This book discusses how, and how much, America "should" involve itself with the rest of the word, and how that decision was determined historically. This is a very important subject that I wish more people would consider. The author appears knowledgeable and writes well, however I would have preferred a less biased analysis. ( )

​In "​The ​True Flag​: Theodore Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of American Empire", Stephen Kinzer looks at how the U.S. became involved in foreign interventions, ​beginning with the Spanish American War. While the war began during the Presidency of William McKinley, Kinzer uses Teddy Roosevelt and Mark Twain as two voices on opposite sides of the debate about empire building vs. self-determination, and foreign interventions in general.

Kinzer​'s initial ​look at the Spanish American War points out how Yellow Journalism and business interests provided the false pretense for th​at war. While the explosion of the battleship "Maine" provided the ​stated ​provocation, few scholars today believe the claim that the ship's explosion was the result of military action of Spanish forces. Following th​at short war, the U.S. was awarded the Spanish territories of Puerto Rico, Cuba, Guam, and the Philippines, with the understanding or expectation ​of Cubans and Filipinos ​that these ​countries would soon become free and independent. Rather than becoming independent, Cuba was kept under U.S. control​ for years​, and ​any Philippine hope for independence was quashed by the U.S. military. The resultant war in the Philippines was particularly nasty, resulting in ​huge numbers of civilians being killed, villages destroyed, and many cases of waterboarding by U.S. troops on Filipinos.

Kinzer then briefly ​reminds us of other recent foreign interventions and their consequences. There was Teddy Roosevelt's intervention in Columbia/Panama; Taft's interventions in Nicaragua and Honduras to protect U.S. business interests​; Wilson's sending troops to Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Mexico, and Russia; FDR's support of dictators in the Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Nicaragua; Truman's stepping in to stop North Korea and China in South Korea; Ike's involvement in Vietnam and Cuba, ​along with ​his actions to depose leaders in Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, and ​attempts in Albania, Egypt, and Indonesia; JFK's fiasco with the Bay of Pigs in Cuba; the Vietnam escalation under LBJ; Nixon's bombing​s​ in Cambodia​, Laos,​ and North Vietnam, ​as well as ​his support of CIA overthrow of Salvadore Allende in Chile; Ford's ​sending arms to one side in Angola's Civil War, and supporting Indonesia​'s invasion and annexation of East Timor; Carter's support fo​r mujahideen in Afghanistan; Reagan's invasion in Grenada, his aiding of Hussein in Iraq, support for the Contras in Nicaragua, support of Guatemala and El Salvador governments against leftists, ​and ​sending troops to Lebanon​; G.H.W. Bush's interventions in Kuwait, Somalia, and Panama; Clinton in Kosovo and Haiti, George W. Bush's invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan; Obama's support in Libya and Sudan, etc.

​The above reminds us that we've intervened in multiple countries​ in the hundred years since the Philippines​, ​often ​with mixed or disastrous results. On one hand, ​some interventions may have benefit​ed our trade, industry, and labor, as expansionists promised. On the other hand, ​many of these ​interventions have set off anti-American resistance movements, insurgencies, rebellions, or terror campaigns. ​All of this leads to the question, ​"Does intervention in other Countries serve our National interest and contribute to global stability, or does it undermine both"? ​Kinzer doesn't directly answer the question, but ​the example he provides about General Smedley Butler gives a good indication as to how he'd answer the question. General Butler would have been Louisiana Senator Huey Long's candidate to be Secretary of War had he won the Presidential election of 1936. As a General, Butler led troops in a number of foreign interventions, including leading troops in Cuba, fighting Boxers in China, directed operations in the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Honduras, etc. While a participant in these interventions, later in his life, he denounced his service saying in actions were simply for the benefit of sugar interests and big business such as the United Fruit Company, and Standard Oil, and not to benefit the those foreign nations.
( )

If Kinzer's thesis is clear -- that American's imperialist impulses originated in 1898 and for the most part they are unabated -- he at least closes, in the book's final paragraph, with some hope: "Nations lose their virtue when they repeatedly attack other nations. That loss, as [George] Washington predicted, has cost the United States its felicity. We can regain it only by understanding our own national interests more clearly. It is late for the United States to change its course in the world — but not too late."

I have a bone to pick about choice to include Twain in his subtitle. Twain's role in the book is minor and the author doesn't make any significant entrance until the last third, then, still, plays only a marginal role. TR, on the other hand, is much more prevalent, and Henry Cabot Lodge is ubiquitous. ( )

This book explores the strains of American foreign policy which veers over the course of history between imperialist and interventionist goals and isolationism. Kinzer argues that these two positions have a long history, and the tension between them has repeated since at least the turn of the twentieth century. The imperialist urge emerges with the outbreak of the Spanish American War and the United States taking control of foreign territories for the first time in the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico. The interventionists argue that the peoples of these lands will find freedom under American control, seemingly at odds with the democratic ideals of our own Revolution. Anti-imperialists then as now try to get Americans to cling to these principles and restrain their militarist impulses, with Mark Twain the most prominent voice. Theodore Roosevelt stands as the icon of imperialism in this book, although Kinzer describes Henry Cabot Lodge as the actor working behind the scenes of the imperialist cause, up to and including engineering Roosevelt's rise to the presidency. ( )

5477. The True Flag Theodore Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of American Empire, by Stephen Kinzer (read 17 Jun 2017) This is an easy-to-read account of the fight to prevent the U.S. from becoming an empire. It tells of the fight against Teddy Roosevelt and Senator Lodge to prevent the U.S. conquering the Philippines. Instead of supporting the fight for independence the U.S. in a vicious war literally conquered a people who had thought we would help them win independence. It is a sad story. In the concluding chapter the author expatiates on various events of the 20th century, some of which discussion is questionable. For instance, he seems to blame us for becoming involved in the fight against Hitler! But till the last chapter the book is commendable and well-told, though the events related are sad. ( )