Reddit reviews Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (The American Empire Project)

I have not downvoted you. But I want to clarify why many are.

We don't completely disagree with you, but while your outlook is more educated than the average, you still seem to be whitewashing the U.S intentions in these engagements.

Examples:

>Had we not supported, say, the Taliban, the the Soviets would likely have overrun Afghanistan. The Bin Laden thing, well, it's a nice theory because it makes it easy to demonize the US, but it's just false.

Should read: Had we not supported any and all radical regimes in the middle east and elsewhere worldwide, including dictators and brutal thugs; whomever we're cooperative with our economic, political and hegemonic aspirations, (who would receive our funding, weaponry, and on the world stage, our backing), --- We would not have control of the vast array of global resources that we do now, most importantly in the middle east, crude.

It wasn't to just keep the Soviets out, it was to keep the soviets out of our oil and natural resources.

>Hussein we supported and created. And then when we went to clean up our mess, America went ballistic.

Hussein we supported and created, for the reasons described above. When he no longer supported our agendas, we revealed him to the world as who he always was. A brutal dictator, which up until that point, did not bother us so long as the sweet crude kept flowing. As soon as it was politically better to remove him, we murdered his ass.

>The US didn't support the Taliban for funsies. The US didn't support Hussein because we thought he was a swell fella. The US did those things because at the time they were expedient and we were facing a threat from the Soviet Union - a bloc of countries responsible for a fair number of heinous things including genocides on par with the Holocaust.

Again, this could be summed up with. DON'T LET THE COMMIES GET OUR OIL. - Side note, again I cannot stress enough that we as a country, yes the US has murdered 10's of millions simply by financially, and politically supporting brutal dictators around the world whom were cooperative with our regional interests. Even this argument wears thin in the case of iraq, were specifically our military and our private contractors have killed thousands of civilians, and displaced millions from their homes, tortured people, denied them the right to a trial, etc....

Overall, the concern is this (For TL;DR users): While we may not actually use our military to murder millions, (I still use this loosely, as we only have a much quieter way of doing so, check out COIN theory) we by proxy support brutal dictators, thugs and otherwise in the pursuit of our goals, even when we know for a fact that our support is the reason why the millions of deaths they pursue are possible.

We are murderer enablers. Not because we like to. But because we have no choice in an economic system that demands permanent growth. The raw materials and oil have to come from somewhere, somehow, essentially NO MATTER THE COST.

I highly recommend reading Noam Chomsky, Hegemony or Survival for references to whom we have supported and why, as well as Sleeping with the devil, how we sold our souls for Saudi crude, by former CIA agent Robert Baer for insight on our rather strange relationship with our Saudi "friends", The House of Sa'ud.

EDIT: Spelling.

Chomsky is without doubt where I would suggest you begin.

Perhaps Hegemony or Survival

> The phrase I was looking for is "rapid response team", composed of EMTs and the soldiers who cover them: they respond to dangerous situations when people have been injured.

And in what way (specifically) did WikiLeaks jeopardize or endanger them or their efforts?

> Extranational infrastructure is the kind of thing which allows modern society to continue functioning ("infrastructure") outside of the country ("extra"-- meaning outside, "national"-- meaning country).

I know what the words 'extra-national' and 'infrastructure' mean. I just don't know what you meant by that, because it's so vague it could apply to anything. The highway system of North Korea could be extra-national infrastructure. The Swiss banking system could be extra-national infrastructure. The Panama canal could be extra-national infrastructure. What exactly do you mean!? I assume nothing, because you're just bullshitting, if you'll pardon my American.

> They, which I assume you use to denote US diplomats, did not spy on the UN.

Nope, wrong. They did spy on the UN. (Source) Now you're showing how uninformed you are. I'm going to guess you're not subscribed to /r/politics, otherwise you could not have missed this story, which leads me to believe you're hardly paying attention enough to be forming any credible opinions on the topic. You're just a wounded nationalist misguidedly acting on your gut.

> On the other hand, I challenge you to find a single nation on the planet which does not have political and economic adversaries.

Many nations do not have the problem of having so many enemies as the US does, and it's due to our aggressive foreign policy. Latin American countries, for one. Many European countries, as well. My step-mother is from Mexico and she is utterly disturbed by our blatant militarism. People in Mexico are much more peaceful and laid back than we are. Many places in the world are like this.

> Furthermore, I have a very large problem with nation building and proxy wars-- I think this is what you mean by "making enemies

I think you're confused about what we're doing. We're waging wars of aggression for the benefit of non-national corporations, not nation-building out of any sense of altruism. Noam Chomsky debunked that a long time ago. It's all about money. Not terrorism. BP and Shell now own the rights to some of Iraq's oil reserves. Prior to our invasion, they were nationalized. This isn't some accident or coincidental consequence. This was the intent. To believe otherwise would be stunningly naive. But I doubt you have a problem with this. You don't mind killing for another nations' riches, do you? Because you don't think they should be nationalized. Because you're a Reagan-Era anti-communist and this justifies it in your mind. I mean, am I wrong?

> As for national security, no; this is not your place to decide despite your status as a US citizen with full constitutional protections. Not at all. The republican aspects of our Constitution were added specifically to keep people like you from doing just that.

The republican aspects of our constitution are those that denote that we are not a monarchy. It is very much my right to decide for myself what is a threat to national security. If releasing the cables and outing (and potentially ousting) the corrupt agents in our government will earn us less enemies, then I think it is in our national interest to do so. It is in the interest of national security for WikiLeaks to release these documents and cables.

> You might find you have a lot in common with those people.

Bullshit, those people are capitalists and conservatives, just like you are. They don't know what liberty is. They don't stand for liberty. They're confused. Just like you are.

Chomsky talks about it in detail here:

http://www.amazon.com/Hegemony-Survival-Americas-Dominance-American/dp/0805074007

The blurb summarizes my position on US aggression.

And I agree that the US are not the only ones blocking climate talks, but the US has the ability to push things on the world if it chooses, especially if it used some of the trillions that it is currently spending on wars and bailouts.

start watching current and old episodes of PBS's FRONTLINE and FRONTLINE: WORLD

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/

Frontline is truly the best program that the US is exposed to for current affairs and global politics. you can watch online or torrent past episodes.

read a few noam chomsky books on US foreign policy, US media, and US agenda, so you'll understand why everyone hates us

http://www.amazon.com/Hegemony-Survival-Americas-Dominance-American/dp/0805074007

http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/ref=pd_sim_b_3


watch AL JAZEERA, ignore the US propaganda against it, it's a very informative news channel that is unimaginable to most US citizens

finally, read the news paper, read the local english paper in whatever country you're in and read a respectable international paper (NYT or something) or at least look at world news headlines on news.google.com

Send him a copy of Noam Chomsky's Hegemony or Survival ... and prayers for his safety, as well as that of everybody else caught up in this BS.