The Cowboy Mentality

We have all seen it, that one fateful part in the movie when the good guy, sheriff, vigilante whatever you want to call him, rides into a lawless town to straighten it out anyway he can. This is not just limited to movies and books though, this mentality also extends to governments. When this happens it is called a frontier or cowboy rhetoric. This “bring em on” state of being is not always the best especially in volatile situations and I hate to say it but the United States has been guilty of this a lot in the passed and even now especially when it comes to using our military.

I believe the United States took on this mentality during the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt. Even his famous quote “Speak softly and carry a big stick”, which basically means  try not to offend anyone but be ready cause you probably will, reflects this. He added the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine that basically asserted “a right of the United States to intervene to "stabilize" the economic affairs of small states in the Caribbean and Central America if they were unable to pay their international debts.”(wikipedia) In other words the United States could intervene in the politics of any Latin American country that we wished to. Roosevelt reinforced this by creating the Great White Fleet towards the end of his presidency. This was a fleet of sixteen battleships separated into four squadrons along with many other

escort ships.  The purpose of this large fleet of white battleships, hence the name the Great white

Fleet, was to have it sail around the world and basically show off the military might of the United States' navy power. He even used the fleet to intimidate and blockade Columbian forces to stop them from putting down the Panama revolt so that we would be able to build, and control, the Panama canal. In this the united states “bring it on” style of handling foreign affairs actually worked.

Another excellent example of the cavalier mentality the states seem to have been slipping into was during the cold war when the Truman doctrine was introduced to counter the spread of communism in Europe. Also know as containment the belief was that a domino effect would occur if communism spread beyond the borders of the Soviet Union. The Marshal Plan reinforced this idea and worked brilliantly with Italy and Greece providing them money and political support to the two countries when threatened by communism. These two countries were not only allies but had strategic value to them since they basically control the sea lanes to the Mediterranean.  Now sadly they took a wrong turn when it came to Vietnam and Korea, especially in Vietnam. Frightened over the loss of China to communism and the detention of a Soviet nuclear bomb. Instead of continuing to support the two countries with financial and political support we just sent in the troops. There was some success in Korea, more of a stalemate than an actual victory, but we did stop communism from consuming the entire country. Vietnam however was a disaster. At first sending in the troops turned out to be a resounding success beating back the north Vietnamese until the had almost driven them out of the country. Then came china giving its support to the Vietcong, and Russia's through them, which returned the fighting to the stalemate along the middle of the country. From then on we became mired in a  

conflict that lasted for twenty years. More bombs were dropped on Vietnam by the United States

then all the bombs dropped by every country that was involved in World War II combined. Which according to Zfacts equates to about six million and seven hundred and twenty-seven thousand and eighty-four tons of high explosives. Not to mention the over one hundred billion dollars we spent on that war and the 60,000 American lives that were lost as well, you don't wanna hear what it cost the Vietnamese. In this case I would say the sheriff was run out of town on his horse.

Now I didn't really want to talk about this next one seeing as it the most obvious next choice for this topic. The Iraqi war. Well actually its not so much the war, its more how President George w. Bush talked about the war. Now I give the last President a little lenience on this because well at the time I totally agreed with him. As we all know Bush wasn’t the best speaker in the world. But in this case I think we can forgive him. It was a week after the 9/11 attacks and according to The Atlantic news "I want justice," Bush said at the Pentagon on September 17, 2001. "And there's an old poster out West that I recall that said, 'Wanted—dead or alive.' “ He also said "There are some who feel like the conditions are such that they can attack us there," the president said. "My answer is, Bring 'em on".(The Atlantic) Now the president apologized about this in his next term for not being the most political statement of all time. This is by far the best example I have ever seen of a politician using Cowboy Rhetoric.

All in all though I know I have been rambling a lot about all these different facts and people and places, I may not have even gotten my point across. So let me just say it out bluntly her in the conclusion and defy all the laws or writing. Sometimes we, The United states as a whole, tend to be a little more cavalier in policing the world then maybe we ought to be. To often we go for the big stick than try to settle things with soft words.

--Parker Thomas