American Hegemony

Last night Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were questioned in a Commander In Chief forum.  This has spurred a lot of conversation in the news in regards to America’s foreign policy.  So let me open up a huge can of worms because I have a feeling my views on the matter are shared by only a minority.

When it comes to foreign policy, the United States needs to act more like a modern day Roman Empire.  This is not to say the U.S. should look to expand its territory without limits, or attempt global domination.  Such things are costly and unnecessary to say the least.  What it means is the U.S. needs to act completely in America’s interest, just as every other nation on the earth acts in its own self interest.  It also means the U.S. should be respected for the authority it has.

I must preface this article with the following statement:  the United Nations and international laws are garbage.  The Geneva Convention and other such agreements are arbitrary and unrealistic by any real measure of human behavior and survival.  America’s enemies completely ignore such treaties and the U.S. is expected to abide by them, no matter how many American lives it costs.  This is a subject to elaborate on at another time.  Suffice it to say this article is based on the premise that the U.S. should play by the same rules everyone else plays by in warfare and conflict…no rules.  If you do not agree with this, stop reading right now because what follows will probably upset your delicate sensibilities.

Here is a short history lesson that could aid American’s greatly when considering warfare and conflict:

During World War Two, the Americans and the British ran a very extensive bombing campaign against the Germans, particularly in the German homeland.  Initially, bombing runs were designed to be conducted primarily at night to reduce Allied casualties.  German casualties were not considered too much because the goal was to win the war, not reduce enemy suffering; what a concept.  At some point, the Allied command discussed conducting more bombing runs during the day.  They came up with the idea of a Combined Bomber Offensive (CBO).  This CBO plan involved the Americans conducting bombing runs throughout the day, and the British conducting night time runs.  The concept behind this was to deny the enemy of even one minute of rest from warfare and carnage.  Germany’s military, economy, and people were to be subjected to this around the clock to diminish their ability to wage war.  In other words, complete submission and unconditional surrender of the enemy was the goal.  That is how you fight and win a war.

This is an important concept to embrace.  As the saying goes, “war is hell.”  There is absolutely, unequivocally no way around it.  For 30,000 years of human existence on this earth, mankind has played, and played to win.  This recent obsession with being more concerned over collateral damage than one’s own casualties is absurd.  I am sick and tired of all the bleeding hearts promoting the asinine concept that “America is better than that.”  This is yet another topic for another article.  Suffice it to say for the past 50 years, Americans have lived under this foolish idea that there is a nice and pretty way to conduct war, and we are somehow subhuman if war is waged in any other fashion.

Here is a hypothetical situation: a quartet of Iranian gunboats harasses a U.S. Naval vessel.  Three of those Iranian boats should be blown out of the water.  The fourth boat should be boarded and captives taken.  Any dead bodies recovered should be hung from the yard arm (if modern ships have such a thing) and that boat should be cast adrift into Iranian waters, bodies included.  Iran should then have to pay for the ransom of the captive sailors.  Do you think Iran would try this again?  It certainly would not be so quick to disrespect the U.S. Navy if this was the response.

Vladimir Putin understands this way of thinking and Donald Trump knows it.  This is important to discuss because lately even the most hawkish of Republicans have turned to mush over Trump’s regard for President Putin.  For instance, Bill O’Reilly criticized Trump for praising Putin, saying Putin is not deserving of praise.  Mr. O’Reilly is badly mistaken.

Credit should be given where credit is due, especially to ones enemies.  One is not ready to battle or negotiate with ones enemies unless they have a clear understanding of their strengths and weaknesses.  An integral part of understanding your enemies comes from appreciating their strengths.  Additionally, if America wants to be respected by foreign powers, it needs to understand what it is those powers respect.  The reason why Russia and Iran have repeatedly gotten away with threatening the U.S. Navy is because they know President Obama is a pushover, and he has proven them correct.  They do not respect him or the U.S.

Trump says he will have good relations with Russia.  Under his administration the U.S. will act more hegemonic, which he knows Putin will more likely respect.  Trump admires Putin’s nationalism.  He admires the fact that Putin will tell the international community to go screw themselves; Russia is going to take care of Russia.  At the very least, one has to admire Putin’s directness and predictability.  Now, I would never trust Putin to run a fair presidential election or provide due process, but that is completely beside the point.  Why do so many people have such a black and white view of this?  It is perfectly logical to acknowledge Putin’s strengths and condemn his behavior at the same time.

In all reality, most leaders act primarily in their own nation’s best interests; Putin is just more honest about it.  Why should it be any different for them or for us?  This brings me to my final conclusion.  We live in a world where the power structure is built around nation-states.  No matter how much globalization ties nations together, we are still a collection of nation-states of varying size and power.  All nations have separate identities, goals, and concerns and there is no reason it should be any other way.   I therefore say, let nations do as they will and the U.S. should do the same.  It does not mean the U.S. should conquer indiscriminately, but it also does not mean the U.S. should be afraid to assert its authority.  The U.S. can live and let live; but if the enemy does not let live, annihilate them like a hawk devouring its prey.

~ AD