Bravo Mr. Walt! It's a shame there are not more people in the US who are as sober and objective as you.

Well, if this isn't common knowledge to any scholar you've got to be a blind, deaf och illiterate. The general consensus on US ventures= "the promotion of democracy" seems to equal the business of killing and the profit of high profile statesmen. This has nothing to do with freedom or democracy.

This is what happens when you elect a rich-kid child president with the consent of less then 25% of the people, only to be replaced by a puppet one term senator.

If there's not a radical shift in the in the way power and wealth is distributed in America all credibility will be lost.

I just hope in the meanwhile american policymakers will make sure that some algorithm wont go mayhem and destroy my pension savings.

One would think with all the it's domestic problems, it's Foreign Policy with it's carefully construct Pax Americana now in a shambles, reasonable people would question whether God is on America's side?

In my view, God is against America as reported here:

THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST: From 19/11 to 9/11

http://ray032.wordpress.com/2011/08/28/the-revelation-of-jesus-christ-from-1911-to-911/

Exceptionalism can only be deemd objectively from the outside and it also needs to stand the test of time. Failing those, it is just hubris from those who espouse it for themselves.

I for one believe articles of this type join a larger trend toward some much needed sobriety in America's self-assessment. (Consider T. Friedman's last book.) Even the media are openly discussing America's "decline." But people like Mitt Romney belong to that desperate breed of Americans who confuse sobriety with a lack of self-confidence--perhaps even self-hatred: they are old school Coca Cola salesmen--that is, charlatans, however self-deluded. (His Mormonism is ironic in more than one way.) They are the type of people who think you should just "snap out" of a depression (be it psychological or economic)...

The problem we have is that thanks to the constant drumbeats of Fox and the conservatives, anyone who is less than mindlessly worshipful of American exceptional is branded a gay commie traitor who probably wants to impose sharia law, destroy capitalism, and shut down talk radio. All our difficulties are externalized; our economic turmoils are due to creeping socialism, everyone hates us because we're just so much better than them that they just can't stand it, and we're God's redoubt whose beneficence we bestow out of the pure goodness of our hearts. Anyone disagreeing with this is likely to catch a Hellfire missile through their front door.

Exceptionalism is inherent to the American psyche; that's why evolution is anathema to so many. We come from God, made in his image, so we COULDN'T have evolved from something so crude as hairy primates (though a trip to the Jersey shore should dispel that notion). Capitalism is perfect, the market is an ideal of self correcting balance, and the only corruption is governmental, and even then MY representative / senator is a good guy, but yours is a crooked bastard . . .

Exceptionalism leads to hubris, and when the two reinforce one another, that's when civilizations fall. Rome thought itself exceptional even after it's sacking. Every Empire and Hegemon that ever existed thought themselves 'Exceptional', and when they placed their faith in the invincibility of their exceptionalism, they fell. As long as America lives in the fantasy world of their own perfection and infallibility, projecting all their ills outward, I think the nation will follow a downward course. It's time for America to wake up and smell the coffee . . .

"The United States may not have been as brutal as the worst states in world history," but what was the least violent, least brutal state in world history? Are there any states that lasted longer than twenty years that not only claimed to follow but actually did follow ideals of humanitarianism and peaceful co-existence?

Dr. Walt suffers from what I call mechanistic thinking, which presumes that all that can objectively stated must have some physical cause and effect mechanism to explain it. Hence his total avoidance of looking at the context (world view, mind-set, attitude) present in people who live in America: which is that I can be any person I want to be; and anything I feel inwardly lead to do is reasonable for me to do, even when no other person appears to agree with me.

Our Declaration of Independence and Constitution present that our government serves for the benefit of the American people, which is the only government founding document that states that in the world. Our successive governments may have taken their sweet time to extend all the rights clearly articulated in the beginning to all the residents of this country, but up until the criminal administration of George Bush, those rights were being progressively extended. And now, and Obama is very much responsible for this as well, those rights are being progressively eviscerated.

So absolutely this country was exceptional, but sadly most Americans out of their significantly false fears repeatedly elect people who are doing their best to make this country a place of horrors. It is truly amazing to see mass self-sabotage occur in front of my eyes.

I have been hearing this twaddle for nearly half a century. Unpleasant truths are not welcomed by "real" americans. The problem is that americans have very fragile ego's and the truth is never welcome.

"U.S. military action has led directly or indirectly to the deaths of 250,000 Muslims over the past three decades"

Iraq was defiantly a major mistake, however this figure here also includes wars which were often in defence or in some way benefited Muslims, the somalia intervention according to a UN refugee report may have saved 100,000 people with 10-25000 being saved when boots were put on the ground, oxfam has shown that less people lost their lives in post taliban rule than during it and d3 systems has shown that afghans prefer their lives more now than they did. The gulf war ended saddams occupations of kuwait.

1) You cite the arrogance of other countries' beliefs in their own "exceptionalism" in history without citing WHY America is different.
Why is that? Do you actually believe that America thinks it is "bearing the white man's burden" or trying to civilize the world or "spreading its version of Christianity?
These are foolish comparisons. You dismiss the idea of American Exceptionalism by claiming "well, everybody thinks they are exceptional."
That is a ridiculous argument.
"Yes, Steve Jobs changed the entire course of civilization on Planet Earth, but everybody can do that...."

2) The United States has been unjust and killed people...
Oh.
Well, it hasn't made any "tyrannical blunders" like the slaughter of several hundred millions of their own citizens such as the Soviet Union; China; and the current Muslim/ Arab fratricides, but... it's still no different from those benighted countries...
You mean that the US has not been Jesus and and the Jewish People and Gandhi all rolled up into one perfect non-violent nation?
Oh.
I do not know who Stephen M. Walt is but, his philosophy appears a tad sophomoric.
(Oy.... I just read that you are actually a Harvard professor of international affairs... I despair of those whom you teach...)

3) Luck?
Part and parcel of American Exceptionalism is that the US was somehow Blessed by our Creator in its uniqueness.
Apparently, Mr. Walt agrees. Only he rather worships at the altars of "Luck" and "Good Fortune" than something more specific and, perhaps, demanding.

4) "The United States Is Responsible for Most of the Good in the World."
How to take an idea; twist it; and create your own straw man.
No, Mr. Walt, the US is NOT responsible for most of the good in the world.
However, the concept of American Exceptionalism does proclaim that the US DOES the most good in the world.
There is a large difference between your simplistic straw man and reality.
However, Mr. Walt does make me laugh.... "the downside of American primacy... greenhouse gases!"
This is so sad. I shudder as I think of his classes where bright young people's minds are being fed with this silly drivel...

5) "Americans should heed Abraham Lincoln's admonition that our greatest concern should be "whether we are on God's side." "
This is 100% correct, Mr. Walt.
And that is the essence of American Exceptionalism.
It is those, such as yourself, who want to examine whether or not G-d is on "our" side that make a mockery of the idea that America is an Exceptional Country that has, indeed, be Blessed by G-d.
It is a core principle of any citizen who believes that this nation has been truly Blessed by our Divine Creator that we continue to be worthy of this Blessing.

If France or Saudi Arabia or China or any other nation on Earth, were to disappear tomorrow, the world would overcome this disruption and soldier on.
If the US were to disappear tomorrow, the world would fall into barbaric chaos and destruction.
That can be verified by studying History, Mr. Walt.

It's real simple, what once made America the envy of the world was developed by Americans working together in unity. There’s an old war tactic that states divide and conquer.

Simply put, if you can create enough division upon a nation and it's people, they can easily be conquered. The main element that held Americans together was the middle class.

The middle class has slowly eroded over the last decade to a point to where now where America is quickly becoming split into two groups, the haves and the have nots.

A great portion of this division can be blamed to our own media. Americas media tends to be biased either to the left wing liberal ideology or the right wing conservative ideology, in other words there is no or very little middle ground. Simply stated you’re on one side or the other.

One side wants trickle down economics, and the other side wants trickle up economics. The solution is down the middle. At one time in history we had a trickle trough the middle. We had a strong middle class that was both understanding and helpful in creating a middle stepping stone for the have nots to rise up as high as they wanted, and the middle class usually had enough financial success to help develop and support the wealthy.

With this middle class all but gone, we now have a society of haves and have nots in a fight for fairness. The middle step is gone. With the middle step or middle class missing, When the wealthy fall, often times it’s straight to the bottom, and at the same time, missing the middle step can make it near impossible for the have nots to jump up to the top leaving them in a situation of having to choose a sides.

I even see this first hand in my small town of Helen Ga. The haves and have nots that were once bonded together through family relationships or mutual friends have become bitter towards one another to a point where there is great division even among our very small community.

The real questions are, who is really pushing the divide, is the division a conspiracy for an overthrowing or conquering of America, and, the biggest question is how do we rebuild our middle class, come back together as a nation, get on the same page, and bring the promise of America back?

The U.S. used to be exceptional politically in that it was born Liberal, in the sense that the Founders of the 1760-80s had discarded Conservatism -- the preference for a society organized along military-monarchical-clerical lines.

Britain had pretty much made its transition to Liberalism by the mid-1700s, and the American leaders were in the vanguard of the British evolution. As a result, there was no real political contest in the U.S. between Liberal and Conservative parties of the kind that Europe went through in the long period from the 1600s through 1918. That's what was "exceptional" about the U.S.

Americans are as attracted by Conservatism as anyone else, but the development of a Conservative political party was postponed by historical specifics. The most important of these was the Civil War, which left the military dominant in the Republican Party while the South was dominant in the Democratic Party. This artificial separation of the military from its natural, pre-1861 territorial base weakened Conservatism to the extent that it couldn't emerge in either major political party.

This changed between the 1930s and the 1970s. FDR got control of the Democratic Party away from the South, and the South gradually moved to the Republican Party. The highlights of the transition were Humphrey's 1948 speech and Thurmond's resulting third-party candidacy, the Goldwater candidacy in 1964, and the American-Independent third party campaign in 1968.

With the skids thus greased, the Nixon disaster and Ford's close loss liquidated the traditional dominance of Liberals in the Republican Party, which neoconservatives took over to create the first capital-C Conservative major party in U.S. history. Ronald Reagan won easily in 1980 on the Wallace-LeMay platform.

The military-monarchical-clerical values embodied in the neoconservatives' global war on terror, unitary Presidency, and faith-based policies are deeply traditional, harking back to the 1600s and earlier. But they're not the values that the anti-monarchical, deist Founders bequeathed to the U.S. in the 1770s and 80s.

The entire premise of our relationship with Israel is whacky. It is Israel's current government that has insulted and embarrassed the United States. I would like to hear the Israeli government pledge its support of US policies, and say that the US is a great and important ally and so on. Why is it always on the US to keep saying this?

Secondly, We were attacked on 911 because of our support of Israel. A fifth column is a group of people, like the Jewish Lobby(see: American Enterprise Institute) and Neocons Richard Pearle and Paul Wolfowitz, which clandestinely undermines a larger group to which it is expected to be loyal, such as America.

Thirdly, We are America, we are suppose to be the good guys. For 60 years Israel has played us for a fool. Israel thanks the stupid Americans who die in the Middle-East for Israel's land grab while they live better than most Americans.

All the time while Israel rakes in Billions of American foreign aid, or as I call it welfare, for their social medicine and subsidized housing on Palestinian land.

They sit on the beach at Tel Aviv and laugh at how stupid Americans are to fight their war for them.

Prof. Walt writes, "The British thought they were bearing the 'white man's burden,' while French colonialists invoked 'la mission civilisatrice' to justify their empire." In modern usage, Kipling's phrase "white man's burden" is used to sum up and represent similar phrases expressing similar support for British imperialism. However, unlike French use of the phrase "la mission civilisatrice" as a justification for French imperialism, the evidence of Kipling's poem does not indicate that he intended this phrase as a justification for British imperialism. Therefore, the continuing use of this phrase as an example of disingenuous British apologies for imperialism is both an anachronism and an injustice to Kipling.

Rudyard Kipling did not publish the poem "The White Man's Burden" until 1899. Therefore, "white man's burden" could not have been a phrase motivating Britain's imperial expansion. This expansion was over by 1899. In the half-century remaining to the British Empire, the phrase may have given some comfort to unthinking supporters of the Empire, However, these supporters were probably unfamiliar with the poem or even completely unaware of it.

Superficially, the poem is not even about British imperialism. The poem is subtitled, "The United States and the Philippine Islands.” In 1899, The U.S. empire was one of two empires that were expanding at the time (the other being the Russian Empire). So, it is the U.S., the very subject of Prof. Walt's article, which is the nominal bearer of Kipling's "white man's burden"!

Kipling certainly intended the very visible American difficulties in the Philippines as a warning to Britons of the ironies of attempting to improve the lot of colonized peoples. Scholars are still debating what sort of warning he intended. The scholar's difficulties may be due to Kipling's thoughts being as conflicted as the ironies his poem describes. For example, Kipling's very use of the Philippine Insurrection as an example of these ironies is problematical. The Philippine Insurrection was not a reaction to any Western efforts to "bring the benefits of civilization" to the Filipino people. it was a reaction to the American conquest itself and a continuation of the Philippine struggle for independence from Spain.

Although Kipling did support imperialism in general, "The White Man's Burden" merely assumes the fact of imperialism. Nothing in the poem itself justifies this imperialism. Kipling's sympathy for the hardships of the colonial occupiers is not support for the conquests that opened the colonies to them. (Readers' confusion of sympathy with justification explains the supposed support, which generations of readers have claimed to find in the poem.)

The poem also assumes as a given the obligation of the colonial occupiers to at least try to benefit the natives (as "benefit" is defined by the occupiers). This obligation is the first "white man's burden.” However, this first "white man's burden" is not the subject of the poem.

The "white man's burden" which is the subject of Kipling's poem is the burden of the physical and moral hardships resulting from attempting to carry out the first "white man's burden.” (Confusion of these two burdens may explain the confusion of sympathy with justification referred to above.) Kipling is warning that, even with good intentions, carrying out this first burden will not be easy. The greatest part of the second burden is the moral dilemma of trying to "improve" people against their will. The conclusion of Kipling poem is a warning to the colonial benefactors that their good intentions, sufferings, and disappointments will not shield them from the moral "judgment of your peers.”

Kipling cannot resolve this dilemma without employing the metaphor of parent and child: "To wait in heavy harness, /On fluttered folk and wild-- /Your new-caught, sullen peoples, /Half-devil and half-child." In spite of his injunction to "check the show of pride," his infantilization of the subject peoples merely adds a new moral dilemma.

A moral dilemma that can be resolved is not a moral burden. The moral burdens of colonialism could not be resolved; they had to be borne. That is why they were a "burden,” to Kipling and others. ("Just going home" would have merely changed the moral burden to comparing and contrasting foreign genocides, famines, and atrocities such as suttee with European (and American) comfort and safety, while fearing that even that safety would be threatened by the spread of controllable but uncontrolled epidemics.)

Therefore, it is not just an anachronism to state that the British used the phrase "white man's burden” to justify imperial expansion. As used by Kipling, it was not even an excuse to maintain a white rule that had already been achieved, and it is a misuse of the phrase to suggest otherwise.

OF COURSE you're special... how else did you get to be the predominant power? This logic made sense to the British Empire ("we're exceptiionally civilised"), the Spanish Empire ("we're exceptionally Catholic"), the Byzantines ("we're exceptionally Orthodox"), the Romans (back to "We're exceptionally civilised") and so on, ad infinitum. The greatest power will ALWAYS be exceptionalist. Who's to tell you otherwise?

And just as obviously everyone outside of the little bubble knows it's a heap of balls. So from this second point, this is rather a blinding glimpse of the obvious to anyone not from Ra Ra Ra Land.

OF COURSE you're special... how else did you get to be the predominant power? This logic made sense to the British Empire ("we're exceptiionally civilised"), the Spanish Empire ("we're exceptionally Catholic"), the Byzantines ("we're exceptionally Orthodox"), the Romans (back to "We're exceptionally civilised") and so on, ad infinitum. The greatest power will ALWAYS be exceptionalist. Who's to tell you otherwise?

And just as obviously everyone outside of the little bubble knows it's a heap of balls. So from this second point, this is rather a blinding glimpse of the obvious to anyone not from Ra Ra Ra Land.

It never fails to amaze me that the people who are determined to destroy America will not consider the possibility of moving somewhere else. Sure, sometimes the loony Left will threaten to leave, like Alec Baldwin did before the election in 2004 ( as if real Americans were going to beg him to stay) but the sad fact is, they will remain in the good ol' US of A like a worn out sponge. If life here is so awful, and Americans are greedy and selfish and nasty, you should have no qualms about packing up your belongings and skedaddling out of here. But that would have consequences, huh? Like, giving up your single family residence, your modern vehicle which you operate on American highways, eating in fine restaurants instead of dog on a stick, the freedom to post your idiocy like you do on this blog, access to the best medical system in the world, at least until you totally destroy it, the freedom to come and go as you want without showing your papers...as memory serves me, the people in Europe would still be living under a dictator's heel and fearing the next knock on the door if it weren't for Americans like Eisenhower, MacArthur, Nimitz, Patton...those EXCEPTIONAL AMERICANS...

"For starters, though Americans watching Saving Private Ryan or Patton may conclude that the United States played the central role in vanquishing Nazi Germany, most of the fighting was in Eastern Europe and the main burden of defeating Hitler's war machine was borne by the Soviet Union."

The fighting men were, of course, essential -- but US 'can do' in supporting the front line men was a pivotal component in both Europe and in the Pacific.

In WWII 'logistics' were the decisive component. The US had both a secure location for, and a large population to utilize in, manufacturing the goods that were required.

But the ability and skills needed to move two million toilet rolls, manufactured somewhere in the boondocks of the US, to a seaport, then across the Atlantic, land it in France, and get them to where the fighting men were, was what powered the US economy for the next 40 years.

I think a strong case could be made that the Scandinavian countries are exceptional (ly good). Despite an austere resource base and harsh environment, they have managed to optimize and carefully balance their politics and economics. By any rational accounting, their vital statistics are superior to anyone’s, whereas ours are middling or worse in comparison. It’s not Paradise there, but it’s a damned sight better than almost anywhere else, including here. Especially here.

I have a feeling this has a lot to do with their very modest military priorities and expectations, whereas we burden our politics and ruin our economy with insanely ambitious ones (World Empire and/or bust!) and the sociopaths in power that always come with.

A USA with Scandinavian geopolitical aspirations and overheads; one with Scandinavian humanist policies instead of the idolatry of Greed; I wonder what that would look like?

I have always admired the USA. The world would be a completely different place without America having existed. The US Constitution is a great document. Americans are some of the most generous of all people. The early founders were some of the most remarkable people in history. Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, William Penn, Thomas Paine et.al. were brave, courageous, resourceful and independent souls all inspired by G-d. Their life histories have been of great encouragement to many people including myself. The USA has a great part to play in the divinely mandated mission of World Peace 2050.

Dear Mr. Bob,

For your own information, anyone living anywhere in the world could post on this blog. No American passport necessary! If you had the chance, you might also be amazed to find out that people outside of the U.S. don’t live in the Ice Age and do drive modern vehicles which they operate on their own highways.

There was no need to insult the immigrants here: a good majority of them is hardworking and honest people. No one is rolling the red carpet for them and they don’t get any free lunches. They are not the ones destroying America, after all – they built it (going through a lot of blood, sweat and tears)!

Finally, it does appear that your memory might benefit from some history lessons…

Until the "natural born clause" is removed and all Americans of age can run for president, the US is technically an apartheid state, segregating its citizens into two, unequal classes. It is a great country, mostly because (most) Americans are great people. But as long as it insists on discriminating based on place of birth its democracy is, frankly, neither complete nor worthy of imitation. But like I said, a great people.

In America I am relatively more free to:
1) say exactly what I want (even Denmark, one of the most liberal European countries in that regard, convicts people of racist remarks)
2) own guns and other arms
3) keep most of the wealth I can yearn or create as taxes are lower in the US than most of Europe
4) practice my faith as I see fit free from state intervention

In Europe I am relatively more free to:
a) drink alcohol in public places
b) not be subjected to draconian sentences for crimes (no three strike laws where stealing a pizza slice, as strike 3, lands me 30 yrs in jail), and I can never be put to death by the state provided I submit to its authority (as opposed to fleeing or resisting police in which case you may be shot in Europe)
c) under NO circumstances be incarcerated for years in legal limbo b/c should I be suspected of terrorist sympathies and torture, should it happen, would be strictly illegal and entitle me to file charges against the authorities
d) receive necessary health care regardless of financial circumstances and help to avoid destitution
e) once I become citizen of a state, run for ANY political office I think myself suited for regardless of where I was born (whether my fellow citizens will vote for me if I am born elsewhere and have a strange accent is is a separate matter)
f) avoid chemical pollutants in my food and drinking water (standards are tighter in most European countries)

I will not pass judgment on which freedoms are the most important but I personally think 1, band c are the most important practical freedoms. I would say that Europe wins on points in "personal freedom" although I'd like to import the American points mentioned here to Europe.

If Obama had a real sense of humor he would be laughing his head off all the time at the lame attempts by his academics buddies to back up his equally lame comments about America being an unexceptional nation. Sometimes I wish we weren’t so exceptional so the rest of the world wouldn’t be quite as dependent on us as a market for their goods and for their defense needs. But, alas, such is the fate of ‘unexceptional’ nations.

http://www.cnw.ca/en/story/848723/canada-is-the-country-with-the-best-reputation-in-the-world-according-to-reputation-institute

Face it , Canada is truly exceptional

Actually NOBODY believes that the USA is exceptional besides blinded Americans. That the world still considers that the US is (so far) a major power is a completely different story.

From the perspective of outsiders and history, the most exceptional thing about the US is our Constitution, its protections and focus on the rule of law and its guarantee of a smooth and regular turnover in power. No other nation on year has enjoyed the benefits of a similar revolutionary document for so long.

Walt misunderstands what American exceptionalism is all about. It does not assert that American is better than other countries, only that it is blessed in ways other countries cannot reproduce.

American is exceptional because it is a nation founded by a people who did their very best to reject the history of the past and all the baggage and corruption that came with it.  Immigrants to this country, especially those from Europe, came here with the express intention of leaving the past behind and starting afresh in a new country in an open land with what was almost an unlimited frontier of immense possibilities.  Across a continent of fertile soil networked by navigable rivers in a temperate climate they and their children built a forward-looking and self-reliant and generous civilization, focused on the future and separated by a great ocean from the historical preoccupations and terrible legacies that are so much a part of the ancient civilizations they left behind. 

America is exceptional because Americans are mobile geographically and have fewer reminders of their past in the way of art and houses and monuments and traditional ties to place and social class.  They come from all over the world and are not obsessed with their ancestry and the position they inherited by consequence of the circumstances and place of their birth nor are they constrained by stifling values of the monarchies and aristocracies and dictatorships they left behind. Liberty and individualism and egalitarianism and self-reliance and a strong desire to be free from the formal authority of church and state have molded a distinctive culture unique to America, with an emphasis on the rights of individuals in private property and to equality before the law and their Maker.

American is exceptional because it sees history as a gentle reminder of where they have been rather than a heavy weight on its future. Americans are rooted in the present, not the past, and look to influence the future.  They want to change the world, not be bound by it, and simply do not accept that the future is in any sense determined by impersonal forces that limit their possibilities.  This is, after all, one of the major points of Marxism and other European theories of history, and it is rejected by Americans because it is inconsistent with their vision of the limitless future of a nation protected by a Creator with a purpose for every American.
 
Finally, America is exceptional because it has nurtured a people who view the world as one of grandeur beyond the ability of mere mortals to comprehend.  They look to God rather than men for their inspiration. For this reason, the typical American tends to be anti-intellectual, in the best sense of the word.  Pragmatic and forward looking in their view of the world, Americans are not seeking intricate theoretical explanations of philosophical notions about the nature of the world but simple practical ideas relevant to the problems of an active life.  Americans do things rather than think about things and live a life of outward action and faith rather than inward acceptance and contemplation.  They are not interested in never ending philosophical speculations about complex and insoluble riddles which in their mind bear little relation to their lives and their future and in any event have no real essence.  To Americans, science and the scientific method inform practical matters.  God and faith inform those areas where metaphysics reigns. 

American exceptionalism has nothing to do with what Walt writes about.

The US should not pat itself on the back for its management at the World Bank. A very accurate model predicted in 2004 that the Gentlemen's agreement for the US to appoint the World Bank president and the Europeans to appoint the IMF managing director would end if the US did not play by the rules. As predicted, a governance crisis at the Bretton woods institutions, caused by US abuse of authority, continued to escalate until the Gentlemen's agreement ended. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DEVCOMMINT/Documentation/22885978/DC2011-0006(E)Governance.pdf US exporters, members of Congress, and attorneys general are now trying to avert a currency war by restoring US respect for the rule of law.

Until this President, the U.S., like other nations, has always put it's strategic and business interests first, as all nation states do.
At the end of WW2, the U.S. could have easily become a global colonial power, taking other nation's resources at will, as Britain, France, Belgium, Spain, etc. had done when they were empires. Instead, the U.S. helped rebuild Europe and Japan and establish Democratic institutions that stand to this day.After the invasions of Kuwait and Iraq, the U.S. could have taken their oil resources for free, intead of U.S. consumers paying them trillions of dollars for the past several decades.
Yet, despite our military power, the U.S. didn't act as other nations with overwhelming military might thoughout history have done.
That is exceptionalism.
The author didn't mention that nearly all of the 20th century conflicts were fought towards ending despotic tyranny (Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan) and communism (Vietnam, Angola, Nic, Afghanistan), which were responsible for far more human misery and death than U.S. counter actions to defeat it.
Nor was it mentioned the peace U.S. military power had provided to post-war Europe and Japan. Without a U.S. counterbalance, the Soviet sphere would have extended to all of western Europe, with no one to stop it.

More high school level analysis from Walt. Such absurd sterotyping of the American people and what they believe.

I shutter to think that Mr. Walt actually might have a hand in teaching students.

Let's put it this way, I could spend about 4 days taking this article apart, piece by piece, and mailing it back to you but I have a job and I have to work.

This is very possibly one of the silliest articles I've ever read. That's for wasting my time with this drivel.

One last thing, Professor --- all of those history books they have on the shelves at Harvard --- they don't do anything until you actually READ them.

the word exceptional refers to a deviation from the norm. In that sense, Walt's exploration of what we have in common with other nations let alone the dominant global powers of history is a powerful illustration of the state of reason at the Kennedy School of Government. It would be more useful to consider the ways the America differs from the norms of nations. I would be remiss not to acknowledge Walt's penetrating insight that nations act in self-interest and compromise their principles who knew

the word exceptional refers to a deviation from the norm. In that sense, Walt's exploration of what we have in common with other nations let alone the dominant global powers of history is a powerful illustration of the state of reason at the Kennedy School of Government. It would be more useful to consider the ways the America differs from the norms of nations. I would be remiss not to acknowledge Walt's penetrating insight that nations act in self-interest and compromise their principles who knew

It could be really dangerous for those of us in the USA to think we are exceptional when we really are not. We seem to think that we are somehow exempt from the types of real world constraints with which other nations must live, or from any consequences from our actions or inactions. This is deadly.

Example: Over the long term, most nations have to keep their imports roughly in line with their exports. They earn their imports and pay for them with their exports. To many in the US seem to think that we are somehow exempt from this - an exception. We are not, and our failure to make the adjustments necessary to bring the two into balance are slowly destroying our economy - as it always has with all other nations that sustain such an imbalance, without exception.

Example: Over the long term, most nations have to keep their national government's budget approximately in balance, and not racking up excessive amounts of debt, with temporary national emergencies and major infrastructure investments being the only workable exceptions. Nations that don't stick to this rule end up very badly, without exception.

Example: Nations that maintain a sound money supply tend to do well, thile those that hyperinflate or make an ideological fetish out of specie or hoard it out of circulation tend to do badly, without exception.

Example: Nations that tend to do better than average tend to have a well-educated population, with those citizens with above-average abilities receiving above-average education. Nations that neglect the education of their citizens experience decline. There really are no exceptions to this.

Example: Nations that overextend themselves militarilly and nations that neglect their defenses both discover too late the error of their ways, without exception.

The US would definitely be well-advised to stop thinking of itself as exceptional in these matters. We are not, and if we don't come to our senses and stop denying reality we may discover too late and very painful how unexceptional we really are.

Stephen- Were you in my political science classes as an undergraduate?

The core thread (role of America in world affairs) of your article was daily debated throughout my undergraduate education during the early 80's. I have argued many of your points then and since during the past 25 years.

True study of the circumstances, motivations and realities are essential to fully understand the relationship between nations. America's republic is unique among representative democracies for the mechanisms used to create of governmental structure, the form. Function is quite another animal.

Governments exist to provide structure to society, maintain political boundaries and when viewed as necessary create conflict or war. Our government is no better or worse than any other political structure (government).

The true exceptionalism I believe is the explosion of technology, social & economic thought along with standardization of the manufacturing process brought forth by citizens of our nation. Henry Ford, the Wright Brothers, Washington Carver, Margaret Mead, and Darla Moore to name a few represent a long line of individuals which define the exception spirit of American's who have accomplished great feats for themselves, our nation and the world.

Thanks for your writings Stephen. They are considered, illuminating, and historically rich.

@Douglas Walter

In an incredible outburst of Tea-Party hymnody and fantasy, you *seem* - there's always a problem of decipherment when it comes to religious texts - to be saying that the US has managed the cosmic and celestial act of transcending History altogether and this through the miraculous intervention of Almighty God!

Forgive me for calling you a Rick Perry bedlamite but honestly mate you pray too much! Or read far too much J. R. Tolkein.

Meanwhile back in the benighted vale of tears which is the planet Earth...

From http://www.iwallerstein.com/wp-content/uploads/docs/HARVIR7!.PDF

"As recently as 2003, it was considered absurd to talk of the decline of the United States. Now, however, such a belief has become common currency among theorists, policymakers, and the media. What significantly raised the awareness of this concept was, of course, the fiasco of the United States’ preemptive invasion of Iraq. What is not yet sufficiently appreciated is the precise nature of this decline and when it specifically began.
Most analysts contend that the United States was at its hegemonic apex in the post-1991 era when the world was marked by unipolarity, as contrasted with the bipolar structure that existed during the Cold War. But this notion has reality absolutely backwards. The United States was the sole hegemonic power from 1945 to approximately 1970. Its hegemony has been in decline ever since. The collapse of the Soviet Union was a major blow to US power in the world. And the invasion of Iraq in 2003 transformed the situation from one of slow decline into one of precipitous collapse. By 2007, the United States had lost its credibility not only as the economic and political leader of the world-system, but also as the dominant military power.
Since I am aware that this is not the standard picture either in the media or in scholarly literature, let me spell this out in some detail. I shall divide this account into three periods: 1945-1970, 1970-2001, and 2001 to the present. They correspond to the period of US hegemony, that of slow US decline giving rise to a creeping multipolarity, and that of the precipitate decline and effective multipolarity of the era inaugurated by US President George W. Bush."

See also http://www.iwallerstein.com/wp-content/uploads/docs/MR3.PDF

"I am going to start with two things with which I think nearly all MR
readers will probably agree. One, imperialism is an integral part of the
capitalist world-economy. It is not a special phenomenon. It has always
been there. It always will be there as long as we have a capitalist world economy.
Two, we are experiencing at the moment a particularly aggressive
and egregious form of imperialism, which is now even ready to claim
that it is being imperialist.Now, I ask you to reflect upon that anomaly. How come at the moment we are living through a particularly aggressive and egregious form of imperialism, which for the first time in over a hundred years has been ready to use the words “imperial,” and “imperialism”? Why should they do that? Now, the answer most people give in one word is U.S. strength. And the answer I will give in one word is U.S. weakness."

From http://www.iwallerstein.com/articles/

"Americans may be justly proud of their role in creating and defending Israel..."
You have got to be kidding!

The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed
Online edition - free reading
http://www.controversyofzion.info/

or pick up a new paperback edition from the barnesreview.org

and Israel Did 9/11 - All the Proof in the World
http://theinfounderground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5367

General de Gaulle used to talk about "le génie des peuples"- genius of peoples.
Every poeple on earth as something specific that can be praised proudly. It's not quite easy to describe or qualify this genius, because it is more than just a quality or a way of life, or a state of mind, and all this is part of it at the same time.
There is certainly some very special genius in America, each American can be proud of being a small piece of it, and cheer it and carry on with it.
It's not much but to many there is nothing else.

"A celui qui n'a rien, la patrie est son seul bien" - Jean Jaurès

Whatever truth about the greatness of this country's heritage it has been twisted into the myth of American Exceptionalism just as the spell checker underlines it in red.

It is heartening to know that somebody has been able to be published on this subject.

There is one thing, that you Americans are not exceptional in. And that is in thinking, that you are exceptional.

Most of us Danes have for many years - and despite very clear evidence to th opposite - believed that we lived in a country that was closer to perfection than any other country. Not the richest, not the most powerful - except in an unmeasuralble and indirect way, but faboulous at societal engineering with top notch institutions and state of the art business leaders.

It is changing a little bit - but only in the sense that we find new and smaller things to be enormously proud of. The local media will tell us that the rest of the world is envious of us, because that is what the customers like to hear. Luckily, the rest of the world doesn't notice this.

Mr. Walt makes powerful arguments based on historical perspectives. Certainly our present Administration is willfully moving us in the direction of level parity with the rest of the world -- by purposely dialing back the rhetoric and the reality of America. He is right -- previously, our leaders have believed that we can, and therefore we do.

That's the point -- great athletes, orators, leaders may have superior talents, but what makes them excel is their belief that they can. Welcome immigrants who were ordinary in their previous homeland become exceptional, not because we give them money, not just because we give them freedom, but because they believe that the streets are paved with gold -- and therefore they are. It works with countries too, and as we have seen recently, the opposite is true -- If your leaders tell the world you are no better, if your policies tamp down rewarding exceptional performance in favor of a "safety net", it will be so.

The point that we believe our system is better is true - I think the secret has been the freedom -- To succeed, to excel, to fail. But with a combination of a strong central government stealing the freedoms, and yes constantly telling us we can't, maybe the forces of darkness will win here. And I'm arrogant enough to feel that there are those around the world who will mourn our passing as a beacon, because other nations may economically or militarily triumph, but not offer the individuals the opportunities to share and contribute to that success.

Thank you, Mr. Walt, for echoing our government and helping take all of that belief away. I feel so "equal".

You've got to be kidding! Only NOW you're discovering that America is un-exceptional?
I came here from the then "communist" Eastern Europe in the mid-1970s. When I knew English well-enough to know that I'm supposed to have an American Dream and that America considers herself pretty much a paradise on Earth, I recognized that the former is nothing but a petite bourgeois wet dream all over the world, and the latter is probably some sort of national mental illness. And that was BEFORE I went to college.

You guys are so self-referential, it's pathetic. Yeah, if you're threatened with hunger, or chronic unemployment/poverty, or violence in your Third World country, America is still a good place by comparison. But since the "Reagan Revolution", and perhaps even earlier you've sealed your fate to become a Third World country in a foreseeable future, by your political myopia, the total corruption of your institutions by corporate money, popular anti-intellectualism, extreme and numbingly stupid consumerism, poor secondary public education, and yes, your unreasonable belief in your own exceptionalism that makes you act toward the rest of the world in a way guaranteed to earn you scorn, resentment and hatred.

So there.

The concept that Americans have lead the world in inventions is interesting. Henry Ford - some Americans actually seem to think he invented the car - the "production line" concept existed in Europe manufacturing of many products before Ford was born. The Wright brothers great invention of the curve on the top of the wing for aircraft - first recorded as designed by an Australian who was advised by an American to patent it. His comment was that knowledge was for humanity. The Wright brothers heard about it and quickly patented it. Mind you, I suspect that the Australian got his idea for curve on the wing from another group of people who had been using it for thousands of years - have a look at a boomerang.

Edison invented the light bulb - your kidding. He tried but failed again and again. Some young middle European fellow tried to interest the Germans, then the English, then he heard about Edison and took his invention there. I understand Edison promised to pay him $ 50,000 ( in 1870 a dollar was worth something) if it worked. I understand he refused to pay up and spent many years trying to destroy Tesla. I have heard Edison given the following description " patents 1047 -- inventions 0.

Where did the people who actually made the space programme possible come from? Not America.

The computer invention - there are people who seem to think the concept was an invention of Americans. Did you never hear about the Englishman who devised the system in the late 1800's.

"The land of the free". In the early days what proportion of the population were "bonded servants" (equals white slaves as they could be bought and sold). The African slaves were cheaper and you could keep them for their entire life and their children so they were a better proposition. How many convicts were sent to America by the English? Forget nil - it was a substantial number. I guess those highly religious early settlers didn't understand that they were getting free labour.

I guess America was not the last country to grant women the right to vote but they were a long way from being first. Some state in Australia got carried away with equality about 30 years before America.

Someone commented about the slaughter of the Philippine people who had been trying to get rid of the Spanish for decades. Yes, those idiots were lead to believe that America had come to set them free. Cuba, same deal. We will help you - but unfortunately we will give your land to American companies. I guess America was a bit slow in taking action. I understand that Congress is on record as seeking to kick the Spanish out in about 1830. Yes an exceptional country that does not talk about things but does them - it just took about 66 years to shut the mouth and cock the rifle.

Although it's not totally new to me, it's a pleasure to hear someone revealing the truth inside out to wake up the drosy mass. The argument is tight and well versed as well. Bravo!
The ruthless massive murders happened overseas conducted by the state machine in the past decades are great shame to people who believe in virtues of their own country. It's always shocking though to realize how much contradictory the claims of politicians are to the reality of the politcs in this country. With all the tortures and treacheries dictated by the government and committed by the secret police organizations and the military how could we sleep in a peaceful bliss any more?

First, I applaud Mister Walt for finally creating an article without "I hate Jews!!!" in it...Long time coming...

This in particular article is a great example of the difference between Liberals and Conservatives...

If someone who has never heard of America landed here, ran into a Conservative and said "Tell me about your country.", the Conservative would reply, "This country has some bad things here and there, but let me spend the next 5 hours telling you how good it is."...

If that same person landed here, ran into a Liberal and said "Tell me about your country.", the Liberal would reply, "This country has some good things here and there, but let me spend the next 5 hours telling you how bad it is."...

cnredd
Political Wrinkles
http://politicalwrinkles.com

. . . Lynne Cheney's not gonna like this one bit!

Reading the above comments I learned:

. the liburels are destroying America's exceptionalism because America truly is exceptional because all of the article is wrong and there are no other exceptional nations
. America beat Russia in WW2 because of FREEDOM

No, the reason that America is no longer exceptional, if it ever was, is because it so full of so many closed-minded, self-centered, stupid and dogmatic life forms masquerading as human beings.

All true, unfortunately because we are human we are fallible – fortunately there exists in at least the USA’s [institutional] system(s) the innate ability to ‘check & balance’. It is exactly, because of the ideals this country stands for, the endgame we will achieve, that this country is the winning team. In this country, like most I am sure, there are haters and sore losers…there are teachers and there are doers…the transcendent and empirical. All must pick a team, where do you wish to be and how will you ENABLE; don’t be caustic, disparaging or attempt to destroy.
People… PRODUCE, read, think, practice, achieve, and build, show compassion, help, and save, be industrious and fruitful; because in the USA – like a lot – you can, but know this - there are very few countries that have the resources to actually do this and even less whom will actually empower you to. That gentlemen, IS exceptional.

Great post, Mr. Walt! You are one of the most objective persons I know in the US!

Hans of NinoNatividad.com

While I agree with most of the points made in the article, I think there was one glaring American area of superiority which was ignored. That is in scientific research and development. Not only did this country develop the new sciences, their businessmen worked with inventors to turn the abstract into practical products for everyday people to be able to afford. The list of products which evolved from scientific research is so long and obvious as to sound like bragging. From the airplane to MRI and PET scans, from the light bulb and movies to microwave ovens and personal computers - we truly were and are exceptional. If we shall still continue to be so is up to us through improving public education, investing in startup technologies, increased funding to basic research, improving the health and training of our work force in manufacturing and returning pride once again to what was the global standard of creativity, quality and style in manufactured products - The mark on all our goods saying "Made in the USA".

Robert Allen Schledwitz
Newburyport, MA

Walt presents only straw man accounts of what American Exceptionalism is.

Do you really wish, Professor Walt, to have your audiences mistakenly believe that American discussions about America's unique features are dominated by unsophisticated and nationalistic celebrations of arrogance?

Silly. We need not look far to see that American discussions about America's place in the world are incredibly diverse, deliberative, and often self-critical.

The idea of American Exceptionalism is not moralistic or jingoistic, it is descriptive and self-reflective.

As the contributors to the edited volume “American Exceptionalism” (Michael Ignatieff, edt.) argue, American life is indeed marked by a unique combination of features, including: the strength of the 1st Amendment, a constitution dedicated to protecting the rights of the individual, a lack of economic guarantees, geography, pioneering authorship of human rights principles, the size of the economy, capital punishment, social mobility, etc.

The unique combination of these features makes American Exceptionalism worth contemplating, as we try to better understand the world. Unfortunately, Walt seems to think American Exceptionalism is a dirty word, championed by self-congratulatory jingoists. Rather than advance our understanding, Walt dumbs it down. HE is the one making myths about what we think about when we think about America.

Desmond O'Reilly
Cambridge, MA

Walt presents only straw man accounts of what American Exceptionalism is.

Do you really wish, Professor Walt, to have your audiences mistakenly believe that American discussions about America's unique features are dominated by unsophisticated and nationalistic celebrations of arrogance?

Silly. We need not look far to see that American discussions about America's place in the world are incredibly diverse, deliberative, and often self-critical.

The idea of American Exceptionalism is not moralistic or jingoistic, it is descriptive and self-reflective.

As the contributors to the edited volume “American Exceptionalism” (Michael Ignatieff, edt.) argue, American life is indeed marked by a unique combination of features, including: the strength of the 1st Amendment, a constitution dedicated to protecting the rights of the individual, a lack of economic guarantees, geography, pioneering authorship of human rights principles, the size of the economy, capital punishment, social mobility, etc.

The unique combination of these features makes American Exceptionalism worth contemplating, as we try to better understand the world. Unfortunately, Walt seems to think American Exceptionalism is a dirty word, championed by self-congratulatory jingoists. Rather than advance our understanding, Walt dumbs it down. HE is the one making myths about what we think about when we think about America.

Desmond O'Reilly
Cambridge, MA

I could tell you that American exceptionalism was a pack of BS from the start. Want to explain the BS Native boarding schools? That was a stupid and relatively recent policy that totally messed up a bunch of Indians. I have talked to some that have went through that . It messed them up royally. Don't get me started on Guatemala either. Two hundred thousand (mostly Native Americans, which is technically a very large genocide) killed because the US decided that the UFC's profit margins were more important than actually fostering democracy. I don't buy that what's his face (Dulles) was motivated by anti-communism when he plotted to overthrow Arbenz anyway. Almost all of the important peeps in the Eisenhower government had some sort of connection to the UFC. I am sure the people in Guatemala (and El Salvador, and Honduras, and Nicaragua) really appreciated all the support for death squads. Thanks America. Oh, and the military junta that was in charge of Argentina in the 60s/70s was real nice too. Thanks for supporting a government that tortures so much, United States. What we did supporting the oust of Mossadegh was a sweet policy with almost no blowback, at all. Too, when we supported the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan, to piss off the Soviets, that was a great policy that helped the Afghanis immensely. I mean, purposely inflaming Islamic extremism in a country will never come back to bite you at all. I will, forever, refer to the US as Amerikkka, until convinced otherwise. And no, I don't think China and Russia and whatever-stupid-jerk-country-you-can-name is any better than Amerikkka. Nationalism is hella illogical. I share no common ground with a lot of the jerks that live in this country.

"The United States has made undeniable contributions to peace and stability in the world over the past century, including the Marshall Plan, the creation and management of the Bretton Woods system, its rhetorical support for the core principles of democracy and human rights, and its mostly stabilizing military presence in Europe and the Far East."

Ironically, the Marshall Plan, the Bretton Woods gold scam and the hegemony of fiat currencies in global central banks did more to mold the United States into the usual predictable military empire of old than to promote the exceptionalism we find in the Declaration of Independence. We as U.S. citizens would do well to understand that third world nations can never become self-sufficient and prosper as long as they are captive to credit and its mandatory debt service. And if those third world peoples know that condition, it is their real reason for resentment towards the United States and should be their reason for resentment towards the United Nations (the international body formed to enforce global debt service).

Ever since Wilson's effort to "make the world safe for democracy" U.S. Citizens have been confused about the perils of tyrannies of the majority as opposed to protections of minorities in our exceptional republic. If this author truly wanted to examine U.S. exceptionalism he would examine the entire Declaration of Independence. the limitations placed on federal authority of Article I section 8, the gold and silver coin mandate of Article I section 10 and most of all Article IV section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.

Your comment is an example of how a relatively accurate statement can be totally misleading.
You mentioned history classes “at least at the university level”. My friend, that’s exactly the problem. Most of us do not keep studying history in College and beyond. The problem is with the primary and secondary education where, indisputably, US criminal record is hardly reported accurately, if at all.
American scholars have undertaken the task to expose this problem. Late Howard Zinn did so. However, one of the best works on this topic is “Lies my teacher told me,” by Dr. James W. Loewen. Professor Loewen reviewed all the textbooks used most frequently in American schools and easily came to this conclusion: virtually all history books used from 4th to 12th grade schools massively understate the dark side of the US record.
You’re also completely delusional if you think that university textbooks are that accurate about the US record.
Native Americans and Vietnam offer an excellent example.
Most university books still fail to mention very specific issues of Native Americans’ genocide, as they occurred, for instance, in California. David Stannard and Ward Churchill are among the very few to have done so.
Recently, US scholars writing on one of the most respected publications about genocide in the US, discussed seriously whether native American women, during the notorious Sand Creek massacre, should be regarded as victims or “enemy combatants.”
As to former Indochina, while American casualties in the Vietnam conflict – about 55,000- are quoted obsessively by university textbooks, you rarely find any serious statistics about total Vietnamese casualties, which were in the millions.
You’re also confusing debate with denial.
Mr. Walt describes absolute facts about the US historical record, not speculations.
Yes, in universities and the political arena, they do discuss these issues.
However, they keep discussing them and challenging them even when they are established facts.
The result is of course, that they fail to accept a condemnation of the US for the facts at issue.
Vietnam is again a useful example, but even more are Nicaragua and Guatemala.
The participation of the US in terrorism against civilians – and even genocide – in those areas is an absolutely unquestionable fact. Yet, it is still ferociously challenged both in academia and the political spectrum.
When President Clinton, following the publication of the report from the Guatemalan commission on historical truth, belatedly apologized for the US role in Guatemala, he was immediately assailed by a number of politicians and historians.
Mr. Walt’ piece is right on spot. On all counts.

@JGARBUZ

Let us abolish the “liberal” college education because it is “unpatriotic” and counter-productive to our national policy of self-deception???!!

How does that fit in with your FREEDOM theory?

Is what made America exceptional. Now that they have what is called collectivism, that great nation will fall. No question about it.

- Vince

The problem we have is that thanks to the constant drumbeats of Fox and the conservatives, anyone who is less than mindlessly worshipful of American exceptional is branded a gay commie traitor who probably wants to impose sharia law, destroy capitalism, and shut down talk radio. All our difficulties are externalized; our seslichat economic turmoils are due to creeping socialism, everyone hates us because we're just so much better than them that they just can't stand it, and we're God's redoubt whose beneficence we bestow out of the pure goodness of our hearts. Anyone disagreeing with this is likely to catch a Hellfire missile through their front door.

What I truly admire about my American friends is their work ethic, strong individuality, self-reliance, resiliency, honesty and pioneering spirit. Having superiority complex and a sense of being exceptional can definitely inflate one’s self-importance. True American pride is way different from blind/emotional patriotism, idiotic jingoism and acting like the “world police”. But the US govt “needs” to perform these war crimes (Latin America, Africa, Muslim world, etc) for economic and political power. That’s a fact.

Much love folks,
Lisa O.

Becoming an American citizen I am very dishearten with the abundance of divisive messages coming initially from from Washington, Electricity and mainstream media. Despite themuscle building tipsfact that many People in america are suffering chosen authorities seem to put additional time and effort in demeaning one another plans than choosing solutions.

I am a lot more disheartened through the amount of People in America who sign up for these divisive ideologies. People are getting increasingly divided having a political landscape ofhow to build musclehands-selected issues that pit one segment in the population against another. The worst part, these issues aren't probably the most critical for the country generally. Understand that this is not a anxiety attack on all chosen authorities because some work very hard round the individuals account.

The media's hands are merely as dirty. Some persona are generating a lot of cash to amplify thevisual impact muscle buildingdivisiveness. Note the quantity of news and talk radio suggests that go out their approach to polarize any perspective they disagree with.

American exceptionalism is not a myth....it is a reality. It is based in racism, and it has been brainwashed into Americans from day one of their takeover of the North American indigenous lands and the haine deaths of millions of its people.

One thing I hate about American exceptionalism, is that American presidents can whine and bitch about condemning and demonizing Arab leaders like Saddam Hussein and Mommar Gaddafi and branding them "War criminals" while Reagan, Clinton, the Bushes and Obama, who otherwise are TECHNICALLY war criminals themselves, are not viewed as such by the mainstream media and American public opinion. Only in America's point of view that the free term "war criminal" only applies to America's enemies, but not to their own leaders.
This is all-out hypocrisy from minute one.