Apr 20, 2021
The Strategic Importance of Leaving Afghanistan
Sixty years ago, President Dwight D. Eisenhower articulated his concern about the ability of his presidential successors to control the military. Several weeks before his Farewell Address, he gathered his senior advisers in the Oval Office of the White House and mused: “God help this country when someone sits in this chair who doesn’t know the military as well as I do.” By and large, the successors to Eisenhower have lacked military experience; they have been deferential to the military and have recklessly used military force to bolster their credentials. This has been a key factor in the expanded power of the military establishment over foreign policy, national security policy, and the intelligence community.
Continue Reading on Counter Punch:
Recent News and Latest Book
Bill Clinton’s Role in the Crisis Over Ukraine
Originally posed on CounterPunch The militarization of American foreign policy has evolved over the past thirty years. Ironically, this took place in the wake of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which should have led to reassessing U.S. national security policy and defense spending. Democratic presidents have played a major role in this militarization because…