Andrew Bacevich

Since the late eighteenth century, the United States has been involved in an almost ceaseless string of wars, interventions
Since this is all an exercise in learning what we can from looking backward, naturally the list includes Edward Bellamy's
Despite a painfully expensive and tragically wasteful record of militarized interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Iran, Somalia, Libya, and many other countries throughout the greater Middle East, the U.S. military and foreign policy establishment persists in staying its presence course.  
Too many candidates are endorsing the conventional political wisdom that more military invasion, occupation, droning and Pentagon spending will somehow make us more secure. That's why we think that now is a more important time than ever to challenge the status quo.
In our era in Washington, whole careers have been built on grotesque mistakes. In fact, when it comes to our various conflicts, God save you if you're right; no one will ever want to hear from you again. If you're wrong, however... well, take the invasion of Iraq.
After a State of the Union Address, we're used to a rebuttal from the other party. This year, two of them turned out to be on the schedule.
“The analogy I'd draw is the following: You go to a doctor, who diagnoses an ailment and prescribes drugs and surgery,” Landay
The escalating bloodbath in Iraq has triggered renewed debate on how muscular America's foreign policy should be. This week, I speak with combat veteran and historian Andrew Bacevich about the events unfolding in Iraq and what they say about America's role in the world.
The premise of the complaint that we don't normally have to endure politicization of our major national sporting events is simply false. Examples abound, but the most unrelenting one is the steady diet sports fans have been fed of nearly compulsory worshipfulness of our armed forces.
A leading critic of American military expansionism has written a critical open letter to Paul Wolfowitz on the tenth anniversary