Discover more from Caitlin’s Newsletter
US Military Intervention Is Never, Ever, EVER The Solution
The imperial propaganda machine is blaring loudly about anti-government protests in Cuba after ignoring anti-government protests in Brazil, Haiti, Chile and Colombia which were much larger and often met with much harsher police responses.
There is nothing surprising about this; the imperial media always ignore protests in member states while amplifying them in unabsorbed territories. But what is a bit surprising is how many calls we are seeing for US military intervention in Cuba despite the US military's consistent and unbroken track record of always making things worse.
The mayor of Miami went on Fox News to encourage the Biden administration to consider airstrikes and other military options. Right-wing pundit Kurt Schlichter is calling for an invasion to topple Havana and former congressman Carlos Curbelo is saying that Biden should "keep all options on the table" for acts of war. Participants in US rallies against the Cuban government frequently voice support for military intervention.
Which is of course bananas. It appears unlikely that any overt US military action is on its way at this stage in the game; most Americans don't even support the economic blockade on Cuba much less airstrikes or an invasion, so we're not anywhere near that level of consent-manufacturing at this time. But it's just amazing that this is an idea that's getting any traction at all.
People who believe US military intervention solves problems are as dumb as flat-earthers but infinitely more destructive. It is always disastrous and it never achieves what its proponents claim it will achieve.
Whenever I say this I always get one or two geniuses stepping in to say "Aha, I believe you are forgetting a little thing known as World War Two?"
To such Einsteins I always say yes, your mind burns with the brightness of a thousand galaxies, but first of all that wasn't interventionism since the US was attacked and Germany declared war on it immediately thereafter. More importantly, though, it's very telling that people have to reach all the way back through history to an age where the world was almost unrecognizably different from the world of today to even try and find an example of the US military being used in a way that was not evil and disastrous.
After Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc, the facts are in and the case is closed. The interventionists have lost the argument. US interventionism is always the wrong answer to every question, unless the question is "How do we destroy that country?" or "How do we generate an obscene amount of wealth for obscenely horrible people?"
This was true last year when people were calling for regime change intervention in Iran, it was true the year before that when they were calling for regime change intervention in Venezuela, it is true now when they are calling for regime change intervention in Cuba, and it will remain true when they call for regime change intervention in whatever their next target will be.
The correct answer to "What should be done about Cuba's problems?" is for the US to end its cruel blockade. After that happens the correct answer to "What should be done about Cuba's problems?" is "None of your fucking business."
Whenever the empire is targeting a socialist government you see public discourse get dragged into a debate about socialism versus capitalism. Capitalism proponents cite the economic hardships and ensuing protests in the country as evidence that socialism doesn't work, ignoring both the crushing economic sanctions and the obvious fact that per their own logic protests and economic hardship in capitalist nations means capitalism doesn't work. Socialists fight back against this, and it becomes a big loud back-and-forth which drowns out the much stronger and completely indisputable point that US interventionism is literally always disastrous and literally never helpful.
It's seriously the worst possible tool you could possibly use for any job; people only think you can solve problems by sending in the marines because they've watched too many movies glorifying the US military and depicting problems being solved by Good Guys With Guns. A casual glance at America's history of interventionism immediately makes it clear that you'd have to be a pants-on-head fucking moron to believe it can help the Cuban people or anyone else.
It's like trying to solve a math problem with a blowtorch.
In every debate about whether or not to send in the US military to a foreign nation, you could just as easily substitute Godzilla and have the pro-intervention side look just as rational:
Person A: Look at all that poverty and unrest!
Person B: I know, it’s terrible.
Person A: You know what we should do?
Person B: Please don’t say send in Godzilla.
Person A: We should send in Godzilla!
Person B: No, he always makes things worse! You know that! Every time we send in Godzilla to try and solve problems in the world, he just ends up trampling all over the city, knocking down buildings and killing thousands of people with his atomic heat beam.
Person A: Maybe this time would be different though!
Person B: Why in God’s name would this time be different?? You said it would be different in Iraq, in Libya, in Syria. What happened there?
Person A: He trampled all over the cities, knocked down the buildings and killed people with his atomic heat beam.
Person B: Exactly! So what makes you think sending in Godzilla would be any different this time?
Person A: Well we can’t just do nothing!
Person B: Dude, doing nothing would be infinitely better than sending in Godzilla to do the thing he literally always does.
Person A: Hey, inaction has consequences too you know! You probably don’t even talk to Cubans. My brother’s co-worker’s dentist is Cuban, and he says a Godzilla rampage is just what they need. You should listen to Cubans.
Person B: No matter how many Cubans I talk to, it will still be an indisputable fact that Godzilla rampages are always disastrous and always make things worse.
And it's not just Cuba; there's a push for interventionism in Haiti as well in the wake of President Jovenel Moïse's assassination. The Washington Post editorial board has called for "swift and muscular intervention" from the US and United Nations, despite swift and muscular intervention being precisely the cause of Haiti's problems. This would be less egregious than a full-on invasion since it's Haiti's de facto prime minister Claude Joseph asking for intervention, but there's substantial opposition to outside interference from Haitians who don't even recognize the authority of Joseph to extend such an invitation.
In an even remotely sane world, people promoting US interventionism would be regarded the same as people who endorse genocide or oppose age of consent laws. It is only because we live our lives saturated in mass media propaganda that the madness of promoting something so consistently destructive and horrific is tolerated in polite society.
US military interventionism is never, ever, ever the solution. You're never going to make things better using something that always makes things worse. Virtually anything else would be preferable.
It's amazing this even needs to be said.
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here.