Imperium USA: Die skrupellose Weltmacht

by Daniele Ganser

Viele betrachten die USA als die größte Gefahr für den Weltfrieden. Woran liegt das? Ein Buch über Hintergründe, Motive und Mittel der Weltmacht USA.

Nach Ansicht vieler haben die USA den stärksten destabilisierenden Einfluss auf das Weltgeschehen und stellen somit die größte Bedrohung für den Weltfrieden dar (Allensbach 2019, Gallup International 2019). Diese traurige Spitzenstellung hat sich die Weltmacht Nr. 1 nicht von ungefähr erworben. Keine andere Nation hat seit 1945 so viele andere Länder bombardiert und so viele Regierungen gestürzt wie die USA. Sie unterhalten die meisten Militärstützpunkte, exportieren die meisten Waffen und haben den höchsten Rüstungsetat der Welt.

Daniele Ganser beschreibt eindrücklich, wie die USA Weltmachtpolitik betreiben, in der Gewalt ein zentrales Element darstellt

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, Conspiracy Theories, Audiobook

392 pages, Hardcover

First published April 24, 2020

About the author

Daniele Ganser (born August 29, 1972 in Lugano) is a Swiss historian, author, 9/11 truther and Peak Oil lecturer. He is best known for his 2005 book NATO's Secret Armies, an adaption of his 2001 dissertation.

Daniele Ganser was Senior Researcher at the ETH Zurich, Center for Security Studies (CSS). He was president (2006-2012) of the Swiss branch of the "Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas" (ASPO), and taught a course (2012-2017) titled History and Future of Energy Systems at the University of St. Gallen.

Ganser has written books about the presumed NATO stay-behind network Gladio, the Swiss policy of refusing to integrate with the EU, the Cuban missile crisis and the Peak Oil theory.

He was president of the Swiss branch of the "Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas" (ASPO) and teaches History and Future of Energy Systems at the University of St. Gallen.

He questions the accuracy of the 9/11 Commission Report.

Reviews

[Randall Wallace · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pugilist Nation: Jimmy Carter told a church service that in its “242-year existence as a nation”, the United States was NOT at war for only 16 years. A 2013 Gallup poll found that 24% of the world’s population considered “the US to be the greatest threat to world peace.” Arnold Toynbee said back in 1971, “I think to most Europeans, America currently appears to be the most dangerous country in the world.” “Since 1945, no other country has waged as many covert wars as the US and no other nation in the world maintains military bases in so many countries often despite the disapproval of local citizens.”

Here’s an incomplete list of countries where the US has illegally used force: Greece 1946, Korea 1950, Iran 1953, Guatemala 1954, Congo 1961, Cuba 1961, Vietnam 1964, Indonesia 1965, Cambodia 1969, Laos 1970, Chile 1973, Nicaragua 1981, Grenada 1983, Libya 1986, Panama 1989, Kuwait 1991, Sudan 1998, Serbia 1999, Afghanistan 2001, Pakistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Serbia 2014, and Ukraine 2014.

Weapons R Us: When Eisenhower was President, the Pentagon budget was $50 billion, by the end of the Vietnam War it was $100 billion, under Reagan it became $200 billion. By 1986 it was $300 billion, by 2003, it reached $400 billion, by 2007 it reached $600 billion. Trump increased it to $716 billion which now makes it almost $2 billion per day to make the US less safe. Fear mongering is good business. Each US state gets a $ piece of the violence pie, “members of Congress only vote for new defense programs if their constituency receives orders.” The largest arms manufacturer is Lockheed Martin which sold $45 billion in 2017.

Dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was intentionally dropping bombs on civilians. “There are currently about 14,000 nuclear bombs in the world” – Russia and the US have more than 6,000 each while Israel has plenty but must deny it in order to get US funds. Pentagon data shows the US has more than 4,000 military bases just in the US and 194 just in Germany, and 4,500 worldwide. A century ago, you measured imperialism by counting colonies – now you count US military bases. “The United States has more than 200,000 US soldiers stationed at various military bases all over the world.” The fall of the Soviet Union changed nothing with US bases, we just said we needed them to fight terrorism. This is permanent because “in principle, terrorists can be anywhere and strike anywhere, at any time.” Note that “none of the 4,000 military bases in the US did anything at all to prevent the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.” German taxpayers have to cough up $1 billion per year to pay for US bases in Germany. Explain that one. US has Japanese bases first and foremost to be able to threaten China.

The superrich in the US amounts to about 300,000 people who basically “rule the nation”. Their wealth is used to control politics and the media. The superrich invest in whatever generates the most profit like farmland, oil, real estate, information technology, genetic engineering, war industries and tobacco. Meanwhile, a much larger group, 12% of the US population, receives food stamps while one third of the US population has “little to no savings.” “These people would not be able to pay for emergency costs of $400.” This is why the superrich hated/hate the New Deal – because it dared help the little guy and the superrich want “human beings, social institutions, even nature itself …to be cannibalized for personal gain.” If you are born poor – expect to die poor “social mobility in the US is far lower than it is in Europe.” Jimmy Carter calls the US an oligarchy and said, “political bribery decides who is nominated as a presidential candidate and who is elected president.” A 2014 Princeton University study also called the US an oligarchy. Others call the US a plutocracy – it is ruled by the rich. This is all why US politics ignores the wishes of the lower and middle classes – thus it ignores the majority of Americans.

History: Portugal and Spain sign the treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 to divide up the world and its inhabitants between them. The Portuguese took Brazil in the Americas, Goa in Western India, Malacca (south of Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia and north of Singapore). The British conquer New Amsterdam in 1664 and change the name to New York. John Calvin preached to Calvinists that one could (through ignoring the teachings of Christ) achieve divine grace through economic success. By 1760, the British colonies here had over 2,000,000 people, including 400,000 black slaves. Travelling from Europe to New York then (only option was sailing) “could take up to twelve weeks if the wind was not optimal, while even in ideal conditions it took seven weeks at sea.” Bear in mind that those that fought the British in our Revolutionary War, “the patriots could be called ‘terrorists’ because they were violent, did not shy away from murder, and were (like the Palestinians today) pursuing a political objective, namely the withdrawal of British soldiers from the thirteen colonies.” Today they are called freedom fighters. If you really are a freedom fighter but not paying the US or Israel enough in bribes to earn that appellation, you are a terrorist. Those whose necks lie pinned under your (or an ally’s) boots are all terrorists. What won our Revolutionary War was the French finally taking our side. Think of the Louisiana Purchase as “the largest land deal in history.” We bought Alaska for $7 million. After the Wounded Knee Massacre, where the US gunned down 150 to 350 Sioux in cold blood, the officer in charge was promoted to major general. That ended the American Indian Wars and armed resistance. As with the Palestinians today, it was easy to kill Native Americans back then “because they were not considered part of the human family.” As the South Pacific song goes, “You Have to be Carefully Taught”. Yes, Native tribes fought each other sometimes, but NEVER to extinction – there was always a wise old native leader saying, “But, we are all part of the human family.”

Tobacco plantations in the South would not have been profitable w/o slave labor – the motivation was “the selfish pursuit of profit without regard for the lives of others” and “the labor of many to make a few rich and powerful.” A self-appointed job of the US (think Philippines, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam) has been “occupying countries and telling the people there how to live.” The battleship USS Maine blew up internally – Spain wasn’t involved in the explosion, yet that became the fake reason for the Spanish-American War. In a rare moment where a US president felt shame, President Grover Cleveland said the overthrow of Hawaii was wrong and a disgrace saying, “a substantial wrong has been committed.” Hawaii’s queen was tried for treason and imprisoned by the coup’s plotters.

World War One: After WWI, Britain owed the US $4.7 billion – during the same period the US loaned Germany $27 million – which country do you think the US wanted to win? Senator Nye simply called WWI a war for “profit for the few.” DuPont profit during WWI alone rose to ten times normal. Bethlehem Steel went from $6 million to $49 million per year. JP Morgan alone lent Britain over $4 billion. All these loans were loans to be repaid with interest. A German victory would have meant the “implosion of Wall Street.” The US bitched about the sinking of the Lusitania by the Germans, but the truth was that the US actually was using it to transport war supplies to Britain – disguised as hunting ammo was over a thousand grenades, almost 5,000 boxes of rifle cartridges, etc… And Wilson, with foreknowledge refused to tell the American public after being alerted to the disguised munitions carrier by his Secretary of State. The US, to defend war profiteers, had to deploy two million US soldiers. All journalists critical of the war were defamed and labeled a traitor. The Espionage Act of 1917 intentionally targeted pacifists – a good thing Jesus wasn’t still alive making speeches about non-violence at the time, he would have been bending over for someone named Bubba nightly in jail. WWI favored the Germans until the US joined. At WWI’s end, Germany had to give up its colonies and ten percent of its national territory. A German general said, if the US didn’t enter WWI, Hitler couldn’t have come to power because no onerous Treaty of Versailles – therefore no WWII. Interesting thought, right? Also interesting is that in 2010, Germany paid its last installment of its WWI debt. That payment was 200 million Euros.

World War Two: Poland lost 6,000,000. Historians believe the Reichstag fire was a Nazi false flag operation that allowed Hitler’s abolishment of free speech, free press, and right to assembly in Germany. Before Pearl Harbor, the US was supplying Hitler and Mussolini with crude oil. So much for the US war against fascism. IG Farben otherwise had to get oil through a process turning each five tons of coal into one ton of gasoline. The US provided 12% of Hitler’s oil needs. “Those who fought against the USA did not have enough oil and lost.” “Freeburg and Goralski proved that the USA was Adolf Hitler’s most important oil supplier.” Even after Germany’s attack on Poland on September 1, 1939, starting WWII, FDR kept supplying Germany with oil. This then allowed the Nazi occupation of Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg, and France. Imagine learning any of this on TV or at school. In 1931, the Japanese blew up their own railroad in Manchuria and blamed it on the Chinese “to sell the Japanese public on expanding their military into mainland China.”

Pearl Harbor: the US (FDR and his closest associates) knew the attack was going to happen and “deliberately provoked it by halting all oil deliveries to Japan” four months before Pearl Harbor. In August 1941 there were two Japanese oil tankers docked at Los Angeles waiting for oil that would never come – they left in November. A Japanese admiral said, “If there is no oil supply, battleships and other warships are nothing but scarecrows.” In 1940, there was an “Eight Action memo” by Arthur McCollum saying exactly how to “provoke Japan into attacking the United States.” It was known that the American people and Congress had to be shocked to mobilize for the war. FDR actually violated international law by sending naval task forces into Japanese territorial waters twice in 1941 to provoke the Japanese. The Japanese diplomatically protested. In July 1941, JP Morgan and other US banks froze all Japanese assets, cutting off their money, fuel and trade. FDR insisted on moving the Pacific fleet from the West Coast to Hawaii even though the men wanted to be near their families. When Admiral Richardson refused to lie and say the move was his idea, he was stripped of command. Churchill needed the US in the pacific war to protect British imperial assets like Singapore. In October 1941, General Tojo takes over in Japan and plans to attack the US Pacific Fleet before Japan ran out of oil, and to get oil from seizing it in the Dutch East Indies. The US cracked the Japanese codes and all radio operators and cryptanalysts were sworn to secrecy.

In 1941, Japan had ten aircraft carriers while the US only had seven. The US removed all its best ships from Pearl Harbor on November 28th and December 5th, 1941 leaving only “old warships that were left over from WWI.” On December 7th, the Japanese attack both the Philippines and Pearl Harbor. No one had bombed the US before. FDR in his post-Pearl Harbor address didn’t mention the attack on the Philippines because that would remind the American people that the US was also an invader and colonizer. The address also was important because many Americans had to then rush to their dictionaries to find out what “infamy” meant. Congress was kept in the dark about the US decrypting Japanese radio transmissions and Congresswoman Rankin who voted against going to war was called a “whore”, an “aide to Hitler”, an “old hag” and a “traitor.” She told her supporters, “I have nothing left but my integrity.” She knew FDR had given Japan no alternative and had deliberately blocked their oil supply. Even the New York Times recognized later (p. 129) how the US had shamelessly kept decoded radio transmissions from reaching commanders in Hawaii.

War Criminals R Us: Did you know that the US dropped napalm on Tokyo and other Japanese cities? Burning Tokyo killed 80,000 to 120,000 people in one night, which Daniel Ellsberg called “the largest one-day act of terrorism in human history.” Because killing civilians is a war crime, General Curtis LeMay said, “If we lost the war, we would have all been tried as war criminals.” McNamara added, “he acted like a war criminal – just like I did.” Author John Steinbeck later wrote, “We were a propaganda arm of our governments.” After WWII, Admiral Leahy said, “It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.” No single person in history killed more civilians so quickly in history than Truman, not even Hitler.

Rommel was stopped in North Africa by cutting off his oil supplies. Rommel later said, “The British struck the part of our mechanism on which the functioning of everything else depended.” One mystery is why Churchill and FDR didn’t do the obvious, and then cut off the Nazi’s Eastern Front oil supply. That would have shortened WWII dramatically, but the US and Britain preferred to betray the Soviet Union. Note that three quarters of Germany’s entire losses died on the Eastern Front, so it is fantasyland that the US alone won WWII. The US intervened only when Hitler was in retreat (p.136).

Fun Facts: If the US hated Hitler so much, why was the US supplying Germany with 12,000 barrels of oil daily in 1944? WWII only began its end when the Germans lost the Battle of Stalingrad and Churchill and FDR quickly realized if Stalin reached Germany first, it would be under the control of Moscow. This is the reason why the US finally got off its ass and opened the Second Front and landed in Normandy, France. After WWII, the UN [Article 2(4) in the UN Charter] banned the use of force and so the US switched over to covert warfare (Italy, Greece, Iran, Guatemala, etc…). The US President’s job became to lie to the American people, by denying any involvement. Ralph McGehee who worked for the CIA said, “The CIA conducts covert operations on behalf of the President.” Italy was the CIA’s first victim in 1948 thanks to a hack pianist named Harry Truman. But Truman also did a good thing – he didn’t want an illegal coup in Iran against Mossadegh, whereas Eisenhower gave Allen Dulles orders to carry it out. Eisenhower wrote in his diary, “The things we did were covert. If they were made public, we would not only have been embarrassed…but our chances of doing anything similar in the future would almost have vanished into thin air.” Then the CIA takes out Guatemala’s democratically elected leader in 1954 for daring to parcel out uncultivated land (owned by United Fruit) to peasants. He paid United Fruit the exact amount they had declared the land was worth for tax purposes. The CIA director was a shareholder in United Fruit as was his brother (who was Secretary of State) and the CIA kicked out Arbenz and returned all the land and killed off land reform – Gee, I wonder if that was a conflict of interest for the Dulles brothers? On a covert roll, Eisenhower then wanted Lumumba of the Congo gone – caring more for his own people than US investors? That act of fairness had to end! Under CIA coordination, “Lumumba’s body was dissolved in battery acid” and he was replaced by the Mobutu dictatorship under the name of Zaire which lasted more than thirty years. Pause to wave the American flag.

In 1975, the US Senate released the 350-page Church report exposing “the CIA’s assassination efforts.” Church dared to say, “democracy depends on a well-informed electorate”. For those who still care, supporting coups is illegal. LBJ in 1967 gave the order to kill Che Guevara; the Green berets teamed up with Bolivian soldiers and captured Che, interrogated him and shot him. “The CIA cut off Guevara’s hands from his lifeless body and sent them to Washington to verify the revolutionary’s identity.” I’m surprised those hands aren’t in a Smithsonian exhibit today. In 1961 the CIA set up “an assassination division” comically called “Executive Action” - and I thought Executive Action meant when Monica blew Bill at the White House. “The CIA also asked the Mafia to kill Castro.” “Later, the CIA prepared a diving suit that they laced with a drug that would produce a chronic skin disease and a breathing apparatus poisoned with tubercle bacilli to be given to Castro as a gift.” How dare Castro remove the Mafia from Cuba when he took power – thank God the CIA was clearly in bed with the Mafia – what could go wrong with that? James Angleton who worked for the CIA said, “You know the CIA got tens of thousands of brave people killed” – which makes the CIA indistinguishable from a terrorist organization.

JFK Assassination: JFK had the power to stop the Bay of Pigs but he didn’t (p.155). The author (and journalist David Talbot) believes that after JFK fired Dulles, Dulles had JFK assassinated because JFK had thus turned on the CIA and Dulles was “ruthless” and knew a long list of hitmen. The Secret Service did a shoddy job protecting JFK on his final day and did not secure the route (roofs and windows) and in fact changed the route so that the motorcade was going under 10 miles per hour, thus making him an easy target. There was no careful autopsy done, and his body was “forcibly taken away.” Instead, “high-ranking military officials” directed the autopsy. “The power elite knew that imperial policies were much more implementable with Johnson, and he did not disappoint the power elite.” Only if one person killed JFK was it NOT a conspiracy because one person cannot conspire with himself. Funny how the Dallas police questioned Oswald “for twelve hours without running a tape or having a stenographer present.” The author calls this not sloppiness but a “deliberate covering up of the defendant’s statements.” Oswald’s nitrate test showed he had NOT fired a gun in the past 24 hours. “Therefore, Oswald could not be the killer.” The negative nitrate test stayed secret from the media for ten months. Review continues in comment section...

[Sabine · Rating 5 out of 5]

ein must-read! D. Ganser schreibt sachlich, klar und vermittelt die Fakten ohne manipulierende 'Gefühlssoße'. Und die Fülle an Fakten ist beeindruckend bis beklemmend.
In einem Interview sagte er, dass einer der Gründe, warum er über die USA schreibt, ist, dass er (u.a.) englisch spricht und er deswegen die Originaldokumente lesen kann.
Schade, dass er nicht auch chinesisch und russisch spricht - die Bücher wären sicher auch grandios.

[Maximilian Reiner · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wichtige und informative Einblicke und Denkanstöße auf die Geschichte der USA.

[Littlenightowl · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eigentlich ein must-read für Menschen, die wie Papageien alles ihren Lieblingspolitikern oder ihren Mitmenschen nachplappern ohne wirklich zu verstehen, was wirklich auf der Welt läuft. Jene Menschen, die Daniele Ganser als Verschwörungstheoretiker abtun, können mir nur leid tun.

Unbedingt lesen.

[Andrea Athos · Rating 5 out of 5]

MUST READ!

[JoséMaría BlancoWhite · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very disappointing. As a high school paper, it may pass. The ignorant masses may get a first glimpse at geopolitical issues that don't agree with mainstream in the West. But the book speaks volumes of the deplorable state of Western academia. If this guy teaches college courses, God help us, even if it were true that AOC was courageous (Lord Almighty!).

[Mephistopheles · Rating 3 out of 5]

Schwieriges Buch. Das Negative zuerst:
Der Schreibstil gefällt mir nicht gut, er wirkt teilweise etwas plump und wie der Schreibstil eines Schulkindes. Ich persönlich mag es überhaupt nicht, wenn Autoren oder Redner bestimmte Phrasen mehrmals hintereinander wiederholen um eindrücklich zu wirken ("... ist ein Verbrechen an ..., ... ist ein Verbrechen an ... und auch ... ist ein Verbrechen an ...!" - falls verständlich ist, was ich meine). Oft gefallen mir Wertungen von Aussagen nicht. ("... analysierte sie klug." oder "... sagte er weise voraus." - darf ich nicht selber entscheiden, ob ihre Analyse klug ist oder seine Voraussagung weise..?)

Inhaltlich wirds dann aber interessant: Fast jeder Absatz ist auf jeden Fall einmal mit Quellenangaben versehen, dies spricht schon einmal für eine sorgfältige Recherche. Allerdings: Tatsächlich empfiehlt der Autor, vor allem gegen Ende, alternative Quellen - so zB die "Russia Today" oder andere russisch beeinflusste Medien (!). Diese Empfehlungen sind nicht gut gealtert, man muss allerdings sagen, dass sich das Maß der anti-westlichen Propaganda wahrscheinlich kriegsbedingt verschärft und gemehrt hat, der grundsätzlich Tenor muss allerdings schon vor Eintritt in den Ukraine Krieg vorgeherrscht haben (also auch zum Zeitpunkt des Verfassens des Buches) - selbst da muss man sich fragen: Wie konnte man schon da diese Quellen als seriös ansehen..? Schon damals muss der Einfluss russischer Politik(er) und Oligarchen bestanden haben!

Aber: Ganz klar, so sehr man die Theorien abstempeln möchte als Verschwörungstheorien - die USA hat nachweislich definitiv viel Dreck am Stecken; zahlreiche Lügen sind der Regierung nicht nur nachgewiesen worden, sie sind auch tlw. von der Regierung selber bestätigt! Ganz abgesehen von den zahlreichen Aufdeckungen investigativer Journalisten. Grundsätzlich gibt es schon sehr viele Hinweise auf die kriminellen Machenschaften des Westens (und der USA im Speziellen), so zB die leider wenig beachteten Dokumentationen "We feed the World" oder "Let's Make Money", die Globalisierungskritik von Noam Chomsky oder die hervorragenden Bücher Jean Zieglers über den de facto modernen Kolonialismus. Sind die anderen Theorien dann wirklich so unglaublich abwegig..? In dieses Gesamtbild eingefügt wirken die Theorien dann gar nicht mehr so unvorstellbar... Ich kann mir gut vorstellen, dass die im Buch angeführten Theorien mehr als nur stimmen.

Definitiv aber sollte man sämtliche Information - jene im Buch als auch jene, die uns die Medien vorkauen, da sie ganz klar einem spezifischen Narrativ folgen - mit Vorsicht genießen. Und vor allem sollte man tatsächlich ein wachsames Auge auf den geschürten Hass werfen, denn tatsächlich beherrschen die reichsten Oligarchen der Welt Wirtschaft und Politik - und damit auch Medienwelt und Meinungsmache...
(Und nur zur Klarstellung: Dass Impfungen einen Mikrochip zur Überwachung durch Bill Gates enthalten, glaube ich selbstverständlich nicht... ;) )

[Bernd Schnabl · Rating 1 out of 5]

Leider nur Verschwörungstheorien und verbrämter Unsinn.

[Uwe · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interessante Lektüre für alle die mit wachen Verstand sich mit Politik und Verschwörungstheorien auseinandersetzen. Leider schießt der Autor hier über das Ziel hinaus und bewertet durch m.E. teilweise manipulative Sprache, die es dem Leser schwer macht zwischen persönlicher Meinung und unumstösigen Tatsachen zu unterscheiden, Fakten, Personen und Ereignisse tendenziös.
Das Bild des von Ganser gezeichneten Imperialisten USA wird stets bestätigt. Hierfür werden teilweise widersprüchliche Aussagen herangezogen. Mir hat ganz besonders widerstrebt einerseits die Öllieferungen der USA an Nazideutschland(m.E. zurecht) zu kritisieren und andererseits auch das darauf folgende Ölembargo der USA gegen das mit Nazideutschland verbündete Japan da dieses Embargo wiederum den Schlag gegen Pearl Harbor provoziert habe. Für mich interessante Geschichtsstunde mit neuen mir teils unbekannten Zusammenhängen und Deutungsmöglichkeiten. Auf Dauer jedoch sehr eintönig und vom Tenor her zu einseitig.

[Bryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

very good introduction for people have not been digging into deep politics, if you enjoyed this book i would highly recommend checking out much of the source material. not super happy about the anti-china stuff, ganser seems to be simply repeating us propaganda about china. the claim that if the us federal reserve raises interest rates the chinese economy would collapse is especially laughable reading this in june 2023

[Jacob Huisman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Een eyeopener! Zonder deze schrijver gelijk te geven is het sowieso goed om de compleet andere kant van Amerika te lezen dan dat we dagelijks via de media voorgeschoteld krijgen. Overigens is het boek zeer uitgebreid van bronnen voorzien die er niet om liegen. Absolute aanrader zeker in deze tijd van hernieuwde oorlogshitsing 😳

[Johann · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dieses Sachbuch von D. Ganser, in welchem er den Aufstieg der USA zur Weltmacht beschreibt, beginnt sehr spannend und interessant. Daniele Ganser versucht anhand von Dokumenten aus der jeweiligen Zeit seine Sichtweise zu legitimieren. Anfangs, insbesondere bis hin zum 2. Weltkrieg ist die ganze Story nachvollziehbar. Auch das Vorgehen der USA gegenüber Korea, Japan und auch dem Vietnam von damals scheint für einen Laien plausibel. ABER je länger diese Abhandlung andauert, und bis zum Syrienkonflikt betrachtet wird, desto mehr lebt diese Darstellung von Wiederholungen und immer wieder kehrenden Mahnungen, sodass es zum Schluss hin schwierig wird, nicht an Verschwörungstheorien etc... zu glauben. Für mich driftet D. Ganser zu sehr von den Tatsachen ab, vor allem in der jüngeren Geschichte. Hier fehlt es an glaubwürdigen Beweisen und es geht viel mehr nur mehr um seine "Friedensmission".

[Simona Bergamini · Rating 4 out of 5]

Libro che riassume a grandi linee la storia della politica imperialista americana. Per me è stato molto utile per avere un quadro generale degli avvenimenti, un buon punto di partenza per poi eventualmente approfondire. A mio avviso ha svolto il suo compito didascalico.
La scrittura lascia un pochino a desiderare, non so se la colpa è della traduzione italiana, ma l'ho trovata elementare e spesso ripetitiva, con anche qualche errore sintattico.
Non è un saggio critico, non si sofferma sugli eventi per analizzarli; semplicemente descrive in maniera generale la potenza militare americana negli anni.
Lo consiglio a chi vuole avvicinarsi al tema e a chi non cerca una lettura pesante e troppo dettagliata.

[schrödinger’s cat · Rating 2 out of 5]

کتاب در جاهای مختلفی روایت یک طرفه ارائه میده و تئوری توطئه‌هایی که علیه آمریکا گفته میشه رو میپذیره. همچنین بارها از مغلطه‌ی مسموم کردن سرچشمه استفاده میکنه در نام بردن از کسانی که نظر متفاوت با نویسنده دارند.
اما این کتاب رویکرد کاملا متفاوتی با رسانه های غربی داره و میتونه نقطه نظر جدیدی به مخاطب بده نسبت به مسائل سیاسی و اقتصادی که در جهان و غرب میگذره.
با توجه به اینکه در ایران هستیم نگاه کتاب تا حد زیادی برامون آشناست.
با همه‌ی این‌ها از نشر آزادنامگان بسیار ممنونم که این کتاب را ترجمه کرد. تجربه متفاوتی بود نسبت به دیگر ترجمه‌های این نشر

[Karl Gilhespy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Der Schweizer Historiker berichtet anhand von diversen Fakten inwiefern die USA das gefährlichste Imperium der Welt ist: 750 Militärbasen weltweit, 11 Flugzeugträger, Nuklearwaffen in unzähligen Ländern stationiert, usw. usw. Ihre Außenpolitik seit dem Anfang des 20.Jhrs. braucht hier nicht näher erläutert zu werden, allgemein bekannt sind die vielen Invasionen, Kriege, Putschversuche, usw.
Ein informatives, tolles Buch.

[marlies · Rating 5 out of 5]

Aufschlussreich und augenöffnend! Durch die alternative Sichtweise stehen geschichtliche Ereignisse plötzlich in einem ganz anderen Licht und man hinterfragt die verschiedenen geopolitischen Interessen.

[دانیال بهزادی · Rating 3 out of 5]

خیلی وقت پیش تمومش کردم. حرف‌های منطقی‌ای داشت و البته بیش‌ترش چیزهایی بود که همه می‌دونن. شاید من مخاطب این کتاب نبودم

[Vicky Schirmer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book left me with a lot of feelings. Flabbergasted and appalled were some of them. This book should be a must read in schools

[Janny · Rating 3 out of 5]

Onthullend en verbijsterend

[Max · Rating 3 out of 5]

- unconventional perspective but slightly repetitive

[Ratheesh · Rating 1 out of 5]

The author manipulates facts to fit into his propaganda. He also choses to ignore simultaneous facts associated with his explanation of incidents. The question is why?

[Anna Küng · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sehr wichtiges Buch um aussenpolitische Zusammenhänge und das aktuelle Weltgeschehen zu verstehen.

[Thomass17 · Rating 4 out of 5]

HB 15h 29min Internet

[Matej Mehmedhajic · Rating 5 out of 5]

Daniele Ganser's work, as described, undertakes a rigorously critical analysis of the U.S. government's foreign policies, military interventions, and the broader implications of its global military-industrial complex. The essence of Ganser's argument is a courageous venture into the less discussed realms of U.S. geopolitical strategies and their consequences on world peace and stability. His approach not only challenges the conventional narratives upheld by mainstream media but also invites readers to reevaluate the historical and ongoing impacts of American foreign policy from a perspective that is often sidelined in public discourse.

Through meticulous research and a commitment to uncovering uncomfortable truths, Ganser sheds light on the darker facets of the U.S. national-security state's actions worldwide, presenting a compelling narrative that resonates with Martin Luther King's profound observation about violence and governance. His scrutiny into the series of U.S.-led interventions, regime changes, and the establishment of military bases across the globe, supported by an extensive military budget, provides a crucial backdrop to understanding today’s geopolitical climate.

Critically, Ganser's engagement with the topic goes beyond mere historical recounting. By integrating the socio-political implications of these actions, such as the effect on global democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, he offers a holistic view of the U.S. empire's reach and influence. His examination of the CIA's covert operations and its controversies, including the still-debated assassination of President Kennedy, serves to underscore the complex interplay between national security interests and democratic values.

One of the most significant contributions of Ganser’s analysis is its accessibility to those who may not be well-versed in the intricacies of international relations or the historical context of U.S. foreign policy. He articulates a critical but often overlooked argument about the nature of power and its exertion on the international stage, challenging readers to question the narratives presented by both governmental bodies and mainstream media outlets.

The critique Ganser faces, branded with labels intended to delegitimize his scholarship, ironically validates the importance of his work. In a media landscape where dissenting views are often marginalized or dismissed, his perseverance in bringing these discussions to the forefront is noteworthy. His insights into the submissive posture of Europe vis-à-vis the U.S. highlight not only a geopolitical imbalance but also a profound crisis in independent, sovereign decision-making in the face of American hegemony.

Ganser’s exploration transcends traditional left-right political dichotomies, touching upon universal themes of peace, sovereignty, and the human cost of military dominance. This book emerges not just as a critique but as an invitation for a global reassessment of how power is wielded in the name of national security, and at what cost to the principles of democracy and international peace.

In summary, Ganser's book embodies a critical narrative essential for those yearning for a deeper understanding of the world's most pressing geopolitical issues. It serves as a poignant reminder of the urgent need for a more equitable and transparent global order, echoing the aspirations of those who have long advocated for a world where dialogue and diplomacy triumph over aggression and warfare.

[katepub123 · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5
Gran introducción a la historia del imperialismo de los EE.UU. Con una extensa bibliografía respaldándolo, Ganser recorre la historia de devastación del Imperio Estadounidense desde la llegada de los colonos ingleses a la costa este norteamericana y el genocidio de sus habitantes originales, hasta las invasiones securitaristas a países del Medio Oriente.

Además, el autor deja muy claro los mecanismos de la política estadounidense que permiten que el imperio se mueva como se mueve, los oligarcas de la muerte detrás de él, y los patrones (como las mentiras presidenciales, el ocultamiento de información a la población en general y la deshumanización de grupos selectos de personas) que se repiten a lo largo de la historia de este país, que por desgracia, sigue siendo igual de poderoso. Si se le quiere ver como un libro de historia de EE.UU, creo que también es muy válido, y puede cumplir ese propósito, dejándole claro al lector la relevancia del imperio y su desenvolvimiento en lo internacional.
Lo malo: no se menciona ni una vez la creación del Estado de Israel, tan esencial para EE.UU en esa región. Este es un problema gordo. Considero también que en la parte de China el autor en su mayoría no eligió la mejor historiografía para hablar del tema, aunque igual deja claro el papel de ese país en el mundo actual. Otra cosa rara es cuando recomienda el Russia Today como fuente de información alternativa. No se ve muy bien recomendar propaganda rusa tan beligerante y con un propósito (aunque no alcance) tan nocivo como la norteamericana.
Creo que hasta aquí llega mi opinión. Todos los imperios caen, y este no va a ser la excepción. Quizá no lo vea jamás en vida, pero va a suceder. El colapso es inevitable.

[Klaus Metzger · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mein Sohn Jochen hat mir dieses hervorragende Buch zu meinem 78 Geburtstag geschenkt. Vor einiger Zeit habe ich mit der schrecklichen Geschichte und dem Imperialismus der USA Diese Wahrheiten: Eine Geschichte der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika befasst. Dieses Buch zeigt noch viel deutlicher die CIA-Tätigkeiten rund um die Welt, die zu zahlreichen Kriegen und Umstürzen führten. In Chile konnte ich dies 1976 nachvollziehen. Erschüttert hat mich die Information, dass die CIA am Tod des amerikanischen Präsidenten Kennedy 1963 beteiligt gewesen sein soll. Der Autor ist Historiker und Friedensforscher hat auch geschildert, was ihm bei WIKIPEDIA widerfahren ist. Unglaublich!

[Lion]

Er denkt da nicht ganz fertig: Wenn Amerika eine Oligarchie ist, wir aber ihre Vasallen sind, kann können wir auch keine Demokratie sein, weil wir ja von ihnen regiert werden.
Dieses Gerede von wegen "der böse Kapitalismus" ist übliche linke Massenmeinung in den USA. Ich würde Ganser da eher als amerikanisch gesinnten Konformisten einstufen. Andere Ansätze sind ganz interessant, er ist halt leider links von Trotsky.
Bei der Geschichte zum 2. Weltkrieg hält er sich auch an die Amerikanische Version der Geschichte: Die Amerikaner haben in den 30'ern imperialistische Kriege angefangen, und dann wieder in den 50'ern, aber in den 40'ern waren sie schuldlose Befreier?
Er idealisiert auch die Sowietunion ohne zu verstehen dass sie ein Hebel der Amerikaner war um Rivalen zu schwächen.
Insgesamt habe ich nicht viel vom Buch gelesen, und meine Eindrücke können unfair sein.

[Lucas · Rating 1 out of 5]

300 page crock of unadulterated shit. Like the aggregated spirit of every AmericaBad online poster wrote a book, in which every woe the world has faced since 1776 is the fault of one nation. One only need review the section on "NATO expansion". Moscow has not been happy with NATO's expansion since 1991. Hm, wonder why. Why would countries once dominated by Russia join a defensive alliance to guard their sovereignty and territorial integrity? Which treaty forbade NATO's eastward expansion as a rule of law? Where is it?
Ganser is the Kremlin's loyal Swiss creature. He'd be hung in Red Square for attempting to write a similar slanted history of Russia. American freedom of speech means this may be published in the US without fear to his life and prospects.

[Jonathan B. · Rating 1 out of 5]

I'd give this book zero stars if I could. The author is not content with spouting Putin's propaganda but he also has to regurgitate Stalin's propaganda. The historical errors are legion and outrageous. See page 115 where Ganser claims the "fighter jets" were sent to Spain in 1938 by Hitler. It is not the only outrageously ignorant statement Ganser makes. The book is full of such errors. His historical analysis is equally lacking. Scan the book and the historical ignorance and Soviet/Russian propaganda leap off the pages continuously. Oddly, I agree that the US has engaged in some horrible practices over its history and these need to be exposed and rebuked. This book is a waste of time and paper.

[Andy · Rating 3 out of 5]

As stated by the author himself this can be considered as a textbook to be used as reference.
Short chapters assess the US and its geopolical expansion into an empire. It feels like a history textbook.

It is interesting to see the perspective from German speaking experts and analysts, which is not common, at least for an average reader like me that relies on UK/US sources generally.

I appreciated the analysis of what MSM calls conspiracy theories, Building 7, Ukraine etc.

A bit of a disappointment is his comment on AOC being a courageous congresswoman, but I guess at the time of writing she had not shown her true colours.

Basic read that is useful nonetheless.