Sunday, April 26, 2015

What Neocons Could Learn From an Understanding of the Horrors Created By Woodrow Wilson

An important essay is out by John R. Schindler who was formerly a professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College, where he taught courses on security, strategy, intelligence, terrorism, and military history. During his career, he was also an intelligence analyst at the National Security Agency and a counterintelligence officer.

In the essay, Schindler surveys the many foreign policy errors that Woodrow Wilson committed that  led to horrific killing and  ultimately World War II.

It is not difficult to see many parallels between Wilson's march into Europe, fueled by his religious liberal Protestant fever, and then his grave error in calling for the breakup of the Hapsburg monarchy, with current day war activity encouraged by neocons and Evangelicals.

This time it isn't the Hapsburg monarchy that is broken up that has led to turmoil in Europe. This time it is the takedown of Saddam Hussein and the resulting breakup in Iraq that has led to turmoil in the Middle East.

As Schindler makes clear, there was no good reason for the U.S. to enter Wold War I, the war was petering out when the U.S. entered. Presently, there is no good reason for the U.S. to be involved in the regional flare ups in the Middle East, which were triggered, in the first place, by the U.S. attack on Iraq.

Read Schindler's full account of Wilson's follies here.

 -RW

1 comment:

  1. There is another NO GOOD reason Wilson entered WWI as was written during WWI by Bernard Baruch, Chairman of Wilson's War Industries Board:

    "Every man's life is at the call of the nation and so must be every man's property. We are living today in a highly organized state of socialism. The state is all; the individual is of importance only as he contributes to the welfare of the state. His property is his only as the state does not need it. He must hold his life and possessions at the call of the state.

    Enforced and involuntary service for a private master is and has been clearly and repeatedly defined by our Supreme Court as slavery. A soldier serves the nation directly. There is but one master in the case and that master is America. He serves to profit no one but the country as a whole."

    ReplyDelete