Stephen Walt identified some reasons in his recent FP article.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/13/the-united-states-couldnt-stop-being-stupid-if-it-wanted-to/?

1. Liberalism
"...liberal states are strongly inclined to what John Mearsheimer terms the “crusader impulse”—the desire to spread liberal principles as far as their power permits."

2. Has gun, will use it
"...the United States finds it hard to act with restraint because it possesses a remarkable amount of power.

3. Military-industrial complex
"... the emergence of a powerful “military-industrial complex” during World War II and the early Cold War was a profound development that would permanently skew U.S. foreign policy in a more militarized and interventionist direction."

4. Foreign lobbying
"... the liberal United States is open to foreign influences in ways that many other countries are not. Foreign governments can hire lobbying firms to advance their case inside Washington and especially on Capitol Hill, or in some cases they can rely on domestic groups to press for action on their behalf. "

"Put these various elements together, and one can see why it is so hard for the United States to stop doing stupid stuff. Ideology, power, bureaucratic momentum, and other states’ desires to use U.S. power for their own ends combine to create a powerful predisposition to do something and a concomitant inability to set clear priorities and stick to them when temptation arises."

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 1:02:32 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> Stephen Walt identified some reasons in his recent FP article.
> https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/13/the-united-states-couldnt-stop-being-stupid-if-it-wanted-to/?
>
> 1. Liberalism
> "...liberal states are strongly inclined to what John Mearsheimer terms the “crusader impulse”—the desire to spread liberal principles as far as their power permits."
>
> 2. Has gun, will use it
> "...the United States finds it hard to act with restraint because it possesses a remarkable amount of power.
>
> 3. Military-industrial complex
> "... the emergence of a powerful “military-industrial complex” during World War II and the early Cold War was a profound development that would permanently skew U.S. foreign policy in a more militarized and interventionist direction."
>
> 4. Foreign lobbying
> "... the liberal United States is open to foreign influences in ways that many other countries are not. Foreign governments can hire lobbying firms to advance their case inside Washington and especially on Capitol Hill, or in some cases they can rely on domestic groups to press for action on their behalf. "
>
> "Put these various elements together, and one can see why it is so hard for the United States to stop doing stupid stuff. Ideology, power, bureaucratic momentum, and other states’ desires to use U.S. power for their own ends combine to create a powerful predisposition to do something and a concomitant inability to set clear priorities and stick to them when temptation arises."

The influence of the first three factors reflects domestic lobbying.
Foreign lobbying is only influential because domestic politics is driving foreign policy as
explained by Henry Kissinger's 20 years old book "Does America Need a Foreign Policy?"

On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 5:08:57 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 1:02:32 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> > Stephen Walt identified some reasons in his recent FP article.
> > https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/13/the-united-states-couldnt-stop-being-stupid-if-it-wanted-to/?
> >
> > 1. Liberalism
> > "...liberal states are strongly inclined to what John Mearsheimer terms the “crusader impulse”—the desire to spread liberal principles as far as their power permits."
> >
> > 2. Has gun, will use it
> > "...the United States finds it hard to act with restraint because it possesses a remarkable amount of power.
> >
> > 3. Military-industrial complex
> > "... the emergence of a powerful “military-industrial complex” during World War II and the early Cold War was a profound development that would permanently skew U.S. foreign policy in a more militarized and interventionist direction."
> >
> > 4. Foreign lobbying
> > "... the liberal United States is open to foreign influences in ways that many other countries are not. Foreign governments can hire lobbying firms to advance their case inside Washington and especially on Capitol Hill, or in some cases they can rely on domestic groups to press for action on their behalf. "
> >
> > "Put these various elements together, and one can see why it is so hard for the United States to stop doing stupid stuff. Ideology, power, bureaucratic momentum, and other states’ desires to use U.S. power for their own ends combine to create a powerful predisposition to do something and a concomitant inability to set clear priorities and stick to them when temptation arises."
> The influence of the first three factors reflects domestic lobbying.
> Foreign lobbying is only influential because domestic politics is driving foreign policy as
> explained by Henry Kissinger's 20 years old book "Does America Need a Foreign Policy?"

Among the three internal reasons, 1 and 3 is driving hand behind its aggressive and America must be the global hegemon foreign policy.
Needless to say, the military-industrial complex exists for the interest of a small group of people. How about "Liberalism." Is it not the end of history?
Unfortunately, its much emphasized liberalism /liberal democracy is not evidence based. And it is not totally embraced by its most celebrated spokenperson. But advocated as a matter of hope and faith.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/18/francis-fukuyama-postmodern-radicalism-democracy/

"In his most recent book, Liberalism and Its Discontents, published this year, author Francis Fukuyama argues that the “virtues” of liberal democracy must be “clearly articulated and celebrated.” This injunction is a curious one. For more than three decades, Fukuyama has been one of the most prominent public intellectuals making the case—again and again, in various genres—that liberal democracy is the best form of government available. What has he been doing all this time, if the case for this regime is not yet clear?
....
Nearly all of his readers missed his much more subtle point, re-elaborated in that reply, The End of History and the Last Man, and still again in “Reflections on The End of History, Five Years Later” that the prospect of liberal democracy overtaking all alternative forms of government cannot be an object of rational certainty but only of “hope.” This hope is inseparable from Fukuyama’s fear that if the world does not imagine history to have a “progressive character” trending toward the spread of their own political values, then their adherence to liberal democracy—and thus the regime itself—will be fatally undermined. Without this hope in history, the United States will come to the same end as the Soviet Union.
....
Fukuyama learned how to speak to multiple audiences from his undergraduate professor at Cornell University, Allan Bloom,...

Bloom suggested to students and readers perspicacious enough to pick up his hints that society would collapse unless it were held together by its members’ collective faith in a common set of beliefs."

On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 5:08:57 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 1:02:32 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> > Stephen Walt identified some reasons in his recent FP article.
> > https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/13/the-united-states-couldnt-stop-being-stupid-if-it-wanted-to/?
> >
> > 1. Liberalism
> > "...liberal states are strongly inclined to what John Mearsheimer terms the “crusader impulse”—the desire to spread liberal principles as far as their power permits."
> >
> > 2. Has gun, will use it
> > "...the United States finds it hard to act with restraint because it possesses a remarkable amount of power.
> >
> > 3. Military-industrial complex
> > "... the emergence of a powerful “military-industrial complex” during World War II and the early Cold War was a profound development that would permanently skew U.S. foreign policy in a more militarized and interventionist direction."
> >
> > 4. Foreign lobbying
> > "... the liberal United States is open to foreign influences in ways that many other countries are not. Foreign governments can hire lobbying firms to advance their case inside Washington and especially on Capitol Hill, or in some cases they can rely on domestic groups to press for action on their behalf. "
> >
> > "Put these various elements together, and one can see why it is so hard for the United States to stop doing stupid stuff. Ideology, power, bureaucratic momentum, and other states’ desires to use U.S. power for their own ends combine to create a powerful predisposition to do something and a concomitant inability to set clear priorities and stick to them when temptation arises."
> The influence of the first three factors reflects domestic lobbying.
> Foreign lobbying is only influential because domestic politics is driving foreign policy as
> explained by Henry Kissinger's 20 years old book "Does America Need a Foreign Policy?"

Cannot tell to what degree Stephen Walt is serious about his thesis that
"The United States Couldn’t Stop Being Stupid if It Wanted To."

If he is really serious, then one has to ask: Does American style liberal democracy have a future?

On Thursday, December 29, 2022 at 12:03:23 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 5:08:57 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> > On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 1:02:32 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > Stephen Walt identified some reasons in his recent FP article.
> > > https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/13/the-united-states-couldnt-stop-being-stupid-if-it-wanted-to/?
> > >
> > > 1. Liberalism
> > > "...liberal states are strongly inclined to what John Mearsheimer terms the “crusader impulse”—the desire to spread liberal principles as far as their power permits."
> > >
> > > 2. Has gun, will use it
> > > "...the United States finds it hard to act with restraint because it possesses a remarkable amount of power.
> > >
> > > 3. Military-industrial complex
> > > "... the emergence of a powerful “military-industrial complex” during World War II and the early Cold War was a profound development that would permanently skew U.S. foreign policy in a more militarized and interventionist direction."
> > >
> > > 4. Foreign lobbying
> > > "... the liberal United States is open to foreign influences in ways that many other countries are not. Foreign governments can hire lobbying firms to advance their case inside Washington and especially on Capitol Hill, or in some cases they can rely on domestic groups to press for action on their behalf. "
> > >
> > > "Put these various elements together, and one can see why it is so hard for the United States to stop doing stupid stuff. Ideology, power, bureaucratic momentum, and other states’ desires to use U.S. power for their own ends combine to create a powerful predisposition to do something and a concomitant inability to set clear priorities and stick to them when temptation arises."
> > The influence of the first three factors reflects domestic lobbying.
> > Foreign lobbying is only influential because domestic politics is driving foreign policy as
> > explained by Henry Kissinger's 20 years old book "Does America Need a Foreign Policy?"
> Cannot tell to what degree Stephen Walt is serious about his thesis that
> "The United States Couldn’t Stop Being Stupid if It Wanted To."
>
> If he is really serious, then one has to ask: Does American style liberal democracy have a future?

No, they don't have a future. Hope they wake up to their stupidity of liberal democracy when they should know they are already imprisoned and lockdown by either party they voted them. The best they should crucified them and run with a new party that really listened to the people.

On Saturday, December 31, 2022 at 3:10:08 PM UTC, stoney wrote:
> On Thursday, December 29, 2022 at 12:03:23 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
> > On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 5:08:57 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 1:02:32 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > > Stephen Walt identified some reasons in his recent FP article.
> > > > https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/13/the-united-states-couldnt-stop-being-stupid-if-it-wanted-to/?
> > > >
> > > > 1. Liberalism
> > > > "...liberal states are strongly inclined to what John Mearsheimer terms the “crusader impulse”—the desire to spread liberal principles as far as their power permits."
> > > >
> > > > 2. Has gun, will use it
> > > > "...the United States finds it hard to act with restraint because it possesses a remarkable amount of power.
> > > >
> > > > 3. Military-industrial complex
> > > > "... the emergence of a powerful “military-industrial complex” during World War II and the early Cold War was a profound development that would permanently skew U.S. foreign policy in a more militarized and interventionist direction."
> > > >
> > > > 4. Foreign lobbying
> > > > "... the liberal United States is open to foreign influences in ways that many other countries are not. Foreign governments can hire lobbying firms to advance their case inside Washington and especially on Capitol Hill, or in some cases they can rely on domestic groups to press for action on their behalf. "
> > > >
> > > > "Put these various elements together, and one can see why it is so hard for the United States to stop doing stupid stuff. Ideology, power, bureaucratic momentum, and other states’ desires to use U.S. power for their own ends combine to create a powerful predisposition to do something and a concomitant inability to set clear priorities and stick to them when temptation arises."
> > > The influence of the first three factors reflects domestic lobbying.
> > > Foreign lobbying is only influential because domestic politics is driving foreign policy as
> > > explained by Henry Kissinger's 20 years old book "Does America Need a Foreign Policy?"
> > Cannot tell to what degree Stephen Walt is serious about his thesis that
> > "The United States Couldn’t Stop Being Stupid if It Wanted To."
> >
> > If he is really serious, then one has to ask: Does American style liberal democracy have a future?
> No, they don't have a future. Hope they wake up to their stupidity of liberal democracy when they should know they are already imprisoned and lockdown by either party they voted them. The best they should crucified them and run with a new party that really listened to the people.

Well US President Reagan's famous conclusion about US Democratic Government is “Government is not the solution
to our problem, government is the problem”. Is this not another way of saying "The United States Couldn’t Stop Being
Stupid if It Wanted To"?

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 1:02:32 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> Stephen Walt identified some reasons in his recent FP article.
> https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/13/the-united-states-couldnt-stop-being-stupid-if-it-wanted-to/?
>
> 1. Liberalism
> "...liberal states are strongly inclined to what John Mearsheimer terms the “crusader impulse”—the desire to spread liberal principles as far as their power permits."
>
> 2. Has gun, will use it
> "...the United States finds it hard to act with restraint because it possesses a remarkable amount of power.
>
> 3. Military-industrial complex
> "... the emergence of a powerful “military-industrial complex” during World War II and the early Cold War was a profound development that would permanently skew U.S. foreign policy in a more militarized and interventionist direction."
>
> 4. Foreign lobbying
> "... the liberal United States is open to foreign influences in ways that many other countries are not. Foreign governments can hire lobbying firms to advance their case inside Washington and especially on Capitol Hill, or in some cases they can rely on domestic groups to press for action on their behalf. "
>
> "Put these various elements together, and one can see why it is so hard for the United States to stop doing stupid stuff. Ideology, power, bureaucratic momentum, and other states’ desires to use U.S. power for their own ends combine to create a powerful predisposition to do something and a concomitant inability to set clear priorities and stick to them when temptation arises."

Additional reason.

5. "Thinly veiled" corruption

"Running for president is really expensive, and presidential candidates in both parties require massive fundraising machines to bankroll campaigns that are becoming all the more so. A pattern has emerged under modern Republican and Democratic administrations alike where presidents will tap deep-pocket campaign donors or “bundlers” who directly donate or help raise hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars for the winning presidential candidate for plum ambassador posts.

Successive administrations argue that these donor ambassadors have the requisite skills and experience—even if outside the realm of foreign policy—through their work in philanthropy, finance, business, politics, or other career paths.

Critics of the practice, including former senior career diplomats, say it’s a form of “thinly veiled” corruption."
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/01/24/campaign-donor-ambassadors-biden-diplomacy/