The Pitfalls of American Interventionism

However, US intervention in the Middle East also includes more extensive and destructive expenditure. In the first Gulf War, the war lasting more than 100 days cost more than $ 260 billion ("Calculation" 6). President Bush spent more than $ 3 trillion as a funding source for a decade of conflict, so the cost of the second Gulf war and Iraq war is much higher (Katel 1). In the Gulf war of the past 20 years, a large amount of expenditure caused a large amount of borrowing, which led to an increase in the debt ceiling today.

In the first 200 years of American history, national policy was isolatedism and noninterventionism. Speech by George Washington's farewell is often considered to have laid the foundation of a noninterventionist tradition in the United States. As much as possible, Europe has a range of key benefits that are not for us, but also for very distant relationships, so she often has to participate in conflict and the reason is basically for us He has no familiarity. The normal relationship in her politics, or the normal combination and conflict of her friendship or hostility must not be wise. "

The transition from isolationismism to diplomatic interventionism in the United States is often due to the consequences of World War II, the Spanish-American war, and the subsequent conquest of the Philippines in the United States. This is a journalist at "The Real Banner: Theodore Roosevelt, The Birth of Mark Twain and the American Empire" by historian Steven Kanazawa. Kinzer claims that all foreign policy debate since 1898 reflects the theme of that era. "There are lots of talented Americans who eloquently claim the problem full of the significance of humanity only once during the establishment of the United States."

No economist dares to argue that interventionism can lead to nothing but disaster and confusion. The advocate of interventionism - most importantly the Prussian historical school and the American institutionalist - is not an economist. It is the opposite. In order to publicize their plans, they firmly denied things like economic law. In their view, the government can freely achieve all that they are aiming without being bound by the cruel regularity of a series of economic phenomena. Like the German socialist Ferdinand LaSalle, they think the country is a god.