea. In the context of American history, this is almost unthinkable.
War is woven into the fabric of American life, and Americans usually embrace it. A century ago, this was because many considered war an exuberant, cleansing, manly endeavor. Theodore Roosevelt, who famously declared that he would welcome almost any war, exemplified this view. All the great masterful races have been fighting races, Roosevelt declared, and the minute that a race loses the hard fighting virtues, then, no matter what else it may retain, no matter how skilled in commerce and finance, in science or art, it has lost its proud right to stand as the equal of the best.
Advances in the technology of destruction and killing made it difficult to sustain belief in wars beauty or nobility. The idea of manifest destiny gave way to something more sophisticated called liberal internationalism, corporate globalism or, in Henry Cabot Lodges formulation, the large policy.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at america.aljazeera.com ...
Kinzer has written several non-fiction books about Turkey, Central America, Iran, the US overthrow of foreign governments from the late 19th century to the present and, most recently, about Rwanda's recovery from genocide.
He has spoken out widely against a potential U.S. attack on Iran, warning that it would destroy the pro-US sentiment that has become widespread among the Iranian populace under the repressive Islamic regime. He is also a fierce opponent of US foreign policy toward Latin America.
Americans usually elect leaders.
I think this biggest factor in our refusal to embrace war is the regime proposing it. This “no” shows how much we trust 0.
And don’t want a community organizer to play bigshot wargames with ‘his military’.
I don’t think that we as Americans embrace war so much as we accept it when the cause is right. IMHO
Americans don’t embrace war, they resolve to do the right thing when necessary. Muslims embrace war, nay they revel in the carnage and bloodshed.
There are consequences when one lied about Benghazi.
We embrace it when someone mucks with us.
“Americans Usually Embrace War”
Not when the president keeps jumping in on the side of people who want to kill us.
Imagine FDR going to war on the side of the Japs on Dec. 8, 1941.
That’s what Clinton did in Serbia.
That’s what Obama did in Libya and Egypt.
That’s what Obama wants to do in Syria.
The author, Kinzer, is full of crap. That’s a leftist interpretation of the American character....which, as usual, is negative. The facts are Americans had to be dragged into both world wars and only the latter because Germany and Japan declared war on us first.
That’s because be have a Muslim-Soviet-loving asshat in charge. Shall we say “red diaper doper baby?
"Citizens concerned about foreign affairs must read this book. Stephen Kinzer's crisp and thoughtful Overthrow undermines the myth of national innocence. Quite the contrary: history shows the United States as an interventionist busybody directed at regime change. We deposed fourteen foreign governments in hardly more than a century, some for good reasons, more for bad reasons, with most dubious long-term consequences."
--Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.
"Stephen Kinzer has a grim message for those critics of the Iraqi war who believe George W. Bush to be America's most misguided, uninformed, and reckless president. Bush has had plenty of company in the past century--presidents who believe that America, as Kinzer tells us, has the right to wage war wherever it deems war necessary."
--Seymour M. Hersh
"Stephen Kinzer's book is a jewel. After reading Overthrow, no American -- not even President Bush -- should any longer wonder 'why they hate us.' Overthrow is a narrative of all the times we've overthrown a foreign government in order to put in power puppets that are obedient to us. It is a tale of imperialism American-style, usually in the service of corporate interests, and as Kinzer points out, 'No nation in modern history has done this so often, in so many places so far from its own shores.' "
Americans haven’t stopped supporting war, they’ve just become apathetic as to the reasons why politicians want to send their soldiers off to die.
This is usually just before a country balkanizes.
It was something the _resident counted on..particularly from republicans, he said as much.
We were supposed to go a,ongoing with this because, in the libs twisted minds, we like war. War for wars sake.
What a bunch of twisted jerks.
>> mI think this biggest factor in our refusal to embrace war is the regime proposing it.
That’s definitely part of it — but it’s only part of it (for me anyway).
I’m generally all in for kicking Islamonazi butt.
But Syria, right now, is like the “perfect storm” of counterexample:
*** Wrong opponent
*** Wrong goals
*** Wrong assumptions
*** Wrong benefit to risk ratio
*** Wrong blowback likelihood
and, especially, as you point out:
*** WRONG LEADERSHIP
It was a gut sense with me that going into Syria is wrong, and it’s being validated with every passing day. What is the purpose, who are we supporting, what are the potential consequences? I see no clear thinking on any of this. No. It’s a very bad idea. Smack him down hard if Obama tries to invoke war powers, imho. There are no good actors in this fight that I can see.
The latter, I believe, was due to Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor.
Most US citizens were against intervention.
We don’t want to follow this leader in a BS war. Even his base refuses.
Three more long years of Obama’s bull shit ..........
Americans usually embrace just and sensible wars.
I’m with you on this one ... gut feeling. Unless we are in the ME to help protect Israel, we should just keep our noses out of there (and bring our troops home).
Sorry, I don’t listen to Al Jazzeera, I’m more into folk and blues.
I think Bush and his crew not only soured Americans, but the whole world in joining us. Now the refrain is, “The last time you told us Saddam had WMDs, why should we trust you now?”
FU Stephen Kinzer and FU Al Jazeera.
Another leftist taking blood money to push muzzie agitprop.
We’ll probably support military intervention when Kinzer’s paymaster, the Emir of Qatar, is attacked and overthrown by one of his neighbors. The irony here is that Kinzer is now being paid by one of the autocrats he used to issue book-length rants against. Talk about selling out.
It used to be easy to use the media to manipulate the public into supporting a war. After all, our government wouldn't really lie to us would it?
Now, everyone knows we are living under a regime that will lie. We listen to the news like Soviet citizens used to listen to Isvestia and read Pravda. Everybody knows it's crap.
Now, even if there were to be a necessary, just war, I doubt that there would be much support for it.
this was a referendum on Obama.
Reagan lived by the credo: Trust, but verify.
With Obama we can do neither.
Obama lied to us about Benghazi, and then spent a year covering up his dereliction of duty as Commander In Chief during the critical hours of the Benghazi Massacre.
Can anyone in the US Military trust Obama?
Why should we taxpayers trust Obama?
Who can trust someone whose own SEALED personal records cannot be verified?
Obama cannot be trusted or verified is the obvious conclusion.
If there’s any rationale whatsoever, it’s that the WMD’s that didn’t exist in Iraq, that weren’t surreptitiously transported to Syria prior to UN inspections, have now been used, in Syria. A longstanding narrative comes unravelled with such an admission, though. So we get vague platitudes that just do not ring true.
The Commander of Chiefs needs to keep his Corpse men home.
I don’t think Obama got the memo that the Caliphate is dead.
Americans are not interested in war. Americans are interested in defending ourselves.
BO and his ship of fools would do well to figure that out quick. But they wont. And dwhats good for them is not usually whats good for America.
Al Jazeera doesnt have a clue , either, any more than their owner Gore the Puffy.
Gobbledigook --Americans simply realize WE WILL GAIN NOTHING in Syria. No land, no money, no influence, no prestige, not even any feeling of having righted some wrong.
Sometimes it appears to the American public that the interests of the country ARE involved, and sometimes it doesn't appear that way.
And this time? It really, really appears we'll gain nothing.
I don't think it goes much further than that.
Why not include the rest?
‘In Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change From Hawaii to Iraq, Kinzer critiques US foreign policy as overly interventionist.’
This guy is a leftist. Why am I not surprised to see the dateline is from AJ???
Why bother to post this drivel from known enemies of the US and Christians world wide???
What the whole world thought about WMD’s in Iraq wasn’t Bush’s fault.
911 changed everything, If Muslims want to kill Muslims, I don’t think the majority in America have an opposing view.
I was never under the impression that the Arabic version of AJ was quite this kooky. Is this just an English-version thing?
Well, how much does Israel want the Syrian depots, full of Sarin and other poisons, to be vaporized by US bombs? The winds will then spread the clouds of poison all over the area... and into Israel.
There is no telling where Assad keeps the CWs, and there is no telling what targets the US generals will pick. Some Syrian commanders may even intentionally preposition a few barrels at vulnerable spots of potential targets, so that when they are bombed and people die the USA can be dragged to the International Criminal Court for a war crime. (Think it can't happen?) It would be insane, from Israel's point of view, to allow the USA to mess with Israel's backyard when consequences may be catastrophic.
Removal of Syrian CWs is a definitely positive development, regardless of anything else. The CWs must be disclosed, inspected, guarded, and then preparations for destruction can start (IMO it will require building a local facility for destruction of CWs. It's hard to imagine carrying them for thousands of miles to the USA or Russia, where specialized facilities already exist.)
Kinzer cut his teeth on Nicaragua...
The NSA doesn't approve of your post.
I've heard the Arabic version is flat-out pro-al Qaeda (which does recycle a lot of Soviet-era anti-American propaganda recycled by Islamists, violent or not). The English version is al-Jazeera-lite.
NO WAR FOR EGO
My friend, who is an editor of some obscure jazz journal, actually met Al Jazeera, interviewed him, posed to a picture, and posted it on his Facebook wall.
Did they dine with Ben Ghazi?
But Ghida Fakhry is not guilty.
"Americans love to fight and we can't stand a loser" -Patton
I don’t understand why we even went to undeclared war against Libya with the desired goal of regime change.
Sec. of State Hillary Clinton even chortled at the war crime murder of a POW named Mommar Gaddafi “WE came, WE saw, HE DIED!!!”