How Americans Are Seduced by War - The New American Militarism

First, William Brennan's review below is far more eloquent than anything I could write, so I'll recommend that you read it before you read mine. I can't emphasize how impressed I was by this book. The fact that the author is both a soldier and a scholar provides this book with a truly unique perspective. The author is by no means a pacifist, but rather someone who really understands the costs of war and of entering into it without full societal committment and knowledge. The book's historical sections, which detail the intellectual, artistic, political, and military histories that lead America to be such a force-obsessed nation are brilliant in their ability to track how these various threads wove together. I'm not sanguine that the author's proposed solutions will work in the current climate, but I would say that a first start is for people to read this book.

Andrew Bacevich's "The New American Militarism" is a wide-ranging and well-written discussion of the events leading up to our culture of glorification of the military and the current ideas about the use of pre-emptive force.

Among other topics, Bacevich provided a good review of Neocons and Conservative Christians and how their ideas steered US policy towards a more militaristic stance. He also discusses how the US dependence on foreign petroleum has influenced our policy in the Middle East.

He finishes by offering "ten fundamental principles" outlining how we might stand down from the dangers inherent in our hyper-militarism.

On the whole, I thought this was an interesting and well-balanced review of recent U.S. military history as it relates to current domestic and foreign policy.

Retired U.S. Army Colonel Bacevich should get a medal for serving our country for writing this book to warn us that we have become a Fascist, Militarist [Nazi] nation-state. He has personally paid for American militarism with the life of his own son, Andrew Jr.; a young Army 1LT who died needlessly in the occupation of Iraq for BIG BUSINESS and BIG GOVERNMENT power and profits. Bacevich does a masterful job pointing out the social groups within America that have created over time our current AmeroNazi nation-state; the Religious Right, the Neocons, the Media etc. but he doesn't start from the beginning and he presents these actors as having straight-forward motivations and thinking. When you take everything he presents, it doesn't add up. It doesn't add up because it's too simplistic and flat out false to ASS U ME every actor in America is singular in purpose. What Bacevich fails to account for is TREACHERY--duplicity--the FACT that the ruling elites have deliberately pitted left vs. right and played both sides in wars for their secret society profits and goals. Bacevich desperately needs to read the works of Antony Sutton and the book, "Nazi Hydra in America" (available online) to get a clue about what's really happening here; which is a march towards an America run by a king where the sheeple worship the nation-state exactly like their earlier experiment, Nazi Germany. Everything Bacevich is describing as happening in America; the adulation of Soldiers, the compliant press, the national mythology are all STEPS and warning signs of fascism.

Where Bacevich next goes astray is in his shallow understanding of the religious right; he jumps right into war--whether the Puritans were "doves or hawks" when he should have first asked WHAT WAS THEIR REASON FOR LIVING? This is what drives everything long before wars pop up. That answer is found in James Hepburn's second chapter of "Farewell America" where he reveals that America's primary sin is MATERIALISM from the very beginning as a Prudish knee-jerk reaction against sex with a not so surprising result of VIOLENCE to get that wealth. Right-wing Americans obsessed with sex-as-evil, love violence. Americans are violent people because they see it as moral and sex as "Sodom & Gomorrah". People are basically bad and evil, so why not put a bullet to their head if they misbehave, they deserve it, right? No Jesus Christ forgiveness or repentance or redemption in this Dirty Harry outlook. Just a smug, self-righteous, holier-than-thou snobbishness that I have-a-right-to-blow-you-away which we see daily in Iraq/Afghanistan. Those that are rich must have worked harder than those "live & let live slackers" so they have the right to rule etc. America's adoration of the rich and famous belies this corrupt outlook which should instead admire those that are moral and unselfish who haven't gotten rich or famous. Factor in the second generation of American immigrants coming to America for selfish, economic reasons and not for religious freedom and you now have a majority growing over time opposed to the Founding Father's ideal that freedom's primary purpose is to be able to live a life according to your conscience--life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Today's AmeroNazis will have none of this; your duty is to conform to the American militaristic borg of BIG BUSINESS AND BIG GOVERNMENT, your conscience be damned.

Bacevich is right that getting rid of one bad Presidential administration like W. Bush and his Nazis will not fix America from being a militarist nation that cannot just say no! to wars. However, he is wrong by placing the blame on societal groups with "urges" when there are SPECIFIC traitors instigating the culture war to divide and conquer us into an AmeroNazi clone of Hitler's Germany. The violence-loving Rockefeller Illuminati that created fascism in the first place and put Hitler into power as a counter to the sex-loving Rothschild communism is the place to start. Americans must wake up that they are being conned and played by the Illuminati's left vs. right Hegelian conflict--and not be patriotically corrected into going along with ANY immoral action just because it's labeled "American". The place to start there is with the lie that 9/11 was done by terrorist ragheads when it was actually an inside job by traitors within our own U.S. Government. Before going to ANY war we must demand we find out who actually attacked us--something Bacevich only hints at because he doesn't want to be seen as too radical. The same secret elites that lied about Pearl Harbor, the Bay of Pigs, JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations, Gulf of Tonkin, Watergate, Iran-Contra, the 2000 stolen election etc. are MORE THAN CAPABLE OF STAGING 9/11 AND LYING ABOUT IT; they are in fact the most likely suspects. For example, the well-qualified, NTSB did not investigate the alleged aircraft crashes on 9/11--go to their web site. The FBI unqualified to do aircraft crash investigations was supposed to do it--but said they didn't need to do it "because they saw it all on TV". Yeah right. "Fade to Black" just as the alleged second plane came into view but out of composite WTC alignment. The FBI at least had enough integrity to admit they didn't have anything to indict Bin Laden and his al CIAduh group for 9/11.

These are the dirty realities of American militarism that Bacevich skirts around with his sociological urge theory for American collective behavior.

If the American people will not demand that there will be no war until it's proven without a doubt that war is necessary--just because a hate-raghead False Flag terrorist incident was staged for them that feeds into their prejudices and urges for violence, then our problems are not mere groupthink--but individuals being GUTLESS and IMMORAL stemming from their lemming psychological make-up. Being a REAL American means studying EVERY ISSUE on a case-by-case objective, factual basis and acting according to one's conscience regardless of what the crowd is clamoring for. If you cannot do what is right, you are not free. What America is doing now at home and abroad is not right; how long we will be free is the big question. Bacevich is asking these kinds of questions and we should all salute him in thanks.

I find it notworthy that Bacevich, a self-described conservative, has ideas (such as cutting the military budget) which are often to the left of many prominent Democrats. His book should be read by those who want a concise history of how the neoconservative persuasion came to dominate our government; both liberals and conservatives should read it with minds as open as was Bacevich's when he wrote it.

Critical to Bacevich's book is substantive discussion of military culture itself, not distracted by currently tangential issues such as technological military transformation.

As an interesting post by democratic insider, Lorelei Kelly, on her blog DemocracyArsenal.org points out that this subject must be thrust forward to the forefront of political debate. Americans must understand their military - its abilities and limitations. Only after that can we earnestly and competently exercise the use of force.

With some luck this excellent book will help spur the discussion.

Andrew J. Bacevichs', The New American Militarism, gives the reader an important glimpse of his background when he wrote that, as a Vietnam veteran, the experience baffled him and he wrote this book in an effort to "sift through the wreckage left by the war." After the Vietnam War, the author stayed in the military because he believed being an American soldier was a "true and honorable" calling. Bacevich states he is a devoted Catholic and a conservative who became disillusioned with mainstream conservatism. He also states that he believes the current political system is corrupt and functions in ways inconsistent with genuine democracy.

Bacevich states that he tried to write this book using facts in an unbiased way. However, he cautions the reader that his experiences have shaped his views and that his views are part of this book. This is a way to tell the reader that although he tried to remain unbiased, his background and biases find voice in this book. I believe the authors warning are valid; he draws heavily upon his background and biases to support his thesis.

The book is about American militarism, which Bacevich describes as the "misleading and dangerous conceptions of war, soldiers, and military institutions" that have become part of the American conscience and have `perverted' US national security policy. According to Bacevich, American militarism has subordinated the search for the common good to the permanent value of military effectiveness that will bankrupt the US economically and morally. Bacevich supports this thesis by discussing issues that have contributed to this state of affairs.

Bacevich believes the current state of American militarism has roots dating back to the Wilson administration. Wilson's vision was to remake the world in America's image. God Himself willed the universal embrace of liberal democracies and Wilson saw the US as a `divine agent' to make the world a safe and democratic place. Today, with no serious threat to keep our military forces in check, we are now, more than ever, free to spread liberal democracy using military force, if necessary.

Considering the military, Bacevich makes the point that the militarism of America is also due, in part, to the officer corps of the US military trying to rehabilitate the image and profession of the soldier after the Vietnam War. Officers attempted to do this by reversing the roles of the soldiers and the politicians that was problematic during the Vietnam War. They tried to establish the primacy of the military over the civilians in decisions as to how to use the military. The Weinberger and Powell doctrines were the manifestation of this idea by spelling out conditions for the use of the US military in combat.

Neo-conservatives further enhanced the trend of militarism. They see US power as an instrument for good and the time was right to use the military to achieve the final triumph of Wilson's idea of spreading American liberal democracy around the globe.

Religion also played a role. According to Bacevich, evangelical Protestants see the US as a Christian nation singled out by God and Americans are His chosen people. These evangelicals believed the Vietnam War was not only a military crisis, but also a cultural and moral crisis threatening our status. Evangelicals looked to the military to play a pivotal role in saving the US from internal collapse due to the higher expression of morals and values found in the military. The military would become the role model to reverse the trend of godlessness and social decay.

Another set of actors that contributed to American militarism were the defense intellectuals whose main contribution was to bring the military back under civilian control. According to Bacevich, they laid the groundwork of our current policy of `preventative war' and reinforced American militarism.

Finally, Bacevich accuses politicians of deceiving the American public as to the true nature of American militarism by wrapping militarism in the comfortable trappings of nationalism. By using labels such as the Global War on Terrorism, politicians are using a political sleight-of-hand trick to hide our true militaristic nature in patriotic terms. Bacevich concludes his book with a list of recommendations to mitigate the current trend of American militarism.

Bacevich seems to create a mosaic of conspiracy perpetrated by sinister actors aimed at deceiving an unsuspecting public as to the true nature of American militarism. Until the last chapter where Bacevich tells the reader that there is no conspiracy, it is very easy to believe there might be one lurking in the shadows. I was shocked when I reached Bacevich's recommendations. The contrast between his recommendations and the rest of the book is astounding. I was expecting highly provocative recommendations that would match the tone of the rest of the book. However, his recommendations were solid and well thought out...delivered in the calm manner one would expect from a political scientist. Nevertheless, in the end, Bacevich's message leading up to his recommendations were hard to swallow. I believe he wrote this book not to enlighten but to be provocative in order to sell books and build his status in academic circles. If Bacevich's aim was to build a convincing argument on a serious subject, he needed to be less provocative and more clinical.

For a foreigner (Colombian), who went to engineering school and lived in the US for five years, enjoying american life style and many personal friendships, the book is well intentioned. Basically, there never will be "victory" for the US in Irak, but the entrenched garrison within the green zone will permit continuity of the exploitation of Irak's natural resource, oil, on a compulsary basis. Changing oil for blood is a sad fact, and the ratio of american casualties (a few thousand), to civil iraqui casualties (at leat a million), is regrettable and shameful, not fair. Another salient case of national BAD KARMA for the US. HC

Bacevich rightly points out that we are in the midst of an "American Empire," military basis and all, and that many Americans are indeed seduced by that. That seduction includes the semantic denial that we could even be an empire, since we're not ruled by an emperor.

But, Bacevich, in his prescription for solving this, seems all too willing to settle for "Empire Lite." And that's not good. It's like using methodone maintenance for heroin addiction rather than getting off it entirely.

No, scratch that. It's like using powder cocaine for crack addiction rather than getting off it entirely.

Also, in his analysis of today's highly mechanized American armed forces, and the fact that the locus of empire seems to be the Middle East, it's a huge oversight for Bacevich to not even discuss Peak Oil and its possible imperial ramifications.

finally a book that puts events in context,without regard to party. i would recommend the book to conservatives & liberals alike;it is a clear,concise review of how we have slipped into being the "world police". i will recommend the book to my aquaintences; liberal or neo-cons...

He did an excellent job of criticizing both Bush and, well, every President before him. I was waiting for his constructive ideas: they consisted of, basically, refering back to the constitution. How disappointing! He is a great writer and does some excellent analysis. But he needed to come up with a better basis for his response than merely referring to an authoritative text. He needed to argue for his ideas based on values; based on what is best for the country and the people... what is good and why. And that can never be answered by saying because the Constitution (or Bible or tony robbins, etc) says so.

I am getting very tired of so called reviewers tauting this or that author's credentials as reasons for buying in on a certain viewpoint. They illustrate perfectly that we have become a culture of uncritical spoon fed mass media automatons incapable of forming an opinion for ourselves. Our schools have apparently failed the majority by not producing critically thinking individuals. In my life I have known more than a few USMA graduates and my sister and brother-in-law both graduated from the USAFA. I admire all of their accomplishments, but these institutions have produced no more intellectual giants than any other institutions of higher learning. To imply that an author's opinions deserve greater consideration simply because of his background is the worst kind of argument.

As to the book, it is old news and if one had read Geoffery Perrett's book A Country Made by War, it would be obvious that through our history we have been anything but peace loving. That my friends is an invention of bleeding hearts that this book will obviously appeal to. He is preaching to the choir.

Bacevich is a genuine conservative. He has presented a cogent analysis of the factors that have led to our nation's dependence on military power for our self-esteem and our influence in the world. This book should be the subject for much public debate.

Take a cue from the previous reviewer who believes in rightwing facism. You see by manipulating people's understanding, there won't need to be a draft. For example, notice how goarmy.com frames its commercials to unpatriotically mislead lower to middle income families and workers into joining the army thinking it will help pay for education and maybe even their debts. And now, thanks to Congress and the President for unpatriotically signing the bankruptcy bill, you can count on army recruiters to come knocking on your door and trying to seduce you into the army or shall I say the concentration camps in Iraq especially since credit card and insurance companies unpatriotically give away sensitive information while protecting Osama bin Laden's private bank accounts. Read this book and let us all help clean out the corruption that has plagued our U.S. military that was once deemed trustworthy.

We Americans have embraced a militarism that will lead to much pain for our country as we use military power as we have lost our way in this world. The utility of force is more limited than most Americans realize. The new American militarism is now a problem as we now place too much emphasis on military force as we have overvalued its utility.

The United States spends more on defense than all of the rest of the world combined by some accounts. US forces are prowling around the entire globe. Self-restraint is lacking on America's part.

The author makes the case for a military draft as we need to have a citizen military where the people have a direct stake in our country's military policy so that we have adequate checks and balances on the overreach of the military. The author also makes the case that many of the hundreds of billions of dollars that we have spent on the military would have been better spent on energy independence.

The present-day Pentagon budget, adjusted for inflation, is projected to be 23% over the average of the Cold War era. By some calculations, the U.s. spends more than all other nations on defense, maintaining forces in several dozen countries (perhaps over 100). Among current members of Congress, the percent of veterans is now lower than anytime since the end of WWII.

Bacevich goes on to assert that we have married a militaristic mindset in the 1990s with utopian ends, that this has been reaffirmed by 9/11 and the Global War on Terror, and that this does not serve our interests. Probably true. However, the vast bulk of "The New American Militarism" consists of Bacevich rambling about Weinberger, Powell, Abrams, etc., with little compelling documentation, quantification of impact, or common thread.

Bottom Line: Boring.

Bacevich is a good writer with impressive credentials. Without repeating what has been said by others, I have to say that I think his premise is fundamentally flawed. Conservatives (let's once and for all ditch this stupid "neocon" label) believe in strong defense and in putting America first. I do not believe that Conservatives are warmongers and I utterly reject the notion that our primary motive in the Gulf War is simply oil.

Frankly, Bacevich seems to ignore the problem of evil in the world--the kind of evil that will annihilate you if you do not deal with it forcefully. Whether one is speaking of Hitler or Stalin or Mao or Hussein, there have been tyrants and ideologies that have arisen in the past 100 years that had the will, the technology, and the malice to attempt world domination (or at least regional domination).

Americans are not "seduced" by war. That is far too simplistic and cynical. It is true that most Americans reject the weak-kneed, confused approach of the Viet Nam era (the soldiers of the era we praise; the politicians, educators, media elites, and entertainment traitors are the ones we loathe). Frankly, I believe we hate war as a people. General Douglas MacArthur said no one hates war more than a warrior. We have seen great heartache and paid great sacrifices as a people.

But we also understand that there is a time to take a stand.

Bacevich apparently served our nation with honor, and for that we must thank him. But his overly simplistic and stereotypical approach here (neocons and Evangelicals are painted with very broad brushes) does him and his reader a disservice. Yes, we do need to lessen our dependance upon oil, foreign and otherwise. But oil didn't drive WWI, WWII, Korea, or Viet Nam, and it's actually not the primary factor driving the Gulf War (except that it finances our enemies).

For an interesting look at the real reasons for our war with Saddam Hussein, check out SADDAM'S SECRETS: HOW AN IRAQI GENERAL DEFIED AND SURVIVED SADDAM HUSSEIN by General Georges Sada. You'll see the reality of Saddam's WMDs, his eagerness to use them, and his insane plans for Israel, Saudi Arabia, and beyond.

War should never be taken lightly. The loss of every American soldier is tragic and heart-rending. Which makes me resent Bacevich's allegations that our President and his team salivate at the thought of war. No, Mr. Bacevich, it was not "seduction" that led us down this path; it is the moral imperative to resist and overcome evil. And you can be glad that Presidents from Wilson to FDR to Reagan to GW Bush had the courage to do so.

Without playing too much to the author's obvious biases, I can only say he has wrought a finely detailed purse from a sow's ear. But it still remains a sow's ear. He is clearly anti-Bush. His argument suits the so-called sane members of the left who have worn out the buzz words, "Neocon" and "Neoconservative."

Chickenhawk is a term best reserved for the cowards who claim military experience but who run when the "real" battle begins. So-called heroic members of the left impeach Bush and his allies for lack of military experience, especially Vietnam, but they hold Bush and allies accountable for not losing the war. The war WAS LOST by the LEFT.

The battle now is how America will deal with rapidly encroaching Islamists and Islam itself, the breeding ground from which such extremists spring. The same cannot be said for Christianity. While Islam promotes offensive warfare and the capturing of slaves, Christianity promotes peace and the sane acceptance of one's plight, should it be as slave.

Nonetheless, France dealt with the Muslims in a half-assed manner. Now it has a nation of fuming Islamic discontents rioting in the streets and burning thousands upon thousands of vehicles, damaging private property and otherwise undermining the rule of law. We can trace such failures back to, at least, Algeria. Should America allow itself to become another France? We have opened the floodgates. They must now be closed beginning at least with the Middle East.

I do not think military or ex-military people should write about war. Battles maybe. This book is another in a long list of "stabbed in the back" apologia. It would be refreshing to read a book, especially on the Vietnam Era, that takes a clear eyed look at the military and their role in that debacle.