The book is schizophrenic. It competently discusses reasons, why the latest military conflicts started by the United States--no other country since 2006 ever began an interstate military conflict--though there were border clashes and interferences in already ongoing civil wars--never end. The main are the following. Systematic exclusion by the Washington foreign policy blob all outside experts on military matters, and limited information provided outside their closed circle--this was not the case during the Cold War, dominance of the hawkish civil servants and Congressional staffers with limited, if any, conventional military experience in the field (i.e. the neocons) in the decision making and waning of the civic military culture because of the professionalization of the army after the Vietnam War.
Yet, while Arkin is competent in discussing why foreign policy of the United States degenerated into military adventurism, he is stalwart in his conviction that the US Armed Forces, which could not defeat rag-tag Taliban militias must maintain extremely aggressive posture against Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, in about that order. I.e. the smaller the country and the fewer nuclear weapons it has, the more apprehensive Arkin becomes with respect to the military solution of all foreign policy problems. In full compliance with the neocon doctrine, he suggests that they cannot modernize their armed forces because they supposedly lack a "democratic culture". Besides a magic thinking relating any particular social structure with the military prowess--how democratic was Genghis Khan--he also does not notice a pitiful state of most European militaries despite their professed (but not always upheld) democratic values.
