I grew up listening to Rush Limbaugh. At the time I thought "liberals" were anti-war. I thought being anti-war was dumb. Everyone is anti-war! That's a lie. I wasn't anti-war and neither were the liberals. Turns out this was just a hangover from the hippie revolution. Which, turns out wasn't anything but a big party about self indulgence. But that's another post. Back in the 80s and 90s conservatives were the war hawks(At least the openly hawkish). They wanted to extend US power abroad. They wanted to flip countries. They did all kinds of shady things all over the globe. While they never pretended to be anti-war, they didn't admit to the US being an empire.
Over the years my eyes began to open the how global conflicts work. I started paying attention to Ron Paul. He made a lot of sense. I read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman". I read "War is a Racket". I read many other books that they don't tell you about in school. Critical books on US policy from the perspective of people that love this country as much as I do. I began to learn how the well connected bankers, industrialists, and politicians all profit from endless wars. How the elites have convinced the plebs that war isn't all bad. After all, it brought us out of the great depression...(another lie that I won't get into). I remember when the wall fell, when the USSR fell. I remember when the US essentially picked a drunk Russian to lead the new Russian nation. I remember when the US sent in economists to advise the Russians on how to do democracy and free markets. It was a disaster by the way. It led to the rise of Putin. A strong man (ala Trump) that wasn't ideological but was more practical and more raw in his use of power.
I think many have forgotten the early years of post USSR Russia. The push for peace and normalization of relations. I remember thinking how great that was. But that wouldn't stand. I'm convinced the Military Industrial Complex was in full panic mode after the USSR fell. Their entire reason for living had died. Sure, there were other adventures that went on that were good money making opportunities like Iraq war 1 but it wasn't anything like the cold war.
Then 911 happened. The war on terror seemed like the next money maker for these industries. The problem is that these conflicts are not like the cold war. They are mostly small decentralized groups whose tactics do not warrant massive stockpiles of weapons. Not to the level of the cold war at least. So who would be the next opponent? Would it be China? I mean back in those times there were people saying that but this was before the liberalizing of China towards more free market mechanisms. At least they had yet to see the growth we see today. There wasn't a new enemy.
With the war on terror and the Bush doctrine W completely dropped his pitch that he ran on. He campaigned on the US NOT being the world's police. Sounds a lot like Trump's approach. Different packaging it but the same idea. Strong defense but let each nation handle their own affairs. You see, after WW2 there were two powers that ruled the world. The USSR and the USA. I would call them empires. One fell and one is still alone at the top. The good ole USA.
Conservatives HATE it when I call the USA an empire. I mean, I get it. We are taught that empires are bullies and how could the USA be a bully. We defeated the Nazis. We saved the world. But the USA is an empire. Liberals usually will agree with me that the USA is an empire. However, they seem to quickly forget this every time a new war is being pitched. Unless it is by a Republican. But even then if their party leadership approves they approve. It is true that the US uses soft power most of the time but the USA has used raw power and muscle many times. Between 1945 and 1999 the USA has had 32 distinct and separate bombing campaigns on 24 different countries. This does not include all the covert operations.
By in large the US population has supported their government's use of power. That's not just conservatives but liberals as well. I have come to believe that Americans just lie to themselves because the truth makes them uncomfortable. Maybe some of the uses of power have been for the better. I'm open to that argument. But don't kid yourself. Many have to be failures if not just simple actions to enrich well connected people across the globe. Only a fool would believe liars that have a history of misrepresenting the truth. That's what politicians do. They pitch every war as a moral good yet quietly support oppressive regimes across the globe that are guilty of the same crimes. The moral case for war is often just marketing.
If you ask most Americans they are concerned about China and Russia. I am as well by the way. But think about this. If you weren't an American. If you lived in one of those countries what would you fear? I think you'd fear the good ole US of A. Lets play a game.
If you were an alien and landed on this planet. You saw that one government had bombed 24 countries over the last 75 years. Then you looked at another that had not bombed or invaded any countries over that time span. Who would you think is the more likely aggressor? The USA. Not China (which hasn't invaded or bombed any other nations since WW2).
If you're thinking. Man, this guy is anti-American! I have news for you. You are biased. You are blind. I'm NOT anti-American. I'm anti-empire. If on the other hand you think yeah, the US is an empire and it needs to be. I can respect that. What I can't respect is people that wanna take the moral high ground while supporting the empire. You are being fooled by the elites and the media system they control. You are a pawn. Don't be a pawn. I was once a pawn. Open your mind. We can do better. We are Americans. Those that want us to turn our decedents into debt slaves are the anti-Americans. Those that do not blink an eye at the idea of sending someone else's children to there death are the anti-Americans. Those that seem to have zero fear of starting a nuclear war are the ones that hate Americans.