Is perpetual war inevitable?

Is perpetual war inevitable?

US_Navy_Aircraft_Carrier_USS_John_C_Stennis_MOD_45153514
In an otherwise interesting essay entitled, "The Price of Perpetual War," we find this perplexing paragraph:

The United States did not choose this era of perpetual war. It is the price of living in a world where, for the first time, terrorist groups and malevolent individuals can reach the United States and wreak havoc from virtually any corner of the world. That threat was literally brought home by al Qaeda on 9/11 and reinforced all too recently by the terror attacks in Paris, Brussels, and San Bernardino.

Does anyone believe this is so? Alas, millions of Americans. But to make a quick list…

…We chose to give a blank check to Saudi Arabia to run one of the world's most repressive regimes while spreading extremist war-on-the-infidels Islam throughout the Middle East and beyond. One doesn't have to subscribe to conspiracy theories to acknowledge that Osama bin Laden and 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi citizens. And what has our kowtowing to the kingdom given us? The House of Saud's oil, to fuel our "non-negotiable" (and already heavily subsidized) car-based sprawl lifestyle. Most oil needs to stay in the ground if we are to avoid destroying the planet even more — and between "making different arrangements" and domestic oil, we don't need OPEC anymore. …

…We chose an even closer connection to Israel, Riyadh's quiet ally, whether this was in America's national interest or not. And with the oppressive and increasingly extremist regime of Benjamin Netanyahu is it increasingly not. Indeed, increasing Jewish settlements on Palestinian land and injustices against the Palestinian people committed by Israel blow back on the United States, which has long ago lost its credibility as an honest broker in the Middle East. It has inflamed Islamic and Arabic anger against us. And for what? To please the powerful donors of AIPAC and older Jewish voters in the swing state of Florida?…

Playing chicken Kiev

Playing chicken Kiev

2014-05-09._День_Победы_в_Донецке_248

Insurgents, including perhaps Russian soldiers, in Donetsk, in contested eastern Ukraine.

Congressional Republicans, some Democrats, and the military-industrial complex want us to go deep in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Arm Ukraine. Send troops to nearby NATO countries. Even puts boots on the ground in Ukraine itself.

Or go deeper. Some believe Washington and the CIA played a significant role in destabilizing and ultimately ousting the elected president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych. But this overlooks Yanukovych's blunders and mishandling of both foreign relations and brutality against demonstrators. If he was corrupt, welcome to Ukraine.

Contrary to the dSi narrative, Russia actually does have vital national interests at stake. Ukraine was for centuries a province of the Russian empire and then a "republic" in the USSR. Even when things were cozy between Washington and Moscow in the 1990s, Russian President Boris Yeltsin declared Ukraine part of his country's "near abroad."

The United States has no — no — vital national interests in Ukraine.