Posts Tagged With: war

“No war is inevitable until it has begun.” – Patrick J. Buchanan, Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

The debates about the war with Iran can be quite curious in that those who pretend to be experts seem to lack the context of history. Every war seems imminent or unavoidable to them. They are appalled at the idea the United States can be pulled into war by other countries or interests. The world’s superpower cannot be convinced to do something not in its best interest, they claim.

In fact, this has occurred more times than we care to admit.

The U.S. had managed to stay out of the tragically avoidable World War I for its first couple years. It wasn’t her fight. A war rooted in antiquated alliances and ideas of empire which turned Europeans against each other in a horrific disaster. America had long held to George Washington’s plea for the nation to avoid entangling alliances (also known as the Washington Doctrine of Unstable Alliances). In his farewell address, he said:

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities… it is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements.

Britain and France’s war had become costly in lives and material, and they needed help. As Buchanan writes, “British propaganda had convinced us the Germans were beasts and we must join the good war for a new world where Prussian militarism would never menace mankind again.” But there was more, including lies about German atrocities. One, the sinking of the ocean liner Lusitania by a German submarine had caused outrage, yet it had been carrying munitions. The Brits also cut transatlantic cables, impeding communication with Germany. It is true, German subs had targeted some American ships, and at one point tried to bribe Mexico into attacking the U.S., but was it worth sending millions of soldiers to Europe?

At the end of the war, with over 100,000 dead, and 200,000 injured, Americans wondered what was the point of the sacrifice. They believed they had been “hoodwinked and swindled…And the next time Britain rang for help, America would take her time in answering the call…until France had been overrun and Britain thrown off the continent at Dunkirk.”

Flash forward a few decades to Vietnam. The militant anti-communist wing of the U.S. government pushed the “falling dominoes” narrative: If Vietnam fell to the communists, than so so would all of Southeast Asia. Initially, President Kennedy seemed to support this, but as time went on, his position began to shift. In October 1963, with U.S. troop presence still relatively small, he said, “We need a way to get out of Vietnam. This is a way of doing it. And to leave forces there when they’re not needed, I think, is wasteful, and it complicates both their problems and ours.”

Less than a month later, he was murdered and the warhawks continued to ratchet up the war, and stumbled face-first into an escalation trap. The communists would eventually take over Vietnam and rule to this day. Did Southeast Asia become a communist empire and unite to become some menace to the world?

No, Vietnam now is an important trade partner with the U.S., exporting tens of billions of dollars of goods to us.

There are just wars, but there are no good wars. Every war has consequences, unintended and otherwise. We must take great care to not allow ourselves to be convinced to enter a war that hasn’t first been brought to us. Not every threat is existential. Not every world leader we don’t like is a Hitler. Diplomacy is not a sign of weakness, but one of strength and respect for life.

Peace through strength means show we can act when we must, and defend ourselves when required. However, more often than not, when we are told we must go war, the exact opposite is true.