CovertAction Institute

Just About Every War in U.S. History Was Avoidable and Based on Lies—Save Perhaps the Revolutionary War

In early February, as part of its “America 250” campaign, the Trump White House issued a presidential pronouncement commemorating what it called “our victory in the Mexican-American War,” a war that it framed as being a defensive one forced upon an innocent United States.

While many recognize this pronouncement as a reversal of reality, standard history books continue to frame the Mexican-American and most other U.S. wars not too differently, and to suggest that U.S. leaders were motivated by good intentions, even if some of the consequences of the wars that they waged proved to be disagreeable.

Ivan Eland’s book, Domestic Causes of American Wars: Economic & Political Triggers is significant in puncturing the dominant nationalistic narrative surrounding American wars.

Eland shows that almost all wars in American history resulted from domestic pressures and were initiated in an attempt to achieve hidden strategic motives or crass economic gain.

The latter is true, according to Eland, even for the supposed “good wars” in U.S. history, such as the Civil War and World War II, which are presented in most U.S. history texts as being noble.

An author of eight previous books who worked for 16 years in the U.S. Congress, Eland’s latest book is valuable as a historical resource that places current aggressive U.S. foreign policies in larger historical context.

Eland starts out with a discussion of the Quasi War with France from 1798 to 1800, which American history textbooks conventionally claim was initiated after France started attacking American commercial ships.

In reality, Eland emphasizes that merchant greed had caused the U.S. to renege on commercial treaties with France and to allow British ships that attacked French ships to operate out of its ports.[1]

Fought entirely at sea, President John Adams and his Federalist Party used the Quasi War to increase their power at home by raising a provisional standing army, creating the Navy Department, and by passing the Alien and Sedition Acts that were used to prosecute Republican newspaper editors and other war opponents for sedition.[2] [...]

Just About Every War in U.S. History Was Avoidable and Based on Lies—Save Perhaps the Revolutionary War - CovertAction Magazine In early February, as part of its “America 250” campaign, the Trump White House issued a presidential pronouncement commemorating what it called “our victory in the Mexican-American War,” a war that it framed as being a defensive one forced upon an innocent United States. While many recogniz...

Did the FBI use the Weather Underground to Undermine Black Panthers and the New Left?

Paul Thomas Anderson’s Oscar-winning 2025 film One Battle After Another sparked a spirited debate on the left over its portrayal of a fictional group of revolutionaries known as the French 75. Some read the movie as a call to arms against Trump’s fascistic policies while others interpreted it as a satirical depiction of ultra-left adventurism gone awry.

However, whatever one’s explication of the film, it is clear that the primary inspiration for the French 75 was the Weather Underground—the notorious militant group that emerged in the late 1960s which took its name from a Bob Dylan song lyric—something leading man Leonardo DiCaprio confirmed in an interview with Radio Times. DiCaprio stated that, “[Anderson] based this on a lot of the activities of the Weathermen, late 1960s revolutionaries that were fighting imperialism, the Vietnam War, [and for] civil rights.”

Indeed, in an era of rampant U.S. imperialist aggression and increasingly corporatized “resistance,” the Weathermen’s militant anti-imperialism holds a certain appeal. Yet a re-examination of Weather’s “armed struggle” tactics and organizational structure shows they should serve as a cautionary tale rather than an inspiration for activists today. Instead, of all the groups that came out of the New Left, the militant Black Panther Party (BPP) represents a model to the issues of strategy and party structure faced by the contemporary left.

Although the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers are frequently lumped together, the militants were often at odds and the stark differences in the U.S. government’s response to the two groups demonstrates who was most threatening to the existing order.

One could argue that One Battle After Another contributes to the conflation of the two groups, as some critics have argued that the character of Perfidia Beverly Hills (played by actress Teyana Taylor, who received an Academy Award nomination for her performance) seemingly made a mockery of the late fugitive revolutionary Assata Shakur.

However, it appears that Taylor, who cites Shakur’s autobiography as one of her favorite books, drew inspiration from the committed activist in crafting the redeeming elements of Perfidia’s flawed, complex and contradictory composite character.

Both the Weathermen and the BPP emerged after the U.S. national security apparatus had quelled the influence of the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA).

Coupled with the overt suppression of McCarthyism, a heavy blow was dealt to CPUSA by the FBI’s Counter-Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO), the Bureau’s notorious covert campaign to sabotage the left. Begun in 1956, the same year the international communist movement split over Stalin’s legacy due to Nikita Khrushchev’s infamous “Secret Speech,” COINTELPRO was first deployed against CPUSA and the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party (SWP). [...]

Did the FBI use the Weather Underground to Undermine Black Panthers and the New Left? - CovertAction Magazine Paul Thomas Anderson’s Oscar-winning 2025 film One Battle After Another sparked a spirited debate on the left over its portrayal of a fictional group of revolutionaries known as the French 75. Some read the movie as a call to arms against Trump’s fascistic policies while others interpreted it as...

Despite What U.S. History Books Say, South Korea and the U.S. Started the Korean War—Not North Korea

June 25th marks the 76th anniversary of the provocation of the Korean War which is referred to in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) as the Fatherland Liberation War or Victorious Fatherland Liberation War.

It was a war of a big country against a small country and a racist genocidal war, which saw the deaths of millions of Koreans and the carpet-bombing of the DPRK.[1]

It was a war so destructive that U.S. Air Force General Curtis LeMay (later a far-right candidate for vice president of the United States) said: “We went over there and fought the war and eventually burned down every town in North Korea anyway, some way or another, and some in South Korea too. Over a period of three years or so, we killed off—what—twenty percent of the population of Korea as direct casualties of war, or from starvation and exposure.”

The mainstream media and history books of Western countries continue to falsely accuse the DPRK of starting the war and even that it “invaded” South Korea.

A classic case of blaming the victim. This false narrative is taught in schools and universities. Few dare to challenge the dominant narrative.

In 1952, legendary U.S. journalist I. F. Stone published The Hidden History of the Korean War, a book which deconstructed much of the Western propaganda and mythology around the Korean War. At the time of the Korean War only U.S. Congressman Vito Marcantonio, of the American Labor Party, voted against it. (Marcantonio, who was profiled in CovertAction Magazine here, also opposed the creation of the CIA.) [...]

Despite What U.S. History Books Say, South Korea and the U.S. Started the Korean War—Not North Korea - CovertAction Magazine June 25th marks the 76th anniversary of the provocation of the Korean War which is referred to in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) as the Fatherland Liberation War or Victorious Fatherland Liberation War. It was a war of a big country against a small country and a racist genocidal ...

CIA Governor Betrays Workers of Virginia By Vetoing Collective Bargaining Right Bill

Abigail Spanberger follows the model of the CIA throughout the developing world

In late May, Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger vetoed collective bargaining rights legislation— Senate Bill 378 and House Bill 1264—that would have allowed half a million Virginia public workers to organize into unions and be able to negotiate their working conditions and pay rates.

Spanberger is a former CIA case officer who advanced hawkish legislation and CIA talking points while serving in Congress from 2019 to 2025 before she was elected Virginia governor.

Backed by the Virginia Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and Virginia firefighter’s union, the legislation Spanberger vetoed was designed to expand on a 2020 law permitting state employees to opt into collective bargaining if their localities allow it.[1] [...]

CIA Governor Betrays Workers of Virginia By Vetoing Collective Bargaining Right Bill - CovertAction Magazine Abigail Spanberger follows the model of the CIA throughout the developing world In late May, Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger vetoed collective bargaining rights legislation— Senate Bill 378 and House Bill 1264—that would have allowed half a million Virginia public workers to organize into u...