America is intervening in foreign affairs because it can, and because the country’s leaders want to, not because it benefits the American people. So writes Daniel Larison at The American Conservative. He continues:
Exorbitant military spending far beyond what is needed to provide for our defense makes it possible to take military action on a regular basis, and the constant inflation of foreign threats makes a large part of the public believe that our government’s frequent use of force overseas has something to do with self-defense. This frenetic meddling in the affairs of other nations hasn’t made and won’t make America any safer, it makes far more enemies than it eliminates, and it imposes significant fiscal and human costs on our country and the countries where our government interferes.
I’ve been vocal in my opposition to America’s military adventurism for a long time now. I ground my research and perspective of America’s foreign policy woes in the work of Cato Institute scholar and vice president for defense and foreign policy studies, Chris Preble. I wrote of Chris’s efforts in January of 2014:
Cato Institute’s Chris Preble, in brilliant and concise detail, shows us what is wrong with today’s backward-looking military and how to look forward with a realignment that reflects the reality of today’s world. Mr. Preble succinctly explains why America should not continue playing the part of the world’s policeman. Chris shows that America is in fact less safe, not more safe, as we continue with a failed strategy of nation building.
I suggest any serious study of America’s foreign policy position begin with a reading of Chris’s book, The Power Problem.
Afghanistan Going Forward: Surge, Negotiate, or Get Out?
Latest posts by Richard C. Young (see all)
- How to Prevent a War With Iran - December 14, 2017
- Can Republicans Win the Working Class Without Trump? - December 13, 2017
- What Country Has the Lowest Prostate Cancer Rate? - December 13, 2017