I’ve been seeing this quote a lot now for some reason from Jimmy Carter.
The only US president to complete his term without war, military attack or occupation has called the United States “the most warlike nation in the history of the world.” Carter then said the US has been at peace for only 16 of its 242 years as a nation. Counting wars, military attacks and military occupations, there have actually only been five years of peace in US history—1976, the last year of the Gerald Ford administration and 1977-80, the entirety of Carter’s presidency. Carter then referred to the US as “the most warlike nation in the history of the world,” a result, he said, of the US forcing other countries to “adopt our American principles.”
Does anyone else know what the hell he’s talking about exactly?
I think I’ve seen the metrics Jimmy Carter has been using, and using those same metrics (basically if there’s a soldier outside the country you’re technically at war) Canada has been at war for an equal amount of time as the United States. Also I’m fairly certain Mr. Carter that the attempts to take back the US Embassy from Iran counts as a “military attack”.
Iran occupied our Embassy in 1979. I would argue that this was an act of war against us. Carter sent a military force to rescue the hostages which was an act of war by us.
Plus, if we’re just counting the number of years at war, I’m pretty sure the US couldn’t even come close to Britain. If it’s as a percentage of a country’s history, maybe it’s possible, but Britain (and all of Europe) were at war pretty much all the time for centuries.
Where is the line drawn on “occupation”? We still have military bases in Japan and Germany. Are we still “occupying” them? I would say no but it does imply the question of where that line is drawn between occupation and we’re just hanging out as guests.
Which then makes one wonder where you draw the line at “peace”? Is sending helicopters to rescue diplomats in Iran war? Sure, violating another country’s border is something we equate as a casus belli but it is not war in and of itself. Taken to the other extreme the last “war” the US was in was WWII. Korea and Vietnam and Panama and Grenada and Iraq and Afghanistan are not official “wars” (not to mention all the clandestine wars the US has been involved in).
I think the issue is one of definitions and drawing arbitrary lines. There is a gradation in all of this from a soldier stepping across a line on a map to full on invasion and shooting. We can probably narrow it down a bit towards the middle but I doubt a bright line can be had with this.
In the shape of huge garrisons forced upon the countries after a victory in war.
“ The United States compelled Japan to turn many of these bases over to American troops directly after World War II.”
“When the military occupation of West Germany officially ended, the country regained control of its own defense policy. However, the Occupation Statute was succeeded by another agreement with its NATO partners. This deal, known as the Convention on the Presence of Foreign Forces in the Federal Republic of Germany, was signed in 1954 by West Germany. It allowed eight NATO members, including the US, to have a permanent military presence in Germany. The treaty still regulates the terms and conditions of the NATO troops stationed in Germany today.“
“U.S. forces landed at Incheon on September 8, 1945, and established a military government shortly thereafter.[9] The forces landing at Incheon were of the XXIV Corps of the U.S. Tenth Army.[10] They were commanded by Lt. General John R. Hodge, who then took charge of the government.[11]Four days before he arrived in Korea, Hodge told his officers that Korea “was an enemy of the United States”.“
What about this “invited guests” and “dishonesty”, now?
Really, you think the situation is the same today as they were 70+ years ago? In all these of these cases the current government of those nations could ask us to leave and we’d be obliged to. New bilateral treaties exist in all three cases which clearly outline the fact that we’re their because they want us there to aid in their defense.
Words have meaning. You can’t “occupy” a country that asked you to stay.
Bruh, you said the US was an “invited guest”. Words have meaning to you?
The occupied countries know there are all kinds of strings tied to the occupation. It is much better to be a nation favored by the US empire than to be on the outs, which is what they would be if they asked for withdrawal.
Empires usually have tenuous hold on their more far-flung outposts and defer to ostensible local autonomy, this is nothing new.
The Philippines and Panama are two US colonies or de facto protectorates that asked the US to vacate its very extensive bases in those countries. While this caused some temporary strains, I don’t think this persists today.