The Ruses for War: American Interventionism Since World War II [Hardcover]

John B. Quigley (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 1992

As a prelude to war in 2003, the administration of George W Bush did its utmost to convince the public that Saddam Hussein's Iraq posed a threat to American security from the secret development of weapons of mass destruction. Within a year of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, it became clear that no such weapons existed. Sadly, this was not the first time the American public was urged to support a war for reasons that turned out later to be scarcely credible. As law professor John Quigley amply demonstrates in this damning indictment of U.S. military interventionism since World War II, the Bush administration's actions fit a decades-old pattern of going to war on a pretence rather than informing the public of the government's true intentions.This newly updated and revised paperback edition of "The Ruses for War" analyses each instance of military intervention abroad by the United States since World War II from the perspective of what the government told the public, or did not tell it, about the reasons for war. Quigley concludes that the government's explanations differed greatly from reality. What emerges from his research is a tale of cover-ups, distortions, and manipulation of the media by our country's leaders for the purpose of gaining public support.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Quigley's simplistic purpose here is to determine whether postwar U.S. administrations have been "truthful" regarding military interventions abroad or whether they gave a "distorted picture." He concludes that although they have been successful in convincing Congress and the public not to block (if not support) interventions, our presidents have not always "divulged the truth, at least not the whole truth." Case in point: the 1983 invasion of Grenada was ostensibly lauched to rescue American students, but they were not in danger (nor were those Cuban construction workers a military unit). Quigley argues that fighting communism was the rationale for Washington's expeditionary efforts in Korea and Vietnam, but that the goverment was less interested in keeping the Chinese and Russians at bay than in drawing Korea and Vietnam "into the market-economy sphere." He predicts, predictably, that U.S. administrations will continue "not to be forthright" regarding the reasons for dispatching American troops overseas. Quigley is a law professor at Ohio State University.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Review

Quigley writes with intellectual fire." -- The Washington Post "Quigley's extensive survey of American policy is a most valuable resource for anyone interested in testing America's foreign policy claims against historical record." - Ludwig von Mises Institute Web site

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 310 pages
• Publisher: Prometheus Books; 1St Edition edition (September 1992)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0879757671
• ISBN-13: 978-0879757670
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.1 x 1.3 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,733,842 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Not new, August 2, 2007

By 

Stratiotes Doxha Theon "2 Thes 2:15" (Richmond, Missouri) - See all my reviews
(TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Ruses for War: American Interventionism Since World War II (Paperback)

Political leaders who spin webs of deceit in order to whip up a war fever is not a new phenomena nor is it unique to the United States. Nor is the gullibility of citizens and media anything new. It did not begin with the post World War II era nor did it begin with democracy. Mr. Quigley does a fine job of exposing how the cause celebre for war is seldom the only cause. Mixed motivations and rationalizing reasons are a sickness of the human condition in all of us - politicians as well as other citizens. Had Mr. Quigley began with the ancient wars as his starting point, he might have filled volume upon volume of this pattern of deceit and gullibility.

So there is really nothing new in these pages. Instead, Mr. Quigley gives us some examples of how often we went to war in the second half of the 20th century with questionable motivation. He begins with the Korean war and takes us through the intervention in Liberia to provide examples. Despite the undertones of anti-Americanism that one might sense in his style, the facts themselves should give us pause to reflect. If it makes us less gullible the next time politicians begin to spin their web of war fever, it will be of great value. Sadly, too many will react with the nationalistic knee-jerk that refuses to accept any criticism. It is doubtful, therefore, to have much of an impact except with the handful of true liberterians and left-leaning faithful to the message.

Mr. Quigley is an effective communicator. He does, at times, irritate the patriot in us that wishes not to think ill of their leaders. But once in a while a little iodine on the wound is the only thing that will induce healing. It is preferable to be an open-eyed patriot than a blind nationalist.

11 of 35 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars If you must read, read with a critical eye, January 24, 2002

By 

"buckeye0562" - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Ruses for War: American Interventionism Since World War II (Hardcover)

I have only read parts of this book; however, it does not surprise me that Professor Quigley is the author.

He is hardly an objective observer/academic when it comes to his feelings about the foreign policies of Western Democracies. Throughout his academic career, he has promoted the hardcore pro-Soviet, pro-Third World viewpoint for every topic he has addressed. He is known as a virulently anti-West, anti-Israel, anti-U.S. Gov't academic. I am not saying that his work is automatically disqualified for this reason; any work deserves an independent assessment. However, the facts he presents and conclusions he draws should be read with a critical eye given his past record.