Would you like to know how many people have read this article? Or how reputable the author is? Simply sign up for a Advocate premium membership and you'll automatically see this data on every article. Plus a lot more, too.
Become a Fan
This would be a good time for some introspection. Questions that deserve pondering are: Why must the U.S. government be engaged in foreign meddling? What good does it do? Are there harmful consequences? Are they worth it?
Notice, first of all, an important phenomenon: No nation-state is invading and trying to conquer the United States. There is no flotilla composed of hundreds of thousands of military transport ships crossing the Atlantic or the Pacific oceans carrying millions of invading soldiers. There is also no massive air force consisting of bombers, fighter planes, and transport planes heading towards us from across the oceans.
In fact, no nation-state on earth has the remotest capability of invading and conquering the United States. For one thing, every nation state is in worse financial straits than the U.S. government. Even if one or more of them wanted to amass a military force to cross the ocean and invade and conquer the United States, they wouldn't have the money, much less the armaments, supplies, weaponry, planes, tanks, and other tools of warfare, to do it.
Let's not forget, after all, that Hitler's army was unable to successfully cross the English Channel, which is much more narrow than the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, and invade and conquer England.
Indeed, even if some nation state, including China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Syria, or Vietnam, were able to cross the ocean and send troops onto American beaches, how would they sustain their supply lines? As soon as those troops headed inland, if they even got that far, they would quickly run out of ammunition and other essentials.
Moreover, there is no reasonable possibility of a military invasion of the United States by Canada or any Latin American country. They have neither the money, the military capability, or even the interest in trying such an impossible feat.
Thus, we have two undeniable facts: One, the United States is not being invaded by a foreign army and, two, there is no reasonable possibility of a foreign invasion of the United States in the foreseeable future.The dual purpose of foreign interventionism
Questions naturally arise: Why then are U.S. troops in foreign lands, far from American shores? What are they doing in Afghanistan, the Middle East, Europe, Africa, Latin America, and elsewhere? What is their purpose? What are they killing people for? What are they dying for? What are they provoking wars for? What are they enforcing sanctions and embargoes for? Why is the U.S. government spending an untold amount of money to send them there and keep them there?
One thing is for certain: Contrary to popular myth, U.S. soldiers over there are not defending our rights and freedoms here at home. How do we know that? Because, again, no nation state over there is invading and trying to conquer the United States. If Syrian troops, for example, were invading the shores of Maine or Virginia, the argument could be made that U.S. troops are in Syria to counteract the invasion of the United States by engaging in offensive maneuvers over there. But Syria is not invading and trying to conquer the United States. That would be an impossible thing for Syria to do. The Syrian regime is simply trying to quell an internal revolt against its autocratic rule.
Thus, if the purpose of all that interventionism isn't to defend our rights and freedoms here at home, what is its purpose?
Its purpose is two-fold: One, to install rulers in foreign lands all over the world who will agree to have their nations absorbed into the overall U.S. Empire; and, two, to produce an endless array of official enemies so that the U.S. national-security state e.g., the Pentagon, the military-industrial complex, the CIA, and the NSA will be able to justify its existence and its ever-growing tax largess and power within the U.S. governmental structure.The consequences of foreign interventionism
What are the consequences of all this interventionism? The loss of liberty, privacy, and prosperity here at home.
By going over there and trying to effect regime change through force of arms or coups, the U.S. national-security state ends up generating an endless supply of angry people, many of whom seek retaliation for the killing, maiming, torture, oppression, execution, humiliation, or assassination of their friends, relatives, or countrymen at the hands of U.S. personnel or the U.S.-supported dictators who U.S. officials place or keep into power, especially with generous amounts of U.S. taxpayer-funded foreign aid.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He (more...)