Yup, the USA has arrived in two world wars in time for afternoon tea, and in no way has experienced the casualties that have been experienced by other nations.

Is this why 11/9 was seen to be so horrific, whilst it represented one night of the Blitz on London, (let alone the 30 million citizens of the then USSR!) and now the whole world must suffer its jingoistic alleged "war" on terror?

Never mind, Australia has taken to flag waving now as well. Does this make it any better? I think not.

It occurs to me that that only those in a luxuriant comfort zone are so terrorised.

"Born in a Nazi Camp"
War on Terror: "That's right, now everyone can experience the thrill of waging war on an abstract noun." John Cleese

“… for most of its history, the US was more reluctant to go to war than other countries, and, by comparison with the European empires of the 19th century, unwilling to engage in wars of imperial expansion”.

If so, they had a funny way of showing it. And I doubt if Mark Twain, Vice-president of the US Anti-imperialist League, would agree. In 1900, he referred to US imperial excess as ‘sending our bright boys … to fight with a disgraced musket under a polluted flag’.

For the record … By 1848, the US had seized from Mexico what is now California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas for its gold and its land (contrary to Remember the Alamo propaganda). In 1898, it declared war on Spain in order to get its hands on Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines. These were made US colonies in that year, with Cuba being allowed independence but with full US control of its foreign and financial policies. The independent nation of Hawaii, under Queen Liliuokalani, was overthrown by the US in the period around 1900 and later made a state. In 1903, the US sent gunboats to secure Panama’s separation from Columbia for control of the Panama canal.

According to the publication ‘Addicted to War’ by Joel Andreas (http://www.addictedtowar.com/book.html): ‘Between 1898 and 1934, the US invaded Cuba 4 times, Nicaragua 5 times, Honduras 7 times, the Dominican Republic 4 times, Haiti twice, Guatemala once, Panama twice, Mexico 3 times and Colombia 4 times’ – and in most cases, left occupying armies/bases of marines to ‘protect’ its interests, mostly sugar and oil.

In its 230-year history, the US has made more than 200 military interventions abroad ... an average of one every 14 months.

And among others killed in the assorted American invasions pre-WW2, during the US takeover of the Philippines were 216 000 Philippinos (Library of Congress figures), 200 000 of them herded into concentration camps and 16 000 "terrorists" who were fighting the occupation and whose wives and children were among those in the concentration camps. But it was surely all for liberty.

guys, guys, yer blaggarding the defender of the free world!

i would be amazed that any non-american would not despise the yanks, if i were not aware that every nation believes what it's ruling class promotes as the truth. the ruling class generally loves the yanks, who are defenders of the rich.

The US economy largely depends on international conflict.
They are the world’s largest international arms dealer and spend almost ten times more on defence than the first runner-up (UK).

Churchill believed their late entry into WW1 actually extended the length of the war by two years and cost the allies thousands more lives than was necessary.

Since the end of WW2 they have toppled (directly or indirectly) about 50 governments – many democratically elected - and bombed around 30 other countries, The notion of “fighting for the freedom of others” while simultaneously installing and supporting various foreign dictators is difficult to understand.

Behind the political façade is the real motive, which is to expand or break into new economic markets.

They had a vested interest in every conflict they have been involved in and never acted out of pure altruism alone as the “policeman” they represent themselves to be.

Unfortunately many of their international adventures are either misguided or bungled and others are left to deal with the consequences, which invariable involves the death of innocents.

Unlike Europe, the closest they have come to civilian casualties was 911 and the subsequent reaction has been well documented. They are now a wounded society that lives in perpetual fear. Imagine what internal social chaos a real military attack would create.

However, despite their sanitised history of violent self-interest, it is better to have them as an ally than an enemy.

wobbles, i believe mussolini felt the same about hitler.

sjf has taken the time to actually look at american history. people who assert that america is not inclined to military adventures simply are ignorant. their wars before ww1 were against vastly inferior military capabilities, either native american, or mexican, or spanish. these wars got what the americans wanted, very cheaply. little wonder they made war whenever they saw a prize.

americans don't shed blood for liberty, except their own. generally the liberty they seek is the freedom to dominate others.

Blaggarding the defender of the free world?

Here's a little bit of history. It happened, whether one likes it or not.

Around 1898-1900 the Philippinos had been fighting the Spanish for liberation of the Philippines when the USA bought the Philippines from Spain for $20 million USD and then sent in their troops to kill 216 000 Philippinos who simply wanted freedom from colonialism.

Guatamala 1954-the people elected a government in free elections and in came the marines to impose a fascist dictatorship.

Nicaragua- the locals kicked out a brutal corrupt dictator, brought in free health care and literacy programmes and in came the Contras, a murderous bunch of US-sponsored and trained terrorists who shattered the social programme of the popular government and killed about.... 80 000 wasn't it?

Cuba-invaded in 1961, under a US-led world trade embargo since 1957. Why? because a popular revolution had kicked out a corrupt US stooge, Batista.

And others, Chile, Vietnam, the installing of the corrupt crook and fascist, Suharto.

Wasn't it Kennedy's father, then ambassador to the UK in 1940, who went around bad-mouthing the British attempt to defeat Hitler?

And the USA SUPPORTED Pol Pot and his vicious thugs at the UN, and with aid, after the Vietnamese had driven them out of Cambodia and were trying to get things back to sanity.

And the US was a prime SUPPORTER of one Saddam Hussein before 1991, shipping him chemicals and weapons and credits for arms purchases.

I don't know what free world the USA defends; perhaps it's the one in which US corporations get cheap labour at a dollar a day and free access to national resources.