Follow us on social

google cta
'Always at War' strives to answer the question: why?

'Always at War' strives to answer the question: why?

Quincy Institute makes its podcast debut with a show that probes the hidden matrix of interlocking interests that fuels American militarism

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

The United States is a country at war. As I write, the U.S. is bombing Yemen, supplying weapons to Israel as it annihilates Gaza, conducting counter-terrorism operations in dozens of countries, and fighting a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Meanwhile, President Trump suggests he would go to war with Iran “very willingly” if nuclear diplomacy collapses.

As we stare down another potential forever war in the greater Middle East, a crucial question is raised: Why is the U.S. always at war?

The answer lies in a complex web of financial incentives and political calculations. This hidden matrix of interlocking interests that perpetuates America's war machine is precisely what the Quincy Institute's new YouTube show, "Always at War," investigates.

For Americans born after 1990, war isn't an anomaly — it's been the backdrop of their entire lives. And these conflicts haven’t just wrought destruction abroad — they’ve reshaped American society. In the wake of our endless wars, Americans’ civil liberties eroded, our police have militarized, and resources that could have been used to address domestic needs were diverted to the Pentagon, which looks set to spend nearly $1 trillion annually.

The money we allocate to defense is simply staggering: the U.S. government has spent $8 trillion on post-9/11conflicts as defense CEOs earn $25 million yearly and weapons manufacturers see 82% returns, amid recent conflicts.

But equally important are the political incentives that reward hawkishness and punish restraint.

When 80% of retired four-star generals join defense companies within five years and over 50 members of Congress own stocks in these same companies, we can plainly see the financial incentives that fuel American militarism. And there's also a powerful ecosystem of think tanks, media outlets, and political operatives that secure career advancements for those championing military solutions as they marginalize voices of those advocating for restraint.

“Always at War” aims to make this deliberately confusing system comprehensible.

The debut episodes feature the Quincy Institute’s William Hartung discussing America's nuclear weapons programs, especially its costly "Sentinel Program," and historian and Quincy Institute co-founder Andrew Bacevich, who draws parallels between the Vietnam War and today's ruinous interventions.

By revealing who benefits — both financially and politically — when America chooses war over peace, "Always at War" seeks to help viewers understand why the United States seems perpetually unable to stop participating in violent conflicts. Understanding these forces is the first step toward building a foreign policy based on restraint, diplomacy, and genuine national interest rather than profit and political advantage.

Watch now:


YouTube
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Unlike Cheney, at least McNamara tried to atone for his crimes
Top photo credit: Robert MacNamra (The Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum/public domain)

Unlike Cheney, at least McNamara tried to atone for his crimes

Washington Politics

“I know of no one in America better qualified to take over the post of Defense Secretary than Bob McNamara,” wrote Ford chief executive Henry Ford II in late 1960.

It had been only fifty-one days since the former Harvard Business School whiz had become the automaker’s president, but now he was off to Washington to join President-elect John F. Kennedy’s brain trust. At 44, about a year older than JFK, Robert S. McNamara had forged a reputation as a brilliant, if arrogant, manager and problem-solver with a computer-like mastery of facts and statistics. He seemed unstoppable.

keep readingShow less
Zaporizhzhia, Donbas, Ukraine
Top photo credit: Destruction in Zaporizhzhia in the Donbas after Russian missile strikes on Ukraine in the morning of 22 March 2024. ( National Police of Ukraine/Creative Commons)

Stop making the Donbas territory a zero-sum confrontation

Europe

Among the 28 clauses contained in the initial American peace proposal, point 21 — obliging Ukraine to cede as-yet unoccupied territory in the Donbas to de facto Russian control, where it would be a “neutral demilitarised buffer zone” — has generated the most resistance and indignation.

The hastily composed European counter-proposal insists on freezing the frontline instead. This was likely intended as a poison pill that would sabotage a settlement and keep the war going; soon after, Brussels celebrated its “diplomatic success” of “thwarting a US bid to force Ukraine” into a peace deal. At subsequent talks in Geneva, U.S. and Ukrainian delegations refined the original proposal to 19 points, but kicked the can of the territorial question down the road, to a future decision by presidents Zelenskyy and Putin.

keep readingShow less
Juan Orlando Hernandez
Former Honduras President Juan Orlando Hernandez listens as Assistant U.S. Attorney Jacob Gutwillig gives closing arguments during his trial on U.S. drug trafficking charges in federal court in the Manhattan borough of New York City, U.S., March 6, 2024 in this courtroom sketch. REUTERS/Jane Rosenberg

In pardon of narco trafficker, Trump destroys his own case for war

Latin America

The Trump administration has literally killed more than 80 suspected drug smugglers by blowing their small boats out of the water since September, but this week the president has reportedly decided to pardon one of the biggest cocaine traffickers of them all.

If that doesn't make any sense to you, then join the club.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.