read more

It is quite ironic that in order to “liberate” a country, force is needed to oppose the same people who “require” said liberation. The objective of “The War on Terror” (the foreign policy initiative begun by president Bush following September 11th) has inflated as the years progress, and has reached the point where any given mission is at the complete discretion of our government. Government, much like every other tangible and non-tangible entity, evolves. And through this evolution comes an end product that can be circumscribed and labeled. It can then be said that a forceful opposition to this end, is a deliberate action against natural forces, and is therefore an action that should not be executed.

The United States has unjustly enforced (or attempted to) both cultural and governmental change in Japan, Iraq, Vietnam and many more countries. Before any elaboration on the nature of these imperialistic acts, it is imperative one understands the objectives a government has and the strict rules it must abide by to successfully execute such an action. Societal unification is a goal aspired by not only the United States government, but by all governments. It is so highly valued because it allows for easy public support using the majority influence conformity principle. This superior governmental aspiration guides most decisions made.

There are many approaches to the process of achieving societal unification, however the most salient are: a complete unification of ones own nation and later expanding to others, and the expansion of the ideal global unified societal influence on each prominent country separately and later improving the clarity throughout the globe. Given Americas history of imperialism, the latter more appropriately describes Americas quest for societal unification.

Now that the objective has been made blatantly clear, the process America uses to simultaneously blind its own people while restructuring an entire country can be understood. The first step is determining the enemy, or cause. This is to create an illusory benefit to provide reason for intrusion. For example the alleged cause of the Vietnam war was to “hold the line against the spread of world Communism.” ( Similarly, the alleged reason for the Iraq war was to “prevent the spread of terrorism.” (

The second step is the deterioration of the current system (whether it be governmental, social or both) by associating it with the cause. For example, in the case of the war on terror, America justified its deconstruction of middle-eastern governments through the association of its improper governance and sanction/promotion of terrorism. (

The third step is to institute a new government which glorifies american attributes and promotes the social mannerisms of America. This not only perpetuates a bind between American culture and the intruded country, but it also promotes to other countries with an already instated American culture that this manner of living is superior to any other and that places all around the world are embracing it.

The final step is to ensure the continuity of the installed government and prevent outside influence from affecting the countries perception of America. This can and has been achieved with a continuing presence of force (although recently it has been questioned whether the presence is needed:

Whether or not one agrees with the intent of the United States government, there should be no such dilemma in the accordance that each act of infringement on the other countries is a severe mistake, corrupting what America was founded on: the notions of autonomy, liberty, and independence. Self-governance was the primary ambition of the American colonies, and depriving other contemporary developing nations this same right, the right to realize ones own power, prematurely ends the evolution of these governments.