Why Foreign Interventionism? by Jacob G. Hornberger
(2020-05-01 at 12:45:32 )

Why Foreign Interventionism? by Jacob G. Hornberger

What is the point of United States foreign interventionism?

Why are United States troops killing and dying in faraway countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Somalia?

Why does the United States government have 165,000 troops stationed in more than 150 foreign countries?

Why is the United States government enforcing economic sanctions and embargoes against the people of Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and other countries?

Why are United States officials waging trade wars against foreign nations?

Why do the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon assassinate foreigners?

Why are United States officials provoking conflicts with Iran and Venezuela?

Why is regime change a core feature of United States foreign policy?

Why do United States officials partner with tyrannical foreign regimes?

Why does the United States government tax hard-pressed American citizens in order to send money to foreign regimes, including dictatorial ones?

Why does the United States government initiate wars of aggression against countries that have never invaded or even threatened to invade the United States?

Why do United States officials spend taxpayer money on foreign interventionism?

Why do United States troops inflict death, suffering, and destruction in foreign lands?

What are United States troops dying for in faraway lands?

After all, let us acknowledge the obvious: No nation-state is invading the United States. No nation-state has the money, resources, personnel, equipment, and supplies to cross the ocean and invade and conquer the United States.

There is no possibility of an invasion and conquest of the United States by Canada or any Latin American country.

Therefore, what is the purpose of all that United States meddling in overseas countries?

We do not like foreign regimes meddling in American affairs. Why should United States officials be meddling in the affairs of other countries, especially when the meddling involves the infliction of death, suffering, and destruction?

Consider Switzerland. It does not have troops in the Middle East and Afghanistan. It does not send foreign aid to regimes. It does not assassinate people. It does not initiate wars of aggression against Third World countries. It just devotes itself entirely to defending Switzerland against an invasion. And no one ever jacks with the Swiss.

In fact, have you ever wondered why United States officials call the Department of Defense by that name? I can see why Switzerland would use such a name. But the United States? it seems to me that the more truthful name would be the Department of Foreign Interventionism.

The Swiss model of non-intervention was actually the founding foreign policy of the United States. This was reflected by Johns Quincy Adams profound Fourth of July, 1821, speech to Congress entitled "In Search of Monsters to Destroy." In that speech, Mr. Adams observed that if America were ever to abandon her founding foreign policy of non-intervention, "She might become the dictatress of the world: she would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."

In fact, that was one of the reasons why the Framers and our American ancestors had such a deep antipathy for what they called "standing armies," by which they meant large, overgrown military-intelligence establishments, or what President Dwight Eisenhower would later label "the military-industrial complex," or what we call today a "national-security state." The Framers and our ancestors did not want a "standing army" large enough to engage in foreign interventionism.

Where to go from here? Is the answer not obvious?

Reprinted here with permission from Mr. Jacob G. Hornberger of The Future of Freedom Foundation!! Their Great Website!!