Eric Zuesse
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Eric Zuesse (blogs at https://theduran.com/author/eric-zuesse/)
The U.S. Government claims to be enforcing peace throughout the world but engages in far more invasions and coups than any other country in all of history ever has. The U.S. Congressional Research Service’s list of U.S. invasions (including increases in existing invasions) lists and briefly describes 297 such invasions after WW II (i.e., during 1945-2022, a 77-year period), and is titled “Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2022”. That 297 U.S. invasions in the past 77 years is more than all of the pre-1945 instances put together during 1798-1945 — which was twice as long a period, 147-years. And none of those 297 invasions after 1944 was defensive. 244 of the 297 occurred after the Soviet Union ended in 1991 and prior to Russia’s invading Ukraine in 2022. Why should there have been any U.S. invasions at all during that period? The Cold War was over — on Russia’s side but not on America’s (where it secretly continued).
So: during the mere 32-year span of 1991 to 2022, there were 244 U.S. invasions. And going all the way back to the end of WW II in 1945, 78 years ago, there were 297. But prior to 1945, there had been only 173 U.S. invasions throughout that entire 147-year period, 1798-1945. When WW II ended, the frequency of U.S. invasions simply skyrocketed, and then it skyrocketed even more as soon as Russia ended the Cold War on its side.
After WW II, there was no U.S. declaration of war and thus no Constitutional legality for any of America’s post-WW-II invasions. All of the 297 U.S. invasions after 1944 were unConstitutional (without an official congressional declaration of war). Most of them were purely aggressions (some in order to help a foreign tyrant suppress his own population). After the Soviet Union ended in 1991, the U.S. Government just went wild, internationally, and greatly stepped-up the frequency of its invasions.
America’s Founders had insisted that there be no “standing army” in this nation. Until President Truman established the ‘Defense’ Department and CIA in 1947, there wasn’t any standing army in the U.S. That change, by him, actually created America’s military-industrial complex, which now controls the country and produces all of those murderous invasions, on behalf of U.S. billionaires, who control and profit from the ‘Defense’ firms (weapons manufacturers), the news-media (to promote their invasions), the lobbying firms, and the extraction firms (such as ExxonMobil).
The biggest winners of America’s recent wars have actually been America’s billionaires (look at this graph, which shows that ever since the 1991 termination of the Cold War on Russia’s side, America’s armaments-makers’ profits soared, instead of plunged — as ought to have happened. (By contrast: in both Russia and China, the weapons firms remained controlled by the Government, not by private investors; so, serve the Government’s national-security needs, not private investors — thus aren’t even nearly as corrupt as in the U.S.-and-‘allied’ (i.e., vassal or colonial) countries.
U.S. history before 1945 was a mixed bag, but America since then has been by far the world’s biggest mass-murderer, with no real contest. It’s profitable for the billionaires. Even without considering the spinoff-benefits to their global extraction corporations, etc., it is a vast global operation.
Right now, 53% of the monies that the U.S. Congress and President authorize the U.S. Government to spend is going to the military, and only 47% to other purposes; and an estimated 26% (half of that 53%) is going to ‘Defense’ Department contractors (basically to those billionaires). U.S. taxpayers (not billionaires) fund all of this.
This empire — all of those invasions etc. — is, indeed, an unimaginably enormous operation. The U.S. spends around half of the entire world’s current military costs, and has 900 military bases outside the United States. David Vine estimated in 2015 that “the United States possesses around 90-95% of the world’s foreign military bases”, which means it’s at least that high.
After 1945, all existing empires gradually ended but America’s empire started, and it is now the only one, and the billionaires who control it (and their millions of hirees and other agents, including the U.S. Government) want to replace the U.N.’s international laws with America’s international rules and so to control the entire world.
Right now, the U.S. declares that it must police the peace throughout the world — no longer ONLY in Europe and the Atlantic, but also in the Pacific and Asia. But police it against whom? It names Russia, China, and Iran, as its chief “foreign adversaries.” On 26 June 2023, I headlined “Pending U.S. Congressional Resolutions to Initiate WW III” and summarized three of them. All are expected to pass, and each is virtually hidden by the nation’s ‘news’-media — as-if the public wouldn’t even care about them. One of them is a bill to secretly institute martial law over the ‘news’-media, under the cover of protecting children from being influenced by “foreign adversaries” — which it identifies specifically as being China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela, but allows other countries to be added to that list. Another is specfiically for war against Russia and it commits the U.S. never to accept anything less than Russia’s defeat in America’s war against Russia that is being waged in the battlefields of Ukraine with Ukrainian soldiers — it would commit the U.S. to send U.S. troops there if Ukraine’s can’t win it with U.S. and other donated weapons. A third resolves that the U.S. will go directly to war against Russia and will demand all of NATO to join it if Russia uses a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine (though Ukraine isn’t a NATO member). In addition, America’s Secretary of State reversed the Administration’s policy and said that if Ukraine wants to invade Russia, then that would be Ukraine’s right, and America would not object.
On July 21st, the retired Indian diplomat M.K. Bhadrakumar headlined “Storm clouds gathering in the Black Sea”, and reported that the U.S. has plans to strangulate Russia’s shipping and cripple Russia’s access to the seas.
On July 31st, I headlined “Lying Blinken Visits Australia for Peace With China by Arming Taiwan to Break Away From China” and reported on the U.S. Government’s preparations to invade China on the basis of lies.
These are some of the ways that America is policing the world in order to ‘preserve’ the ‘peace’.
Is its Government evil? You decide.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
I tend not to use the word “evil” since it has religious connotations which I prefer to avoid. But America is a very badly behaved nation, in fact rotten to the core.
You’re hung up on labels there, not on on the things that are referred-to. Is there any real difference between “rotten to the core” and “evil”? (Furthermore, this article is not about “America” but about “America’s Government” (after 1944). Are you saying that America is rotten to the core, or instead that America’s Government after 1944 is rotten to the core? If the latter, then I would agree with that. But America isn’t rotten to the core.)
What happened to the word “bad”? In the old West there were good guys and bad guys. Hey sheriff, there go the evil guys. Ha ha, that’s funny.
Just for fun, Billy the Kid was one of the good guys.
Most people would say that arsenic is “bad” but are you saying that this means that arsenic is “evil”?
Why would arsenic be considered bad? Of course, I would prefer to have drinking water which does not contain arsenic, but then I would not want it to contain motor oil or antifreeze either, so I don’t understand the problem here.
The problem here is that to replace the word “evil” by the word “bad” — which doesn’t necessarily entail intentionality as the word “evil” does — is assuming that “evil” and “bad” are synonyms, which is a false assumption: they aren’t synonyms.
Since you were talking about the American Government, so was I. Did you think I was talking about the average American walking down the street who is the victim of bad government.
And is the entire government evil? Is Ron Paul evil? Is Tulsi Gabbard evil. They have both been part of the evil government.
Now calling the Neocons evil is a good call.
America’s Government (to judge by the votes in its Congress) are around 98% neocon. So: we agree that it’s around 98% evil.
Yes, I’ll agree to that. Spelling out the details of the problem is important information.
Ron Paul is one of the good guys (best guys?) I’d say after watching and listening to him for a decade.
The Democrats are just as evil as the Republicans. I don’t know where you get the idea that they’re not. The Democrats all voted to send millions to Ukraine, you know, the Nazis. They all voted to force an end to the rail strike. That’s evil in my book.
I’ve pondered this for years and have come to the conclusion that until we can all agree on a universal definition for the word “evil” then we’ll end up just spinning our wheels. If it were up to me a simple definition of an evil person would be: those who do harm, in any way, to another purposefully and without just cause. From the jealous office worker who spreads false rumours about her co-worker to get her fired, to the nation who starts a war and murders to steal wealth. The latter example is obviously on another level but in… Read more »
I use the word “evil” in the same way that you have just stated here. I always prefer the simplest definition that is 100% accurate; so, maybe the way I would phrase it is: “Evil” means that a person or other intentional being (or “creature” — any conscious entity) intends to create suffering or death that that creature does not believe to be necessary for its own safety or for the safety of other creature(s). In short: it is selfish intent to cause harm; it is sadism. Thus, to say that America’s Government is “evil” is to say that it… Read more »
I am an atheist and I refer to human evil when I call someone evil. Evil is sociopathic and occasionally psychopathic. Evil is anti-human. Evil is anti-life.
“U.S. GOVERNMENT”, who are they Eric, did you forget Zuesse ? And yes, they ARE EVIL ! LESS THAN 2% OF AMERICAN CITICENS ARE JEW, SO WHAT THE HELL IS THIS ?!! 1.) Alaina B. Teplitz JEW: United States Ambassador to Sri Lanka and the Maldives 2.) Alejandro Mayorkas JEW: United States Secretary of Homeland Security 3.) Alina Romanowski JEW: United States Ambassador to Kuwait 4.) Andy Slavitt JEW: Senior Advisor to the COVID-19 Response Coordinator 5.) Anita Dunn JEW: Senior Advisor to the President 6.) Anne Neuberger JEW: United States Deputy National Security Advisor for Cyber and Emerging Technology… Read more »
Your bigotry displays your evil. In your bigotry, you ignore the evilness of the many evil non-Jews, and you ignore the innocence of the many entirely innocent Jews, and so how are you any different from any other type of bigots — against Blacks, against Christians, against Moslems, against Chinese, against gays, or of any other type. All types of bigots are dangerous to society, and to the entire categories of individuals who are victimized and terrorized by such senseless and dangerous haters.
Against, against, against. What about those who are against pedophiles, rapists, and serial killers? Are they types of bigots who are dangerous to society.
That’s not what he was talking about. I’m fairly sure everyone here deems the actions of those you mentioned as “criminal” within our society.
Iwonder if you’ve noticed the stereotyping and attendant hatred of white men throughout hollywood and everywhere else in western media over the last few decades. I’ve noticed faux libs and many others (lgbt, blm) championing this fight against a supposed white male patriarchy where every white male is suspect. Same crap, different flavour.
RE: “dangerous haters”
Hate and haters are overused words. If a family member came to me with a 600 lb partner and said “we’re getting married”, I would regard that family member as being a few sandwiches short of a picnic. Does that mean that I hate overweight people? Of course not! That’s puerile nonsense. I would in fact tend to be sympathetic to their plight. But being sympathetic does not mean to ignore. That would be stupid.
That’s quite a list you put together there, Jarno P. I appreciate the effort you made to provide us with that valuable information. Unfortunately, some people are very disturbed by the truth, which has fallen into disrepute these days, so they think that those who provide the truth are bad guys (evil guys?) But not all of us are taken in by their propaganda.
As for those who think everyone is equal, I suppose when it comes to crime they would claim there is no difference between organized crime and petty thieves. Hey, crime is crime.
“Quite a list?” It’s a list of ONLY evil Jews. The list of evil NON-Jews is vastly larger. Neither list is useful.
It is useful. That’s like saying that a list of organized crime leaders is no more useful than a list of petty thieves. I would disagree. In addition, the second list of evil gentiles would have to start with all of the goyim who serve the interests of the first list. Like Biden, the Clintons, etc. You know, AIPAC approved gentiles.
Those “organized crime leaders” are billionaires, of all faiths and of no faith. They are not Jews, nor Christians, etc, but are the billionaires who control international corporations and national governments — and they are of any and no faith or ethnicity. Only a bigot would blame an entire faith-group or ethnicity.
Come on, Eric, any American with an IQ over 90 who is paying attention knows that Jews have an inordinate influence on American politics. Certainly politicians at the national level know this. That is why they kowtow to AIPAC.
You know it too. You would just prefer to avoid the topic.
Hey, I understand. You are just trying to earn a living.
I derive no income from my articles. I am not, and will never be, compromising truth, not for any reason. Truth is my only objective. You misinterpret not only the world but me.
Yep.
“Is the U.S. Government Evil?”
Is the Pope a Catholic?
Is the Pope a good Catholic? 🙂
All government is evil by its nature. The US Government simply takes that evil to whole new level….
Tribal structures of governence by elder family members was unlikely to be evil within itself. A town of 50 people who vote on local affairs too. It seems the problems start when the government begins to grow in size and scope.
All government structures include bestowing power upon certain people, over everyone else. Human nature dictates that once humans are given power over others, they will abuse that power. The evil is not in governmental construct, it is in human nature. All humans given power, will at some point abuse that power. That is an undeniable fact that has been proven to be 100% accurate as far back as human history records…..
I understand your point. The way I see it is that since all governance stems from the family unit as the base structure (like in nature), then when considering the simplest form of governence, a father over his children, I can’t agree that this is evil. It could be, but by default it’s likely not imo or we might not even be here as a species. Cheers.
Your false intimation is that there is necessarily some kind of equality between the victim and the victimizer. The U.S. Government is not on a par with Russia and with China when it seeks to defeat them — no more than a rapist is on a par with the victim when seeking to rape that person. In some instances a conflict is between two persons who are morally on a par with each other, but you simply assume it to be the case, and that is often a false assumption.
A country is its government. Its people are always irrelevant. So “America” is evil.
YES!
Yes.
.