I know this post is kind of random and out of the blue, but I was listening to someone on the radio making some ignorant statements and I had some thoughts I wanted out of my head…
I understand that some countries don’t like the US. I also understand that this is almost universally true when it comes to countries that lack freedom (Iran, N. Korea, China, the former USSR, etc).
But how can it ever come as a surprise to anyone when the US decides to take action? Let’s face it, you know if you’re a friend or a foe of the US LONG before anything happens.
46 years ago President Kennedy said:
“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of freedom.”
Am I supposed to believe the world thinks we changed our minds?
I just thought it was important to get this out there because lately I’ve been providing information about the Opportunity Cost of the War in Iraq, quoting Bush’s hypocritical statement about nation building, and citing the new Presidential Dictatorship Doctrine.
Despite the current situation, anyone on earth would be out of their mind to even think for one split second that the US would shy away from any conflict if we felt our freedom, or that of one of our allies were seriously at risk.
I really just can’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want to ally with the US? Doing so gives you the biggest trading partner in the world, a great country to vacation in plus reciprocal tourism, the ability to get massive loans and foreign aid, the ability to influence US decisions, and much more. Being a foe is just bad news…
wow u guys are all funny. sound just like i did when i was in political science at douglas college 2008 british columbia. im sorry guys. truth of the matter is america was taken over in 1963 following the public execution of jfk. coup de dat my friends. The media was and is still the biggest weapon that took down america and now the middle east. eisenhower point blank warned u in his farewell address about the MILITARY/INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX (your military was bribed by secret societies): “Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace, to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity, and integrity among peoples and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension, or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt, both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insiduous [insidious] in method. Unhappily, the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.” — january 1961 eisenhower was subtle you see.
and then he also said : ‘we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all United States corporations.Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
But then jfk comes out and says it CLEAR as DAY that its world war 3 : April 1961
“I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future–for reducing this threat or living with it–there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security–a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.
Today no war has been declared and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.
If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger,” then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.
It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions–by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.
This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President–two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.
The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it’s in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.
It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world’s efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.
And so it is to the printing press–to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news–that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.”
Michael,
I am unsure if you are lecturing me, or one of the other commenters…
If your comment was addressed to me, I would point out that I didn’t claim we are supporting freedom anywhere else, merely that we will use our POWER to maintain our own freedom.
I’m not making political commentary on this fact – merely pointing it out. The fact is, no one would have messed with Rome, Greece under Alexander, the Ottomans, or other super powers throughout history, so I would suggest it is naive to think the US should behave differently. So again, its better to be friend than foe.
I would also like to point out that you must not have read any of my other posts before suggesting that I am uninformed. You seem to have misread or at least taken this post out of context.
John
You seem to be mixing up freedom and power. Our foreign policy has little to do with human freedom, and very much to do with extending the power of “our” domestic overclass. Hence, our second-closest ally in the Middle East is the KINGDOM of Saudi Arabia, where they imprison and whip women for getting raped. (The first closest is the little theological outlaw apartheid state called Israel.)
And your own arguments for allies (as if other simply get to choose in or out, before we welcome or attack them!) are ones of power, not freedom.
You have some thinking and much reading to do.
I agree too with the
sentiment. Freedom isn’t free and it isn’t about handouts. The fact is that *anyone* in America has the chance to better themselves. Sure that might not mean ahomeless person running for President, but it does mean a homeless person getting into a shelter, getting a job at McDonalds, saving up and getting an Apartment, going back to school at night, and making manager in 10 years. That’s the American dream (albeit one example) and our freedom makes it possible.
No way! That’s pretty crappy! You think it’s really a penalty, John?
Alrighty, I can see I sparked some opposition. I’m going to take this one comment at a time. No, I am not confusing handouts with freedom. We do not live in a capitalistic state, like it or not. It is not capitalism or socialism or bust. Every modern civilized non-totalitarian-controlled government in the world is a balance. It would be easy for me – an educated, middle-class white male American – to agree and say: yes, everyone should have to fend for themselves, we all get equal opportunity. But the reality is we DON’T all get equal opportunities – I’ve had way more than most Americans.
Our ENEMIES are dictators? President Bush has violated more laws in his pursuit of power than I could begin to count. How can you not see his leadership as a dictatorship? The world is not black-and-white. The US doesn’t just represent ‘freedom and democracy’ just like our enemies don’t represent the opposite of those values. Hell, Saddam kept Iraq more ‘peaceful’ than we have. Greed for money and power? If that doesn’t also describe our leader I don’t know what does. Lives have been lost in Iraq, and Bush and his cronies have profited from those deaths.
Hey did you realize your Google PR just went down from pr8 to pr5? It looks like the penalty for selling links without nofollows. There goes the free America JFK wished for us. GooglAmerica here we come… :-p
Sounds like socialism to me.
I’d have to agree with a lot of the points that Tom and John made about the capitalistic positives that you are overlooking. And weighing those positives against the negatives that you’ve portrayed, I’d have to go with the capitalism that doesn’t necessarily make all of my decisions for me.
I, for one, am glad for the inflexible and unwavering stance that the United States takes on matters. I really do think that it’s unimpressive when other countries will dedicate themselves to a task and then withdraw after the going gets tough. Granted we make mistakes, but as in with people it shows a certain amount of heart to truly try to do a few amount of things very strongly.
I think it’s less about the US losing status as a superpower as it is realizing we’re much like the steak and potato captain of the football team facing a much smaller, much more agile, wrestler.
For the most part our size, brute force, and reputation/popularity (whether from admiration or fear), will carry us through most fights but when we find that person who can take us to the ground and choke us out, we’ll have to submit.
With less restrictions on industry, countries like India and China are flourishing (although both are now running into the after-effects of pollution etc.). I don’t think we’re about to lose status as much as we are about to realize these guys have become bigger blips on the radar, in a matter of speaking..
Yes, I’m going to have to agree with Tom here.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the concepts of universal healthcare and education, and although I’m not at all what one would call a bleeding heart liberal I would support any efforts to make those services available.
Having said that however, the same systems which provide all services to all people are the ones that make all people exactly, and nothing more than, equal. While nothing is free in America, the system under which we operate has proven to be the most successful economic system of all time (as illustrated by my recent GDP comparison).
It is the entire macro-economic model that allows people in the US to flourish like no where else on earth. So, you might have to pay for your education, but afterwards you have a lifetime of prosperity to recoup those costs in an economy unmatched anywhere on the planet. If that is not enough, you’ve got a military securing your future that is unmatched in the history of the world. Nothing short of Mutually Assured Destruction is going to take down the country.
Also, I’m not sure where the feeling arises that the US is in a decline as the world’s superpower? Don’t confuse our inability to have successful relations with other countries with a declination of power. This is a failure of diplomacy. Furthermore, you are a little young to remember, but the USSR was much more powerful than China has yet to even become, and look what happened to them.
So, all in all I have faith that we’re still in a good place.
John
an interesting quote from Oscar Wilde…
“America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.”
I dont agree with this, but i find it funny.
Daylight again, following me to bed
I think about a hundred years ago, how my fathers bled
I think I see a valley, covered with bones in blue
All the brave soldiers that cannot get older been askin’ after
you
Hear the past a callin’, from Ar- -megeddon’s side
When everyone’s talkin’ and noone is listenin’, how can we
decide?
Do we find the cost of freedom, buried in the ground?
Mother earth will swallow you, lay your body down
Find the cost of freedom, buried in the ground
Mother earth will swallow you, lay your body down
Find the cost of freedom buried in the ground
Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young
Urbanist,
You are confusing handouts from the government with freedom. I would like to be free to buy my own housing, food, clothing, transportation, education, health care, entertainment and utilities with my own money rather than having the government take it by force, waste a large portion, and provide me “free” services.
Back to John’s point, countries would benefit from siding with us but typically our enemies are dictators that would rather profit directly from their own people while exuding complete power. Look at the Nazis, Communists, and extreme Islam, each had powerful dictators that profited off their own people and killed them off at will. Greed for money and power keeps these dictators from allying with not just the US but all free nations.
Hmm, I might take something of a controversial position here, or a few. This is going to be a train-of-thought comment I can tell already ::sigh::
First of all, I take some issue with this use of the word ‘freedom’ which I have recently heard applied in all sorts of ways and contexts. How are we a ‘free’ country when our healthcare and education systems suck compared to countries that are far less ‘powerful’ and ‘wealthy’ in the world? Freedom, to me, might mean the freedom to get an education without bankrupting myself and to make a mistake, break my leg and also not bankrupt myself :) Much less likely, but I might also consider ‘freedom’ to mean the right to follow my fundamentalist and bizarre religious beliefs that the US mocks openly.
Honestly I think the US is in decline and has been for a while as the world’s superpower. People don’t want to ally us on our costly crusades because they know this. The next power? Well, lots of people think China … maybe it’s India … could be the EU I suppose if they got their act together. Hard to say, but not us for sure. We’re living on time we borrowed long ago after the second world war left most of the then-world-powers in ruins.
The fact that we won’t back down and are so aggressive is, I think ,ultimately related to our decline in power. If we had acted more judiciously in these past decades we might not be so far in debt. I’m not a protectionist but I do think we meddle too much in foreign affairs we shouldn’t take part in, while ignoring things like genocide in parts of the world that aren’t rich in oil.
OK, this comment has turned into a virtual blog post :) Anyway, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this fellow commentators and/or John! My essential argument: people make enemies with us because we have a fixed and inflexible idea of freedom and because people are aware that we are not the most powerful – or at least not for much longer – force to be reckoned with in the world.