There’s a Reason George Washington Cautioned Against “Entangling Relationships”

America’s Cold War relationships have created conditions for very hot wars to take place

Interventionist sentiments have prevailed in the guiding of US  foreign policy, one could claim, since 1917.

From the US  participation in World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Persian Gulf Battles, the Afghanistan war, the “ war on fear, ” to say nothing of other minor interventions by force in Grenada, Compact country of panama, the Balkans, Somalia, etc ., one could conclude that the Usa is not shy about using military force to advance its internationalist inclinations. This is not by chance,   shows no indication of abating, and coincides with  the propagation from the internationalist/interventionist mantra we now are witnessing  within the legacy press and on social media.

Governments around the world, comprised of many adherents to the internationalist vision of a “ new” entire world order, now seek to make use of the war in Ukraine as their latest cabal in order to divert global resources to their next great cause. These well-manicured, effete, and occasionally partially coherent leaders  endanger and coerce unified activity against what they have deemed to be the next object of their obsession to advance their vision: Russia. These elites offer in an ethereal strategic world of grand visions depending on endless amounts of financing through central banks and perhaps an upcoming reliance on cannon fodder provided by the masses  (read: working class), who are on the hook to pay the expenses rung up by their social betters. Jeff Deist  in his  most recent post   captures the particular spirit of these elites very well.

The ethereal strategic realm is the world of the military generals and foreign ministry “ specialists, ” who only view the upside to enormous increases is military spending as well as the associated foreign adventures to advance their goals. They actually have no understanding of the visceral tactical costs of their eyesight, the economics of turmoil, the financial damage triggered to the American economy especially, or the burdens their lofty visions  place  on generations to come. Along with numerous users of Congress, members of the executive bureaucracy, defense companies, lobbyists, and their alternatives throughout the world, these people deal in the fantasy world where they only reap the rewards of the endless cycle associated with conflict begun on an commercial scale in the twentieth millennium.

It is a desire world, yet it has provided us a series of nightmarish treaties and security arrangements, which  all American men, women, children, and those yet to become born are obligated to back up in perpetuity. Many hardworking Americans may be unaware they are on the hook to maintain, monetarily,   and with their lives if their government decides therefore , these arrangements, which arrived as a result of the internationalist wish to establish Western dominance during and after the Cold War.

The list of  treaties in force   maintained by the US  Department of State is truly mind boggling. Among the most notable of the security arrangements are usually the  North Ocean Treaty , the  Mutual Defense Treaty involving the United States and the Republic associated with Korea , and the  Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security among Japan and the United States of America .

There are others to be sure, all trigger points for future conflict. Nevertheless , these are the big three treaties that are backed by the massive resources of the United States and construct a web of entangling relationships that provide the opportunity for quick, significant miscalculation and access into a large kinetic war. Any mere suggestion these treaties are overly burdensome  relics of the past which the vast majority of Americans are completely unaware is met with accusations of ignorance and isolationism toward  those who choose to consider the costs of these preparations.

The  Northern Atlantic Treaty Organization  ( NATO ) is an historic anachronism. Developed in 1949 as a barrier against  Soviet expansion into Western Europe, NATO stopped to serve any purpose when the Berlin Wall emerged down in 1989. The business metastasized in the post-Soviet period, when it not only lost a chance to show good will toward  its former adversary, but took advantage of the momentary weakness of Russia in order to expand, welcome in former Soviet client states, and pose legitimate security worries for the Russian leadership. As  David Stockman   explains:

Still, the US  war machine would not proceed quietly into the good night time. Clinton could have led the entire world into global disarmament,   but was so afraid of the particular Republican hawks in 1996 that he led in just the opposite direction— the eastward enlargement of NATO, which  turned Russia into a pariah and has now finally brought the world to  the brink associated with nuclear Armageddon.

A vast amount of money and resources were wasted within not accepting a hard-won peace  but rather maintaining a war footing and taking advantage of the new potential for NATO to act as a force to increase Western European hegemony, right to Russia’s front door. This, of course , was largely paid for by the United States. Rather than disappearing as a relic of the Cold War, NATO continues today, to be a business which very well might drag the United States into yet another European war. In Ukraine, much like in  Afghanistan, NATO is usually demonstrating that a state do not need to be a member to find the reassurance of NATO’s protective bosom.

Another relic from the Cold War is the US– Republic of Korea alliance. There are nearly thirty thousand US  troops stationed within the Republic of Korea, evidently there to defend the connections. In reality, they are there to act as a tripwire to include the United States in any conflict that could break out on the peninsula. 2023 will mark the seventy-year anniversary of the Korean Battle armistice. Despite the fact that the Republic of Korea has the  twelfth-largest GDP   (gross domestic product)  on earth  and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea  is listed as  130th (though  there really are no  accurate data   to determine the size of its economy), the Republic of Korea has required a good open-ended treaty commitment in the United States that has cost vast amounts of US  taxpayer dollars and  54, 296   dead troops during the Korean War (1950– 53). Although 1, 789, 500 US  troops served in theater during the Korean War, and today’s commitment associated with under 30, 000 troops will be argued by connections defenders to be a pay sum, at least this potential area of conflict begs the question: When can it end? Will certainly the United States have troops in the Republic of Korea for the hundred years? A hundred more years? Forever? Will the US  debt-to-GDP ratio have everything to do with that decision? May be the demilitarized zone more important to Americans than the US-Mexico boundary? Apparently, it is to the policy makers and the self-appointed deep-state “ experts” who continue to support this forever connections.

Similarly, the particular US-Japan alliance, created during the Cold War and signed into treaty in 1960  specifically to address Japanese disarmament after World War II and the Soviet presence in the Far East, offers lived beyond its effectiveness. It certainly has outlived the singular reason for the existence, the former Soviet Union. Japan, which was able to create its  enormous economic climate   because it counted on the American security blanket during the Cold War, found it to its benefit to continue this security arrangement beyond the existence of the Soviet menace so it could considerably defray the costs of its very own security. However , this has not only left the responsibility and financial burden of defending The japanese to the United States, but it has done so with the very great potential of drawing the United States in to confrontations with the new, scary  international menace, the Householder’s Republic of China.

Recently, Japan has been keener on spending a lot more for its own defense and increasing security cooperation using the United States. That mises the point. The United States, a country having a national debt of nearly  $31 trillion , pays billions of dollars per year to station a vast variety of military forces in The japanese, ready to enforce the security ensures within the mutual defense pact. Of course , there is nothing mutual about the treaty, which calls for US  security guarantees for Japan, but no such reciprocation from Japan. American sons and daughters may be required to die for the  Senkaku Islands   one day, but not one Western is on the hook in the future to the defense of any kind of US  interest anywhere. In fact , the Japanese are prevented through doing so by  write-up 9   of their own constitution.

Exactly who pays the actual price for the security arrangements? The United states taxpayers and workers. They are the ones who will pay the price in blood for these contracts created by the internationalist elites of a former era. The realm of the working class is visceral and technical. It is the realm of true human beings, mostly poor, who have throughout history have stuffed the mass graves of foreign battlefields. It is the world of those who are always designed to clean up the messes developed by those elites luxuriating in the ethereal strategic realm. The visceral tactical realm  is the realm of financial ruin, military casualties, the destruction of families and communities.

Americans are actually spoiled in that their reveal strategic blunders have not however resulted in societal collapse. The disasters of the Vietnam War, Iraq, Afghanistan have not translated to widespread negative results for American society, other than these misadventures have additional substantially to the national financial debt and caused great misery among  working-class people, that are the ones footing the monetary bill and paying the cost in blood. How long will certainly the American public accept the idea that they are marionettes  controlled by elite hands which have bungled every major problems in American history? Whenever will Americans demand of the government that they dispense along with promises of security to foreign nations that have used American generosity for far too long  and instead concentrate on the other, domestic disasters awaiting American society?

The time to end these security obligations invented by political elites is now, while we can control the process of what comes after them. If we wait considerably longer, these alliances will either collapse under the stresses associated with failing fiat currencies  or the United States will be dragged in to a war most of its citizens do not want  and which might cause significant, long-lasting damage to American society. Let’s not leave another mess for that working man to clean upward.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *