Policeman of the World

It is past time for America to stop its endless military adventurism. How much American blood and treasure have been spent since World War II on military operations overseas, and how much have we gained?  How much actual peace time have we enjoyed in that time?  What will be the marker that tells us we have done enough? Do we actually believe we are coming to a time when all of our enemies have been conquered, or at least cowed? I have heard time and again an argument against military operations based on the notion that we have no exit strategy. Well, apply that idea to our military operations for the last sixty-five years. What is our exit strategy from endless warfare?

After the Second World War the United States was the premier country in the world in terms of wealth and power. We had created an incredible military economy that was so powerful it was scarcely appreciated by our enemies until it was too late for them. We were the "Arsenal of Democracy," with an industrial capacity so immense we could arm, not just ourselves, but our allies as well. Germany and Japan lay in ruins, Russia was devastated and economically exhausted, and Great Britain could barely feed itself. Most of Asia and the West were in a similar state. But the United States was virtually untouched, able still to send vast quantities of food and other goods to the defeated enemy.

In a sense, World War II never ended. Because of Soviet expansion, and Communist revolutions and insurgencies in China and other parts of the world, countries that had been U.S. allies during the war quickly became enemies, and instead of demobilizing as it had done after World War I, the U.S. military remained in a powerful state, as it still is. Less than five years after the end of the world war we were embroiled in another hot war, in Korea. We have essentially been on a war footing ever since.

During the 1950s and 1960s there were many debates about the United States being the world's "policeman" because we were constantly sending troops to various parts of the globe where conflicts arose. While that term is no longer used, the involvement in conflicts has not stopped; if anything, it has increased. We seem to have become inured to sending troops and armaments practically anywhere to put down (or try to put down) conflicts, especially if they are offensive to a sense of fair play; if it seems one side is bullying the other. ISIS is a prime example: they kidnap and enslave little girls, they behead victims on camera, they enforce Draconian rules in their conquered territories; consequently, we drop bombs on them.

Of course, there is a sense of satisfaction when that happens; evil, violent people deserve to have bombs dropped on them.  The problem is, there will never be and end to evil people. Even if we were to completely destroy ISIS and bring about peace in the Middle Ease, there is still the lunatic regime in North Korea, and if we were to bring about a happy outcome there, there would be another conflict somewhere else, and another genocide somewhere else, and another bully somewhere else. Somalia, Sudan, Ukraine, and on and on. Does that mean we have to send our sons and daughters to foreign lands to die forever?