Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Three Good Reasons To Liquidate Our Empire and 10 Ways to Do It

By Chalmers Johnson, Tomdispatch.com. Posted July 31, 2009.


The failure to begin to deal with our bloated military establishment will condemn the U.S. to a devastating trio of consequences.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
What if People Actually Treated Religion as Just a Metaphor (Like Trekkies and Secular Jews)?
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
15 Signs American Society Is Coming Apart at the Seams
David DeGraw

DrugReporter:
When It’s Crunch Time at College, Students Turn to Adderall
Erik Hayden

Environment:
20 Weird, Crazy Ideas for Helping the Earth

Food:
The War on Soy: Why the 'Miracle Food' May Be a Health Risk and Environmental Nightmare
Tara Lohan

Health and Wellness:
Pharmaceutical Giant Paid $500,000 to Psychiatrist Who Used Chicago's Poor as Guinea Pigs
Christina Jewett and Sam Roe

Immigration:
Dobbs' Resignation Was Long Overdue
Janet Murguía

Media and Technology:
Is Right-Wing Media Hustler Trying to "Blackmail" Obama's Attorney General over ACORN Videos?
David Edwards, Muriel Kane

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
New Right-Wing Craze: Using Bible Quote to Pray That Obama’s 'Days Be Few'
Amanda Terkel

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Hey Guys, Don't Want Kids? A Vascetomy Is Probably the Way to Go
Anna Clark

Rights and Liberties:
Economic Crisis Is Getting Bloody -- Violent Deaths Are Now Following Evictions, Foreclosures and Job Losses
Nick Turse

Sex and Relationships:
How Abstinence-Only Programs Perpetuate Dangerous Stereotypes
Martha Kempner

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Poseidon's Financial Shell Game: Why Is a Private Desalination Plant Asking for Public Money?
Peter Gleick

World:
Army Sends Mom to Afghanistan, Infant to Protective Services
Dahr Jamail

More stories by Chalmers Johnson

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

However ambitious President Barack Obama's domestic plans, one unacknowledged issue has the potential to destroy any reform efforts he might launch. Think of it as the 800-pound gorilla in the American living room: our longstanding reliance on imperialism and militarism in our relations with other countries and the vast, potentially ruinous global empire of bases that goes with it. The failure to begin to deal with our bloated military establishment and the profligate use of it in missions for which it is hopelessly inappropriate will, sooner rather than later, condemn the United States to a devastating trio of consequences: imperial overstretch, perpetual war, and insolvency, leading to a likely collapse similar to that of the former Soviet Union.

According to the 2008 official Pentagon inventory of our military bases around the world, our empire consists of 865 facilities in more than 40 countries and overseas U.S. territories. We deploy over 190,000 troops in 46 countries and territories. In just one such country, Japan, at the end of March 2008, we still had 99,295 people connected to U.S. military forces living and working there -- 49,364 members of our armed services, 45,753 dependent family members, and 4,178 civilian employees. Some 13,975 of these were crowded into the small island of Okinawa, the largest concentration of foreign troops anywhere in Japan.

These massive concentrations of American military power outside the United States are not needed for our defense. They are, if anything, a prime contributor to our numerous conflicts with other countries. They are also unimaginably expensive. According to Anita Dancs, an analyst for the website Foreign Policy in Focus, the United States spends approximately $250 billion each year maintaining its global military presence. The sole purpose of this is to give us hegemony -- that is, control or dominance -- over as many nations on the planet as possible.

We are like the British at the end of World War II: desperately trying to shore up an empire that we never needed and can no longer afford, using methods that often resemble those of failed empires of the past -- including the Axis powers of World War II and the former Soviet Union. There is an important lesson for us in the British decision, starting in 1945, to liquidate their empire relatively voluntarily, rather than being forced to do so by defeat in war, as were Japan and Germany, or by debilitating colonial conflicts, as were the French and Dutch. We should follow the British example. (Alas, they are currently backsliding and following our example by assisting us in the war in Afghanistan.)

Here are three basic reasons why we must liquidate our empire or else watch it liquidate us.

1. We Can No Longer Afford Our Postwar Expansionism

Shortly after his election as president, Barack Obama, in a speech announcing several members of his new cabinet, stated as fact that "[w]e have to maintain the strongest military on the planet." A few weeks later, on March 12, 2009, in a speech at the National Defense University in Washington DC, the president again insisted, "Now make no mistake, this nation will maintain our military dominance. We will have the strongest armed forces in the history of the world." And in a commencement address to the cadets of the U.S. Naval Academy on May 22nd, Obama stressed that "[w]e will maintain America's military dominance and keep you the finest fighting force the world has ever seen."

What he failed to note is that the United States no longer has the capability to remain a global hegemon, and to pretend otherwise is to invite disaster.

According to a growing consensus of economists and political scientists around the world, it is impossible for the United States to continue in that role while emerging into full view as a crippled economic power. No such configuration has ever persisted in the history of imperialism. The University of Chicago's Robert Pape, author of the important study Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism (Random House, 2005), typically writes:


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: war, empire

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I agree 100% with author of this article!
Posted by: Jay Randal on Jul 31, 2009 12:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time to cut loose the empire and bring all the troops home. If Pres. Obama refuses to do it, then he can go to Afghanistan to be king there and fail like Alexander the Great did.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chalmers Johnson Has Almost Exactly Right ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Jul 31, 2009 12:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bit he missed was that almost every other empire extracted taxes from their colonies.

The Russian Empire, the USSR, covered countries that added greatly to its economy. The Ukraine with its manufacturing and agriculture. The "Stans", central Asian countries rich in oil, natural gas and minerals ...

The British Empire that used its might to force the purchase of British Goods such as salt and linens in India, the Highly profitable Opium Trade in China through Hong Kong and the duty charged all colonies to trade with one another while prohibiting trade with other European Nations except through England.

Both Russia and England had very good reasons for their empires ... taxes, trade, natural resources and strategic geopolitical positioning.

The U.S. has none of these. The U.S. extracts wealth through usurious loans. This game is up. Has been for years, and only we don't know it ... the other countries certainly do.

The U.S. Empire is a failed idea. It makes us less secure, will bankrupt us and diminishes our ethical and moral standing in the world. The American Empire is a lose, lose, lose situation ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TWEETED!
Posted by: nihilozero on Jul 31, 2009 1:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
@nihilozero

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

R-i-g-h-t. . .
Posted by: The Old Hippie on Jul 31, 2009 2:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
 
A nation whose citizens allowed corporations to become a “citizen” - Who allowed three straight national elections to pass without real protests or revolt - Who allowed torture, that resulted in the death of over 100 humans, to be accepted, and “defined” as legal - Who have allowed their nation to become the most incarcerated nation in history, in raw numbers, and percentage of its own population - Who continues to allow over half of it wealth to be spent on a fiscally out of control military-industrial-congressional-complex, more than all of the other nations’ spending combined - Who remains the only 1st or 2nd world nation without universal health care, the only one controlled by corporations that blatantly let people die rather than pay for the needed care those people needed to live - Who allowed the largest criminal wealth-transfer in written history to succeed, and it is still being accomplished as I write this - Who continue to allow, allow, allow, allow. . .

All of it without real protests, without hitting the streets in anger, without even a weak revolt - Do you think they will not continue to allow. . . Until their own self-destruction results in our destruction also?  Seriously?

In a nation who allows 47% of its adult citizens to not know how long it takes the Earth to orbit the sun, or allow 41% of its adult citizens to believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted?

Do you think they, the citizens of this nation, aren’t going to continue to allow, even in the face of all the exposed facts concerning their own self-destruction?  Do you really?  Seriously?

The fact that none of the previous administration, outside of one scapegoat, and none of the corporate officers of the banks, et al are not in prison right now, and none of whom are under any serious investigation. . .  And that there are no real protests, nor any in the streets righteous anger, nor a revolt of any kind and the face of it all. . .  Kind of says it all right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: R-i-g-h-t. . . Posted by: Razional Thinker
» RE: -i-g-h-t. . . All in the family Posted by: americansheep
Obama's ambitious domestic plans
Posted by: Perry Logan on Jul 31, 2009 2:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Er...what were those "ambitious domestic plans" again?

Oh yea, bailing out the banks, appointing neocons, passing destructive energy bills, screwing our chances for publicly-funded elections, extending fascist policies, extending Bush secrecy, rewarding the perpetrators of the financial meltdown, alienating gay Americans, squatting on Bush war crimes, pumping up racial tensions, continuing "faith-based" initiatives, worsening the Patriot Act, and in general functioning as a corporate Republican's dream.

Holes in History

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Either with us or against us...
Posted by: jparsons on Jul 31, 2009 2:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The US is using political scare tactics to get
New Zealand to risk our people as well in
Afghanistan....

You may need us

Of course, why we should think there will be any
military power left to protect us "someday" when all of these
other wars have drained the US taxpayer....?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our US economy is tied to militarism like cancer !
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Jul 31, 2009 4:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One problem in getting popular support for curtailing military adventures is that people in all 50 states depend on the military for employment. Many poor families depend on the armed forces to employ their sons or daughters, to bring at least one paycheck into the family and keep the kids away from alcohol, drugs and crime. Many areas depend on bases and weapons plants for their local economies. They provide direct employment as well as indirect support in the form of customers for local business.

As we have allowed industry to falter and rust, exported jobs for decades, this is truly a severe structural problem.

My outline for solutions: re-tool factories and re-purpose military service. Factories can be used to build transportation facilities, subway cars, eco-friendly housing components etc. Contracts could go to universities to research how to build solar panels or supply water rather than building drones or spyware. While we are paying salaries of troops anyway, they could be used to help and build, rather than kill and destroy both at home and abroad. Private contracts should be curtailed, and the army take care of its own food services, construction, repair and support. That would allow for diversity of training and return veterans to to civilian life better prepared for work psychologically and technically.

I hope that local politicians who have to face the choice between funding imperialism or throwing people out of work in their districts, will sometimes come up with creative proposals to employ their constituents. Is there anyone out there who will be enough of a man (or woman) to go in that direction?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» How about you? Posted by: Beck
» Gee Beck, afraid I kicked your butt? Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
???
Posted by: ellie on Jul 31, 2009 4:50 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
didn't we read an article similar to this one not too long ago or am I crazy???

close the damn bases, scale back the pentagon, bring everyone home and knock off the co-dependency of the entire globe expecting the US to jump in and save them from every little scrape we don't agree on, or to stick our noses into everyone elses business... enough already...

party's over, everyone comes home, now where were we on digging this joint out of the mess we're in locally...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ??? Yep and yes ... Posted by: mmckinl
Hindu religions tell us;
Posted by: richholland on Jul 31, 2009 5:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
thinking in black/white causes big problems

USA could have less militairy bases, is it an american vice to have all or nothing

Winner or loser?

Have 10 big mansions and thousands have nothing???
I hope the USA will close several bases and use the money for the workers...
Obama close bases and use the money for real health CARE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Excellent
Posted by: aadinko on Jul 31, 2009 5:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, excellent idea and some very good ways of getting it done indeed!

RT
Online Privacy when it Counts

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks to the Repubs we get...
Posted by: bobtr900 on Jul 31, 2009 6:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...ever better at killing people. The Repubs and their Religious Right better get even better at killing people --for God-- because they are going to have to kill many more millions of people to get even a small piece of what they want, which is supremacy, including both corporate supremacy and religious supremacy.

They are totally convinced that everything is black and white, religious or non religious, pro business or non pro business(anti business), Socialist or Capitalist, Repub or Dem, etc, ad nauseam. Looking at everything and everyone thru the lens of thier black or white spectrum is a very narrow pov and weill only serve to alienate everyone who is not them. Just as they have done with the 240+ million of us who are not convinced that their religious-political-economic trickle-down policies are the root of all good rather than the root of all evil. God, religion and business are not one and the same thing.

Iow, the Pope(my religion) and Pat Robertson better get far better at killing people for theology and business because there are many more millions of people who will not submit to their supremacist mindset.

Or to put it another way, their is a lot more to Pro-life than just their pro-fetus and gay hating agenda..

But that is all they focus on, to the worlds detriment or even it's possible destruction..The never ending greed of the Repub party and it's endless lust for ever more power/money is bringing about the destruction of what might have been a force for good, the USA and our now dying democracy, thanks to the likes of Bush and Scalia and their hate for the Constitution and our democracy.

Pro-life and Family Values are nothing but the right wingers bid for more money and more power. Call it Dominion and Domination over the lives of everyone on the planet.

It just ain't gonna' work. And a whole lot more people are going to suffer and die as they try to wipe out any and everyone who disagrees with them.and their corporate Repub death machine of profits above human values.

Iow, I totally agree with Chalmers Johnson.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why bother laying it out? Obama's already doing it and
Posted by: maxpayne on Jul 31, 2009 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
GOD IS ALREADY PUNISHING AMERICA SEVERELY TO ETERNAL DAMNATION !!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Excellent article. Now we need to pass it on
Posted by: Fempatriot on Jul 31, 2009 7:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's difficult to say just what the average American citizen can do to stop the insanity. One thing that I have vowed to do with the rest of my life is to speak out and to send articles like this to my email "friends" and family. Some will be highly offended, but if I can reach just one person on my list and make them think, or educate them a bit, then I will hopefully have started a chain. The big problem is that the average American is not aware of the really sad state of what is still called the United States of America but which is no longer a "nation."

I've printed this article out so I can refer to it and perhaps read some of the cited books, and I intend to send it around. I'll probably lose an Internet "friend" or two, but maybe someone will read it...and learn the awful truth. We're just like the Soviet Union; we're just like the Roman empire. And we'll go down, just like they did.

We're already going down; we just haven't hit the ground yet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The gig is up......
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Jul 31, 2009 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is soooo far past time that this nation gives up it's Imperialist mid-Adventures, the only ones that don't want to recognize this are the American people! Our attempts to "democratize" the rest of the world was a lie when it was first spoken, and now ring extremely hollow! When the President went to the G8 summit in the spring, while the babbling heads were saying that "he" got no concessions - what they failed to mention is that he actually had to go basically saying the last guy f---ked up, and now it's a new sheriff in town! I don't think Americans realize exactly how badly "our government" has behaved toward the rest of the world!

The b.s. that we've heard about our "freedoms" and how people want "to destroy our way of life" - well they will have to take a number because the Corporate Oligarchy along with their prostitutes in Congress are doing that quite well, thank you! Americans have been dumbed down, and really people it's time to wake up!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, Viet Nam Veteran
Posted by: tomu4ia on Jul 31, 2009 8:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article; great warnings.
Our military is the greatest cause of our national insecurity and economic collapse. Some thoughts:
1. Keep college ROTC but reduce the size and/or number of programs.
2. Eliminate ALL high school ROTC programs.
3. Eliminate ALL service academies (West Point, Annapolis, Air Force, Coast Guard and Merchant Marine).
4. Teach peace in high schools and universities.
5. Realize that the military is, in part, a welfare system, and that detailed WPA employment programs must be developed to replace it and employ the one million(?) military and associated civilian people laid off.
6. THANK OUR LUCKY STARS that our country has never experienced a coup and KNOW that there is absolutely nothing to prevent one. (Watch the 1964 movie "Seven Days in May" for calibration.)
7. Understand that greed breeds our military and that NO POLITICIAN has ever had the courage to buck the bucks--not even 5-star General Eisenhower who warned of the "military, industrial, congressional" complex on his way out the presidential door.
8. Incremental reductions (e.g. the F-22) are our best and only hope. 9. Let's PLEASE care enough to exercise our democratic responsibilities and constantly appeal to our elected officials to listen to our voices. If they won't, we must elect officials courageous who will.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: coups of 2000,2004, 911 Posted by: tazdelaney
Johnny
Posted by: jonoruf on Jul 31, 2009 8:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good article except for the fact that the title was completely misleading due to the fact that the article didn't actually EXPLAIN to us how to accomplish the things outlined to destroy an empire....That would be a GREAT article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Have been saying all this for years.
Posted by: bettyn on Jul 31, 2009 9:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's like beating your head against a brick wall. Why the HELL do we have all these bases around the world, especially in Europe? The Russians aren't coming (Although if we put this non-functioning weapons shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, they might reconsider.)I'm tired of us trying to police the world, meddle in the affairs of others, (It's their country. Isn't it possible these people might know what's best for them more than we do?), and generally **** everything up.

We all know the reason why this shit keeps going on, don't we? It's the corporate crowd again. There's money to be made, CEO's to get ridiculous salaries and bonuses, and the HELL with the rest of us.

Ike was right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

good stuff tom
Posted by: tazdelaney on Jul 31, 2009 10:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
bill burroughs wrote "america tries to hire death as the company cop." even that indian-killing, syphilitic slave-rapist george washington, said, "a democratic society cannot long exist in the presence of a standing army."

what it needed, however, isn't just to end the american military empire but the entire framework of globalist empire.

i imagine a worldwide grassroots non-violent and guerilla revolution to shut down ALL empire from the top down. this should have as top priorities the disarmament of all WMDs, starting with the most heavily armed which should be considered rogue nations committing massive crimes against humanity by the R&D and stockpiling of war-crime devices. as disarmament spirals downwards, the process starts disarming the lesser armed countries and the disarmament broadens to include less deadly weaponry than WMDs. then comes the rapid, though gradual, dissolution of militarism across the planet.

meanwhile, an authentic human bill of rights could begin implementing genuine freedom for all everywhere. perhaps at this juncture, the dismantlement of the multinationals financial and resource empire can be dissolved in favor of a democratic-socialist system in which resources nor peoples are exploited. then we tend to trying to salvage nature from total catastrophe of the mismanaged industrial revolution and find the optimum means to depopulate a hideously overpopulated globe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

a 'simple' concept
Posted by: tazdelaney on Jul 31, 2009 10:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
how about a worldwide law requiring that no nation shall have any troops stationed outside its core borders. any nation refusing to abide this would be embargoed completely by all other nations. this method could also be applied to force global disarmament, human rights, etcetera. as only rogue states would remain abroad and maintaining WMDs; those would be treated like the terrorist organizations they truly are, with forfeiture of all foreign assets and disruption of external financial and business dealings. and spil all their grisly secrets...

we can imagine that the ruling demons - whether NSA, WTO, PRC, mitsubishi or monsanto – will act like a cornered cat and move in all ways to thwart this movement. best to keep the movement as non-violent as possible... as the enemy is itself violence incarnate, murder, inc.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A brilliant article
Posted by: badkitty on Jul 31, 2009 10:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a brilliant article by Chalmers Johnson, and I wish every congressperson and senator could read it, even though I think few would understand it. I have been writing my senators for years now, asking to have the Department of Defense abolished--think of all the things we could use the money for--but I'm sure they laugh every time I write this. Although I am in general very happy with Obama (I know a lot of people disagree, but there is some difference between him and Bush, just as there was between Pat Brown and Reagan), but his extension of the illegal war in Afghanistan reminds me more every day of Lyndon Johnson's increase of fighting forces in Vietnam, and will be his downfall. I understand his point that we will not be financially secure until we get health care costs under control, but health care is just half of it. As Chalmers Johnson has pointed out so well, we need to cut the military too, and the sooner the better. We are definitely on the downward slide, and picking up speed. Just wait until climate change really starts to hit! The military needs to go, NOW.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mr. Obama! Tear Down This Empire!
Posted by: JMorse on Jul 31, 2009 10:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Twenty-two years ago, June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan made a speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate at the Berlin Wall in which he implored Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall.” Within a year, the wall that symbolized repression and tyranny did in fact come crashing down. But with the demise of the Soviet Union, there is something else that should likewise have been toppled: the U.S. empire of troops and bases that encircles the globe.

Mr. Obama, Tear down this empire.

The kingdom of Alexander the Great reached to the borders of India. The Roman Empire controlled Western Europe and the Hellenized states that bordered the Mediterranean. The Mongol Empire stretched from Southeast Asia to Europe. The Byzantine Empire lasted over a thousand years. The Ottoman Empire stretched from the Persian Gulf in the east to Hungary in the northwest; and from Egypt in the south to the Caucasus in the north. At the height of its dominion, the British Empire included almost a quarter of the world’s population.

Nothing, however, compares to the U.S. global empire. It is an empire that would make Alexander the Great, Caesar Augustus, Genghis Khan, Suleiman the Magnificent, Emperor Justinian, and King George V proud. What makes U.S. hegemony unique is that it consists, not of control over great landmasses or population centers, but of a global presence unlike that of any other country in history.

Sure, Donald Rumsfeld maintained: “We don’t seek empires. We’re not imperialistic. We never have been.” Right. Just like Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Just like the war in Iraq was supposed to be a cakewalk. Just like Bush told us, “we don’t torture.” Some neocons are a bit more honest, like CFR Senior Fellow Max Boot, who rejects the term “imperialism,” but insists that the United States “should definitely embrace the practice.”

READ THE REST HERE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can't believe
Posted by: Archie1954 on Jul 31, 2009 11:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that Canada of all places would sign a SOFA agreement with the US. How in the world would such an agreement be of any benefit for Canada. Very few US military are ever even in the country and if they are it's usually for short term manuevers or training exercises. The idea that US troops visiting there could commit crimes and then be whisked away free of any penalty is absolute anathema to me as a Canadian. No wonder these agreements are kept secret from the populace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

cmon, face up to obamabush
Posted by: tazdelaney on Jul 31, 2009 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
while obama had just spouted to '60 minutes' that "we don't stand for torture;" on the 2nd day after his inauguration, he mandated the coninuance of the CIA 'rendition' program of outsourced disappearance, torture and execution... then delayed the promise of closing just the one torture chamber of gitmo until at least 2011... plans on leaving 50,000 troop occupation in the resource-colony of iraq indefinitely while expanding the wars in afghanistan and pakistan. obama moves to protect the war criminals and torturers of bush-cheney years because he already has several thousand deaths under his command and the torture continues in the network of hellholes. and so forth. obamabush is an uncle tom sell out to the exact forces which would rather incinerate the earth than shut down their militarism and empire.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: cmon, face up to obamabush Posted by: Lex Thomas
Militirism in schools is not what ROTC makes
Posted by: HLbuchanan on Jul 31, 2009 11:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
7. Given the growing constraints on the federal budget, we should abolish the Reserve Officers' Training Corps and other long-standing programs that promote militarism in our schools.

This is the worst recommendation in the article. ROTC on Civilian campuses is what produces the most well rounded and less hawkish officers in the Military. You understand the effect opposite of what is really happening. The service academies produce the hard core military officers that are much less influenced by the multicultural education environments that are found in the campuses across the USA.

The ROTC departments don't do anything to militarize campuses other than bring in a very small portion of the student body into the military following college. With the exception of the rare civilian military academies and a few other large ROTC departments, most campuses ROTC enrollment is well under 2% of the student body. Do you really want the only officers in the military educated by the pure military education system, or do you think it would be better for a portion of them to receive the education next to non-military folk, and from the varied professors from across the lands?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We are 5 percent and consume 25 percent
Posted by: leemiller38 on Jul 31, 2009 11:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and that's why we have an empire to make sure our American interests (resources), need protection so we can continue our overbreeding, affluent and distructive ways. One thing about the Russian recovery after the USSR collapse is that they did have vast energy resources that Europeans really need. When we collapse, there won't be any resources here to recover with-- our peak production was in 1970. We will be an asphalt and concrete ticky-tacky, auto-based, urban sprawl without the means to produce food once the energy is gone-not to mention depleted aquifers and polluted environment.
Have a nice day and don't hold your breath for our voluntarily giving up the empire and the M-I complex. Too much enertia and we will go broke first.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How many of you who voted Obama are proud to see him and the Democrats in Congress continue the
Posted by: Lex Thomas on Jul 31, 2009 1:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
empire status? Before the election, there were plenty of Obama supporters who screamed against empire status and yet after Obama won, they have either kept quiet about it or have loudly supported it just because Obama is now in charge. Partisan politics is poisoning this country and keeping the empire status alive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Speaking just for myself: Posted by: channing
» You're not alone actually. Posted by: Benn_Miller
J. CARTER OBAMA
Posted by: reelman on Jul 31, 2009 1:42 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
REVISED: ECONOMY 2X WORSE


SECULAR SOCIALIST PACIFISM IS NEVER THE ANSWER!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» oh really? Posted by: usonian
Why we're a tottering giant.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jul 31, 2009 3:16 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
China doesn't make empires; it makes deals. Which is why it will surpass the U.S. in the coming decades as an economic power. One can always accomplish more with friends than against enemies.

Chinese truism: "Mud slung is ground lost."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our tiny fragile blue jewel of life called Earth....
Posted by: maxsmart on Jul 31, 2009 3:41 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hopefully it won't be like with Charlton Heston, pried from our cold dead hands...but most likely the military-merchant-missionary complex will continue until an economic collapse. maybe like with the Roman Empire the outpost just go local and become mercenaries or something. Empires are probably short these days because the incredible cost of technological development to keep ahead of the weapons we sell to fund the development of the next generation of weapon we need to develop a solution for gets too much.
This is a global issue now however because our finite planet will become more and more unsustainable and we may even cause our own extinction without ever learning to balance body and mind. If we cannot learn to live with our instincts of territoriality and dominance and the conceptualizations to rationalize collateral damage, ideology, and demonization we will become a failed evolutionary sidetrip.
Territorially speaking we all share this one jewel of life called Earth and we all share very similar DNA even with life in general on Earth. We are interdependent and damage to others is kind of like a vulture feeding on it's own live body. It may be no coincidence that China and India and Japan are growing in influence but they need to return to their roots represented in the ying-yang symbol rather than individual materialism. That symbolizes a wholistic system that respects the whole and the uniqueness of individual parts. Mindfulness awareness meditation is also a useful skill for balancing the duality of body and mind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clunkers And Humans.
Posted by: melpol on Jul 31, 2009 6:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It would be terrible for some poor souls if the government expanded their cash for clunkers to humans. Grandma might be turned in for cash and crushed. It would save billions. The only protests would be from the clunkers. The rest of us will not raise a peep.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pentagon=America=Corporate Interests
Posted by: dayahka on Jul 31, 2009 6:51 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To dismantle the military is to dismantle the country. The military is not an accidental appendage to the country, but its very essence, its raison d'etre. Robbing the world's resources is central to the American way of life. No president could dismantle this monster and live to tell about it. The only dismantling will occur if the empire collapses; and this event will not happen through ballots, but through bullets--or catastrophe.

Thus saying that the wars will bankrupt the country and that this is a reason to dismantle the military is naive. If we didn't have the military system we now have and the wars, we would have a great many more unemployed--and unemployable--people in the country. Better let them die and bankrupt the country where they are than bring them home to cause trouble.

Contrary to what you say, the military does spearhead innovation and innovative products that eventually make it into the mainstream. The Internet was no private enterprise innovation--it came from the military, as well as GPS systems, cell phones, and a host of other products.

No, you're wrong. The military is not something that can be shunted off and downsized without destroying the economy and its institutions. Oil companies could not exist without the military grabbing the oil wells in Iraq and surrounding the entire Middle East with bases and troops. Trade could not flow worldwide without the troops. International travel would be very difficult, with everywhere a Somalia-like bunch of pirates ready to pounce.

What you propose is a brand-new America, one based on justice and rationality, and that would be a great good, but it just ain't going to happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's Better Define Losing in Afghanistan
Posted by: PaulK on Jul 31, 2009 7:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We might very well "Lose" in Afghanistan, but that's a terribly limiting concept. Wars are rarely that neat.

Countries switch sides. It drove the right wing writer George Orwell crazy that Hitler used Stalin, then stabbed Stalin in the back, and then the US found a dirty little way to declare war on Hitler and so Hitler lost. In Afghanistan's case, Hamed Karzai controls a few square miles of Kabul and that's all. He has little to lose. Everybody is a heroin dealer, so technically the US is starting out from a position of 100% total loss and is making no progress in the heroin war whatsoever. Renting a local heroin warlord is a long way from winning a war. These guys make enemies.

The U.S. soldiers have begun a completely new wave of tactics involving teddy bears, cups of tea with the civilians, and crayons. When they put down their lethal weapons in favor of these new tactics they might actually be "winning" some kind of war. When individual marines can say, these are our friends, I am going to personally rebuild a local school, I am going to marry a local woman, then maybe we have won, because we are them. Such are the roots of peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Beautifully written PaulK Posted by: channing
alas, it won't happen until it's too late
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford on Jul 31, 2009 8:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama will never tear down this empire. Republicans make democrats weak. Here's how: They insult democrats and call them weak, so the democrats, in turn, not wanting to be seen as weak, still carry out wars, etc, just so they don't look like "wimps." It's time to elect someone who isn't afraid of republican insults, and actually has the courage and conviction to stand up for us. $4 billion of revenue from just closing two bases? Imagine if we closed 90% of them! We could have another NHS like in Britain. We could have taxpayer subsidized everything in this country without ever having to raise taxes on the middle class past their present levels. We could have everything. We could have a utopia in this country, but vested interests will continue to serve themselves. Obama is no help. I think most people on the left see that now. Time to post someone else as our figurehead for the next election. Kucinich possibly?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Afghans prefer the Taliban to the Afghan National Police
Posted by: Canute on Jul 31, 2009 8:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Brits are finding out that their Afghan counterparts in Helmand Province are a bunch of thieving rapists. The ANP is corrupt and brutal.

That's why the Taliban won back in 1996 - as medieval as they are, they are sticklers for the law. The warlords of the Northern Alliance made the mobsters of 1920's Chicago look like a bunch of patsies. As long as we are in bed with a bunch of greedy murderers and thieves we are doomed to fail.

Likewise, we need to get the big money out of politics first or all our well intentioned efforts at reform (military or otherwise) are doomed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A well-spoken moralist to be certain
Posted by: willymack on Aug 1, 2009 10:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But not much of a REALIST.
The author dreams of a world where we're not the bully boys, morally and financially draining our life's blood, a world in which all our military personnel are brought back home to help in the rebuilding of democracy, schools, infrastructure,and enviornmental repair, etc.
Nice dreams, but we have an amoral and completely evil aglomoration of well-entrenched, greedy psychopaths who have all the weapons and power, and who will stop at NOTHING to retain what they have.
How do we go about isolating and removing them from their lofty perch? They're a deadly danger, and have nothing to lose by defending themselves.
We've been bamboozled and brainwashed by these criminals for so long, our reflex action is much like the Nazi salute, and debasing ourselves by towing the party line.
How do we reverse this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well, Duh! Posted by: leafsong1
Better late than never
Posted by: talkville on Aug 2, 2009 2:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the social human of our species is to further advance at all into the realms of justice, liberty or equality, this article points quite accurately at the answers to that question in our human condition: What is to be done?

Of course, in some respects we are about 220 years too late; in other respects approximately 400. The Action of 1776 accomplished a historical triumph in the cause of liberation, justice and equality. A mere 13 years later, in 1789 the advance of this cause was summarily stopped, de facto and de jure by the new, more autonomous, Imperial Plan - in large measure courtesy of the development of Federalist theories and the interests of large land-holders and private individual capitalism. Any action even remotely similar to 1776 was in fact foreclosed, de facto and de jure. Since those times a fledgling imperial project has developed right into our own present period. The empire is well advanced and entrenched at every level, in our very consciousness as citizens.

Objective forces of militarism, expansionism and colonization and integration are by now "automatic", barely registering as we go about our individual daily lives as we "freely chose" to develop in our various ways. Whether on a personal, a policy or a systemic level, empire is on the march -- dogmatically, resting on the metaphysical grounds of religion and morality, not the physical and concrete reality each human has lived, will live and always will live.

Dismantling such a continuing 400 year old program and march is truly a gargantuan task.

Monitor the ideas, policies and activities of the Federalist Society. whether internally as to theory or in practice in positions of power - state and corporate. Institutions like that one are in the very center of the maelstrom each of us is living in. The left desperately needs clear and methodical voices.

Thanks for the article -- on with dismantling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Great Article!
Posted by: Avatar on Aug 2, 2009 3:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although I do agree with your article, no Empire has ever given up it's Imperial Ambitions until holding on to their Empire or Colonies was no longer possible! Just like the Soviet's defeat in Afghanistan helped to bring down the USSR, and likewise the European Colonialists only gave up their colonies when the price holding on to them were no longer viable! But it was NEVER given up voluntarely!

After the end of the Second World War, all of the colonial powers did their darnest to re assert their pre War colonial rule and authority over their old colonies, when Japan invaded their teritories and force them to withdraw. The exception was India where the Quit India Movement under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi was well on its way but even there Independence didn't come until 1947.

After the defeat of Japan........the good old colonialist's boyz club was not about to give up their spoils and colonies voluntarily! But they did make a slight erro of judgement a miscalculation. They forgot to recognize that during the Japanese occupation people in many of the occupied countries has built up a vigorous armed resistance to fight the Japanese occupiers in jungle and guerilla war fare and when the Colonialists returned to reclaim their colonies they had met with a fierce armed resistance..........in Indo-China the French got decisively defeated by the Vietnamese at Diem Bien Fu..........in Indonesia fist the British has tried to grab the "colony" from the Dutch that left the country up for grabs and when they met with a strong armed resistance lead by Sukarno fighting the British they came to realize that this was not the same docile nation that was enslaved 300 years earlier. The British Army fighting in Indonesia were mostly manned by Indian troops but with more than 600 Indian troops defecting and joining the Indonesian freedom fighters, it doomed the British efforts to take over Indonesia as their colony under the guise of being Peace Keepers! When the British left Indonesia, the Dutch returned with a vengance to reclaim their colony and fierce fighting continued. Not until 1949 December 27th did Indonesia finally won its independence! While the British kept on fighting in Malay until 1963...........and almost in every country except for India bloody wars were fought by the Colonialists to hold on to their colonies, Algeria, Tunesia etc
The various bloddy wars fought for independence and moving the world towards the "De Colonization of Asia and Africa" continued until the late 1960's......

I suspect the USA won't give up their military bases either voluntarely! Not until they get decisively defeated and humiliated in Afghanistan or are forced by their financial collapse that makes maintaining all these bases and military occupations, wars, military adventurism cost prohibitive......

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Great Article!.... Posted by: Captainmagic
Excellent
Posted by: travelertoo on Aug 6, 2009 9:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article should be read by everyone in the U.S.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oh really?
Posted by: usonian on Aug 21, 2009 9:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Neither Jimmy Carter nor Barack Obama are secular, socialist or pacifist (more's the pity). Both are, in fact, deeply religious Christians (especially Carter); defend and support capitalism; and continue to support the U.S. military-industrial complex's wars (with the partial, but only partial, exception of the Iraq War). So, where's the secularism, where's the socialism, where's the pacifism?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement