RANGER AGAINST WAR: War Path -- Part Two <

Thursday, May 10, 2012

War Path -- Part Two

It's a fool's game
Nothing but a fools game

Standing in the cold rain

Feeling like a clown

--
It's a Heartache, Bonnie Tyler

When the music's over

Turn out the lights

--When the Music's Over
,
The Doors


Ranger Question of the Day:
How can West Point release classified documents
recording Osama bin Laden's last thoughts,
while Bradley Manning languishes in jail for
doing the same thing?
__________________


The United States fought two World Wars in the 20th century, contravening the Monroe Doctrine and its "Spheres of Influence", the earliest U.S. foreign policy document.


The wars the U.S. entered in 1914 and again in 1939-40 resulted from colonial overreach and the resultant blowback, and entangling alliances and treaties, often secret in nature, which set the die. One man was shot in Sarajevo in 1914 and the Western world entered a suicidal paroxysm of senseless violence.


What is interesting is that even though the U.S. lacked treaty obligations in either war, it still became embroiled in both. The Axis pact between Japan and Germany cause the U.S. entry into the WW II European mess. In fact, the U.S. had no historic or rational reason to fight Germany in either war.


Why were the French, Russian and English any better the German, Italians or Austrians? What right did Chamberlain have to negotiate away the country of Czechoslovakia? Why are these questions never raised in our discussions of WWII?
Why did we sink the Monroe Doctrine in the blink of an eye?

98 years on, the U.S. has expanded NATO and taken it upon itselfs to fight future wars for the security of places like Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Lithuania, etc., which makes exactly as much sense as entering a war because an Archduke got killed in Sarajevo.


Now throw into the mix the new U.S. - Afghanistan Security Agreement in which the U.S. obligates itself to the protection and adoption of Afghanistan as a satellite state, without any benefit accruing to the people of America.
Why, after 98 years, do we follow a formula of doom and destruction when it is clear that Western civilization began its decline in 1914 from the exact same sets of behaviors?

Simply: We base our security upon entangling alliances even though history has shown that these ultimately lead to wars of unfortunate consequences.
If an alliance or a treaty does not offer more than it costs, then it is a fool's venture.

Labels: , , , ,

3 Comments:

Blogger Mark Fleming said...

Apparently we are venturesome fools.

Friday, May 11, 2012 at 9:27:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Kevin said...

"Why were the French, Russian and English any better the German, Italians or Austrians?"

Perhaps this might be a clue :

THE BRITISH WERE COMING!
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j070401.html

VIDAL'S VALEDICTORY:
A NON-INTERVENTIONIST MANIFESTO
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j101800.html

Just looking around a bit will most likely find some similar material regarding british meddling to "incite" US stepping into WWI, with for example good old aleister crowley being such an agent of influence (though a pretty amateurish and ineffective one, IIRC).
This didn't went unnoticed at the time, if I get it correctly, pacifists and isolationnists of all kind were quick to point out how contradictory it was to intervene in a foreign war on behalf of the old colonial power and long term rival, against a Nation that had no history of contention against the USA and even had provided a good chunk of its immigrants.

Saturday, May 12, 2012 at 3:53:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Kevin said...

And, while I'm at it, please allow me to vent out a bit of hurt-national pride frustration : why is this that, even without taking into account the british lobbying to involve the USA into both world wars, that the now-commonly accepted popular US view of those conflicts boils down to a simple "rescue France from its own ineptness"?

I can almost accept it for WWII, which is after all ther very legitimacy basis for the "US world order" and can be, and indeed is, used as a convenient club to bash in the obnoxious ungrateful frogs who won't go along the program... but, for WWI?

It almost feels like the Great War is being appropriated, so to speak, vampirized by the "America, fuck yeah" mindset...

I shouldn't mind, really, but, it's actually hurtful to have such a world-changing event stolen out of your History, to have it reduced to a prop for an (hostile) political worldview - especially when it's accompanied by a quiet but rampant revisionism...
Again, the cheese-eating surrender monkeys thing, a 180° of what the french army was at the end of WWI, or on a lesser scale, the whole conflict reduced to gunlore fairy tales, about Alvin York, the "chaushit", the mighty .45 or the mighty trench shotgun,...

Saturday, May 12, 2012 at 4:08:00 AM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home