Hi barge,
I don't doubt that the Warrior song expresses something of the American character and sentiment. American exceptionalism often expresses itself as the desire for superiority, the wish to grind down others in the name of US righteousness, to consider one's own interests superior to those of others.
For myself, I don't tether military strength to macho posturing. An insightful Pentagon would not want it either. Increasingly, wars are fought in the networked information world. A country that is seen to be peaceable and mutuallistic has many advantages.
Indeed, the Warrior song expresses sentiments that I think of as weaknesses. Selfish behaviour creates instability. The desire to crush your opponent tends to make them more determined rather than less. The US' experience with Iraq was a little humbling - and avoidable if US leaders had some idea of how it was seen by Iraqis. The trick is not to rely on military relationships but cooperative, mutually beneficial ones.
If the Warrior song accurately expresses the attitude, then maybe the US should expect insurgencies. No one much likes a self-regarding imperialist without human sympathy. The warrior song is the kind of thing that in Russian might appeal to someone like Putin.
As I want what is best for the US, I apply the mirror. I hope that in looking, folks will understand how they appear to the world. And what they are missing.
The red part of the US political spectrum is unique in the world. There's no equivalent for it anywhere. Except perhaps amongst Putin's Russian supporters.
Underlying things, I suspect you see US military strength as the guarantee of Jewish survival. That may be. But in the knowledge space, the assertion of thuggish might is counter-productive. It encourages that which it seeks to destroy.
| 