Dispatches From the Rambo Republic

Tom Engelhardt tackles our military fetish in The American Way of War.

<a href="http://www.army.mil/yearinphotos/2009/gallery/july/02.jpg">US Army</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The week before September 11, 2001, was eerily quiet in America. In the lull of a late summer news cycle, a series of shark attacks ruled the headlines. The president, back from cutting brush in Crawford, Texas, floundered in the polls. That time period appears, as if preserved in amber, early in Tom Engelhardt’s biting look at United States militarism, The American Way of War: How Bush’s Wars Became Obama’s. “[T]he savage attacks of the following day would, in fact, buy a faltering, confused, and weak administration, as well as a dazed and disengaged president, a new life,” he writes. “In an American world now filled to the brim with horrors, a United States that was no longer a ‘country,’ but a ‘homeland’ and a Homeland Security State.”

Except a Homeland Security State has always been stuck in the American subconscious; it just experienced a coming-out after 9/11. In this pithy collection of essays, Engelhardt—cofounder of the American Empire Project and the Nation Institute-sponsored blog TomDispatch—charts the long history of America’s obsession with war. Beyond the Bush administration’s expanded US military agenda, militarism and its trappings have been ingrained in the American psyche for decades. “That’s why, for all the shock, it was, in a sense, so familiar,” he writes. “Americans were already imagining versions of September 11 soon after the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945.” Hollywood-generated apocalypses from The Towering Inferno to Independence Day had set a cultural precedent for visions of widespread manmade disaster. The Bush administration only seized on that vision to fuel its own version of reality.

In The American Way of War, Engelhardt presents absolute notions of war and peace as vestiges of a vanished world. In chapters like “Shock and Awe: How We Got Hit,” “Air War, Barbarity, and Collateral Damage,” and “The Language of War, American-Style,” he probes our capitulation to a modern-day strain of Orwellian Newspeak, in which “war” or “more war” are the only options, and “less” no longer exists. “As for ‘peace’—war’s companion and theoretical opposite—it, too, has been emptied of meaning and all but discredited,” he writes. “No longer the opposite of war, it’s just a rhetorical flourish embedded, like one of our reporters, in Warspeak.”

Meanwhile, the Bush-coined Global War on Terror made possible a continuous state of conflict. GWOT recast contemporary combat as a generalized ongoing struggle, a state of being, rather than a specific military engagement with a specific purpose: “Keep heading backward through the Vietnam and Korean Wars, and the US military was last truly victorious in 1945. But achieving victory no longer seems to matter. War America-style is now conceptually unending, as are preparations for it.”   

Those preparations are tracked in Engelhardt’s book in alarming detail. In “How to Garrison a Planet,” he investigates a Pentagon “lily pad strategy” of dropping bases everywhere the United States anticipates war. Embassies aside—he balks at the $592 million, 104-acre US embassy in Baghdad’s Green Zone in the mordant “Wonders of the Imperial World”—there are at least seven hundred American military and intelligence bases scattered across the globe. The Pentagon’s budget has increased on Barack Obama’s watch, and according to Engelhardt, within the next two years we will see “near-Vietnam-level escalation rates” in Afghanistan. The president who campaigned to end the Iraq War, he writes, has conceded to the generals who advocate this other “necessary” war.

In an epilogue wryly titled “Premature Withdrawal,” Engelhardt condemns pundits and strategists who keep the Warspeak machine in motion. “What, of course, makes their arguments particularly potent is the fact that they base them almost entirely on things that have yet to happen, that may, in fact, never happen,” he writes. Engelhardt himself has been working for years to deflate such fantasies on TomDispatch, from which these essays were culled. In his latest book, as in his daily dispatches, he takes on our war-possessed world with clear-eyed, penetrating precision.


If you buy a book using a Bookshop link on this page, a small share of the proceeds supports our journalism.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate