America Is Everywhere
Written by Major Tom
Filed under: Global Politics
January 10, 2007
I WAS JUST SCOURING THE NET for some fresh news when slowly I deduced that America seems to be everywhere. Not that I didn’t know much about it but somehow it came to me as a realization that America has now become more immersed in global affairs than what was usual; maybe not as much as what it appears to me now, maybe just a tad more but still, even a keen reader of news as myself could not help but noticed how President George W. Bush is getting his hands so muddled into a lot more conflict than what is typical; like hefully believed that America alone could police and manage world order and of course, world peace. Not that I am against this completely (America becoming a global police) since for some reason, we need America to be on the side of peace, we need its enormous military power to be on our side, we need its might to straighten out kinks in the face of the earth, we’d be better of having America as a friend than an enemy. And whether we like it or not, we have to remember how it almost single-handedly saved Europe from the malevolent hands of Adolf Hitler during World War II.
BUT WHAT PRICES the policing of the world? Is one singular country like America really capable of embracing the entire length of the earth and keep all the enemies at bay? I hardly see President Bush smile on television these days. He used to be so coy and full of jest when being interviewed but now he got to resort to what many see as a sudden change in strategy in Iraq—like a last ditch effort some have said—sending additional troops to Baghdad hoping that this latest move might stabilize conditions there and get Iraq prepared for handover this November to Iraqi rulers. But with only 3 of the 18 provinces being controlled by Iraqis, that November deadline may yet again be set-aside, like countless times already in the past.
And as if President Bush has not been losing a lot of sleep already, America has got to send stealth fighters into the Korean Peninsula, anticipating and reconnoitring on what could be yet another nuclear test by the hermit kingdom of North Korea. What if the stealth fighters find the target they are looking for? What if North Korea would indeed be testing next-generation Taepo Dongs? Would America be up on its toes and launch air strikes into North Korea territory? With 120,000 troops in Iraq already deployed, I wouldn’t think America has enough ground troops and firepower left to launch another operation like Operation Desert Storm II, the stealth would end just mostly be bluff tokens.
You think America’s hands are all that full already but the hunt for Al-Qaeda elements had led another U.S. strike in Somalia that news headlines around the world carried how “America is back in Somalia”, probably insinuating how the U.S. operation there almost a decade ago had turned out so ugly that it had inspired a top movie director Ridley Scott to recreate the horrifying terror faced by a number of American troops there.
I know, it has been like this for a long time now but I just couldn’t help but noticed how America had been too engrossed in world affairs for far too much, like way out of its comfort zone that you’d wonder how it could afford to manage its focus and resources with so many conflicts it had involved itself, like juggling fireballs that could explode in midair. 
Maybe it’s all about President George Bush and the Republicans, the way they are so inclined outward, towards the conflicts outside its borders. Or maybe the enemies of peace has just gotten too many these days that America had got to dip its hands into many troubles.
We just can’t be sure but surely, I feel right now that in terms of conflicts and troubles throughout the face of the earth—America is just everywhere.
America likes to act as the world’s policeman. It always wants to believe that there are evil lurking in this world and takes on the responsibility of licking it which can be perceived as arrogance. Perhaps it just needs to satisfy the urge to justify the existence of its large military might.
Comment by bw — January 10, 2007 @ 11:07 pm
The eerie thing about America being the world’s police is there are a lot more going on behind the scenes in other countries which don’t get much publicity as the Iraq crisis or the military strike in Somalia. That in my opinion is what makes their role a lot more dangerous than perceived.
Comment by Daphne — January 11, 2007 @ 11:37 am
What America is doing these days is but typical of a country at the top of the superpower food chain. In its heydays, Russia did the same thing with the communist bloc countries.
Whether we like it or not, an outward-looking America is a lot better than an inward-looking America.
Comment by snglguy — January 11, 2007 @ 9:36 pm
To BUFFWINGS: America had been seen like that for a very long time now, starting from the Reagan Era and peaking during the Clinton years when almost exclusively, they’ve been fighting wars not their own, like in the Balkan wars and in Somalia. I believe truly that there’s really nothing wrong if they want to become the world’s policemen but as you said, there is just that inclination towards arrogance and whenever it becomes more and more involved in a lot more conflicts than what was usual—like these times—it becomes a worry that maybe one day, there could be a backlash effect on this, like America becoming suddenly capricious and become imperious like Rome in the old days. I remember the Vietnam experience where in the beginning the war was still heavy with good objectives but as the war dragged on and America suddenly feeling that it got too much in its hands—more than it could handle—the American military in Vietnam went into some sort of a breakdown where they did drastic and unusual measures like pouring defoilage like Agent Orange incessantly, killing innocent civilians, and they resorted into hamletting where drugged GIs did some very bad and unspeakable things to women, children and the old. In short, it became ugly. I hope this won’t happen this time around, like in Iraq which threatens to become too much too handle.
To DAPHNE: Exactly this kind of situation which could lead to breakdown in America’s venture into policing the whole world all by its own; there’s just so many things happening that at one time, it probably takes on more enemies than it could handle.
TO SINGL: You’re right bro, that is just but consequential to enormous power. But I just couldn’t help noticing that President Bush and his administration seem not to be so good at resources management and focus since they just got too much on going for their military units than what is ordinary or what we are used to see. They’ve got Iraq and Afghanistan, waging two major wars in so short a time, like they’ve got all the money in the world. Sooner or later, cracks in this kind of policy would appear and this could lead to very ugly results like what could happen in Iraq now. If the Americans pullout from region this year, many analysts predict that Iraq would see bloodshed like nobody had seen before as civil war could erupt there. Despite 140,000 American troops stationed there, would you believe that they only have reasonable control over three provinces out of eighteen. That’s not a good sign at all. I think the republicans will lose a lot in the nest U.S. elections and this could mean a major shift in Iraq policy. And if that becomes a sort of changing horse in midstream, that could have disastrous repercussions.
Comment by Major Tom — January 12, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
Major Tom - Fear mongering is also a habit of America. Iran’s president is being portrayed as a Hitler when the fact of the matter is the man is a liberal. The best test of this was when Canada, France and Germany didn’t go with the IRAQ invasion because Bush’s reasons were more speculative than factual.
Comment by bw — January 13, 2007 @ 11:52 am
I’m more concerned about the young veterans coming back home to America damaged by the extreme violence of war, and readjusting to civilian life. Some, unfortunately, are not able to do so completely due to post-traumatic stress. There were lots of them then after the Vietnam war. But then again, I guess, they were merely pawns or collateral damages.
Comment by eric — January 16, 2007 @ 6:33 am
To BW: You said it bro, CIA and even FBI had been so notorious bout this in the past. Remember when they themselves created the havoc and mayhem in the Contra Scandal in El Salvador?
To eric: Indeed, times have change. I don’t think we could back to the time when generals move their soldiers like toys and tokens in a board game and decide who will die first and who would not.
Comment by Major Tom — January 16, 2007 @ 1:19 pm