> But the last few wars were not started because somebody made the mistake of messing with us. More often, we messed with somebody else. We haven't done too well in wars that we started.

Assuming you count Vietnam (which we didn't exactly start), we've done OK in wars we started. Just recently, we handily won in Grenada, Panama, Kuwait and Serbia (whether or not some of those are wars is debatable, but whatever). This notion of America as a peaceful power that only responds when attacked is pretty much an American myth to make us feel good about ourselves.

I can think of several instances in which we got into wars despite the country not posing any real threat to us, and in which we won.

In the Spanish-American War we took over the Spanish colonies in our hemisphere after finding some incredibly shaky pretenses to fight; we also fought a protacted war in the Philippines, which we won, as part of the aftermath. The Mexican-American War was largely a land grab, and who started hostilities is debatable. We also fought countless battles against American Indian nations largely over land, and we ultimately came out on top. Throughout the 19th and early 20th Century American forces fought a whole lot in the Western hemisphere, often simply to promote U.S. economic interests.

There are some other instances, such as the War of 1812, where we pretty much got a draw (and is anyone convinced there was a really compelling reason to go to war then?).

Frankly, I think our real problem is not war but what to do afterwards. OK, we have the Philippines -- now what?

Stephen