What we support and defend

[JMA]

... I don't think either side has the slightest interest in equitable inclusion. They want power. They want to win and kick the stuffing out of the other guys. That will leave them fighting an insurgency, but they don't care, because winning and kicking ass is better than losing and getting your ass kicked, and they know perfectly well that one or the other is going to happen...

Of course. This could be applied to any number of wars fought supposedly for freedom and democracy since WW2.

The only guys who did not understand it then were the US State Department and it seems that the tradition continues today.

[Dayuhan]

Of course. This could be applied to any number of wars fought supposedly for freedom and democracy since WW2.

The only guys who did not understand it then were the US State Department and it seems that the tradition continues today.

Yes, all too often the US tried to sustain the unsustainable in the name of fighting Communism, or some other such construct that had a good deal more meaning to Americans than to those trying to rid themselves of a colonial master or a dictator. There are a few suggestions that this may be changing: several of the dictators that fell in the Arab Spring tried to convince the US that their opponents were Islamists and their fall would promote terrorism, but the US didn't fall for it. That might mean that the US is starting to realize that trying to roll back history in the name of ideology is a fool's game, or it might be a lucky accident. The cynic in me inclines toward the latter view.