The original article:

This is a simple article. It just has a few sentences. We need to rewrite and expand it.

The rewritten and expanded article:

This is a rather simple article.

It consists of just a few sentences, which seem to lack depth and detail.

In order to make it more engaging and comprehensive, we need to rewrite and expand it.

Perhaps we can add more examples, explanations, or personal experiences to support the main ideas.

By doing so, the article will become more interesting and valuable to the readers.

Moreover, we can also improve the grammar and vocabulary to make the language more accurate and vivid.

Overall, the process of rewriting and expanding this article requires careful consideration and attention to detail.

Don't dream of a happy world
For behind every emperor dies
A new emperor

That overbearing feeling of frustration and oppression that follows you after finishing one of Chomsky's books, the knowledge that reveals to you the ugly face of the world, and the feeling of inevitability, the inevitability of revolutions and the inevitability of the struggle for human dignity in the existence of a country like the United States. It is the most evil and tyrannical country in human history without any exception (even Hitler!). It is enough for you to know that Goebbels had plagiarized his system of overbearing propaganda from American announcements, and that Hitler did nothing but develop the mechanisms of destruction and torture that the United States had previously used against the indigenous people.

The failed states are those that do not adhere to the mechanisms of democracy and do not respect international law and international treaties. Chomsky declares that this definition applies to the United States completely, and he lists dozens of examples across three intellectual frameworks: the mean principle, the tenacious connection line, and the crisis of democracy:

First: The mean principle
It means that moral principles become meaningless and useless in the presence of power. International norms and treaties do not concern us in anything and do not oblige us to the least respect for the rights of others (the others or the misled if we coin Zionist terms). This principle states that morality is a trick of the weak and that it is only useful in the political waste of opposing systems. The incitement against the nations that they are supporters and backers of terrorism comes mostly from the only country against which a decision was issued by the International Court of Justice for practicing terrorism, and the non-respect for international commitments is corrected by the country that refuses to adhere to the Covenant on Human Rights, and even legislates laws to violate them. Killing civilian isolates, massacres, starvation, the methodical displacement of the pillars of democracy, violating the sovereignty of nations... just routine practices under this overbearing rule.

Second: The tenacious connection line
Over the years that have passed since the end of World War II, it has never happened that the United States committed to any principle in its foreign policy except its commitment to not being consistent with a principle! Democracy is only beloved and desired in the case of its submission to subordinate systems. Otherwise, it suppresses with iron and fire, either by financing armed militias or by sending military interference; the Palestinian elections are blocked because they will give legitimacy to the state and grant it international legitimacy, the Iraqi elections are doubtful because our client candidate will not win, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Haiti, name any country you want, the subservient systems are the ones that enjoy our protection even if they kill thousands, and the independent systems are the cancerous disease that must be eradicated even if it comes on the shoulders of the people. The United States sees that social justice is a "pestilence" that must be eradicated so that those peasants who think that such an act will pass without retribution do not follow it, the systems fall and the innocent who dared to dream of living a dignified life are bombed... The advanced countries have adopted methods to achieve what they have reached, such as the economy that the state directed and imposed restrictions on imports and so on. And today, it expects with pride and arrogance and great things that it will take them for itself. They herald the dawn of neoliberalism, which has proven that it has only benefited the 1% at the top of the pyramid. As for poverty, it has worsened and income levels have remained stable or returned to their levels in the sixties. Neoliberalism does not aim to reduce the power of the state as is commonly believed, but rather aims to empty its coffers and prevent the people from influencing the economic and social policy. For this reason, by definition, it only flourishes in the presence of non-democratic systems, which leads us to the third principle.

Third: The crisis of democracy
The intention here is not to reduce the influence of democracy, God forbid. The crisis is in the increasing awareness of the youth of its importance and their entry into the political arena. Democracy, according to the American regime's definition, is not the rule of the people, but the rule of wealth. For this reason, democracy represents a threat to the transnational corporations that control the resources of the peoples without a right. So if awareness increases a little, the cries of social justice and other essential principles will rise. So what is the solution? Of course, it does not lie in the fair distribution of wealth, but in suppressing these cries and deceiving the poor with propaganda. The real crisis is that democracy, even on American soil itself, has become empty and useless. Measures are taken in the interest of the businesspeople's alliance even if they conflict with the people's opinion, which prefers not to expand militarily and reduce military spending in favor of social spending and increase medical support.

Chomsky mentions in his conclusion that the pace of change has already begun in the cycle, and that the international blocs are such that they will limit the influence of the United States, and also the class difference in it will lead to social unrest that will open a window of hope for future generations to get rid of the yoke of American hegemony. I don't know... maybe it's a disaster.

On the margin:
* The Zionist thinking alone is its own enemy. How worthy it is for us to point out the Israeli journalists who undermine the negotiations for peace and expose the violations of the occupation army. It is easy to see your enemy as completely evil, but to stand up for the truth even if it comes from within his ranks... that is the real challenge.

**To what extent can we attribute fundamentalist terrorism to religion as long as we are associated with social oppression? Extremism has intensified in Iraq and Afghanistan as in Vietnam, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and India with different religions, but the constant is military interference and oppression. Isn't it more correct to attribute the phenomenon to the constant factor (while not neglecting the variables)?

It's Noam Chomsky, the renowned linguist and political analyst. Get ready for an in-depth exploration as hundreds of pages of articles are reviewed and countless journals are cited.

As always, he examines the contrast between rhetoric and policy, as well as truisms. A significant amount of time is dedicated to the Balkin wars, which is interesting since they are often regarded as the so-called "good humanitarian wars" by statist dove interventionists.

Many excellent memos are also reviewed, with the Blair files being a personal favorite. Nicaragua, Israel/Palestine, and Iraq are likely the most discussed topics. The simulation scenarios of states acting in sovereignty and the blocs they would form are quite unique.

In the first half of the book, Chomsky spends most of his time establishing the NPT and climate change international norms/policies as the most urgent issues of the moment. The best deconstruction comes from the rhetoric of anti-terrorism and the actual policies that only exacerbate the situation, which is, of course, supported by approximately 72 studies.

Finally, after dissecting the intentions and results of their real decisions and translating the rhetoric into logical English, Chomsky compares this with countless opinion polls and human development studies for comparison and contrast. The afterword delves into future possibilities, targeted policies, and cultural suggestions.

There is nothing extremely revealing here, but it is interesting to note that 17 years ago, this individual accurately predicted growing wealth inequality and the rise of ISIS simply by analyzing the numbers and citing experts in the relevant fields.

It makes one wonder if there is some truth to the idea that by carefully observing and understanding the data, we can gain insights into future trends.

Perhaps this serves as a reminder that we should not overlook the power of data and analysis in understanding complex social and political phenomena.

While it may not always provide a complete picture, it can certainly offer valuable clues and perspectives that can help us make more informed decisions.

In a world where information is abundant, it is essential that we learn to sift through the noise and identify the meaningful patterns and trends that can have a significant impact on our lives.

Mostly focuses on the war in Iraq.

This particular piece stands out as cheekier and more sarcastic than any of the others he’s written. It delves into the complex and often controversial events of the war, with a tone that is both light-hearted and cutting.

The author seems to take a jab at the various aspects of the conflict, from the political decisions that led to it to the actions and inactions of the different parties involved.

Perhaps through this cheeky and sarcastic approach, the author aims to make readers think more critically about the war and its consequences.

It forces us to look beyond the surface-level justifications and propaganda and consider the real human cost and the long-term implications.

Overall, this article offers a unique perspective on the war in Iraq, one that is sure to spark debate and discussion among readers.

Whether you agree or disagree with the author’s观点, it’s hard to deny that this piece is a thought-provoking and engaging read.

If you are disillusioned (as I once was) about the United States' role in the world, then this book is for you.

I'm a U.S. Army Veteran of OIF, and I once firmly believed that my service was ultimately serving the net good of humanity. Our military's actions were sold to the citizens as bringing democracy to the Middle East. However, in reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

This book meticulously details how U.S. foreign policy actions speak volumes louder than its empty rhetoric regarding freedom and democracy. It reveals the true motives and consequences behind the United States' actions on the global stage.

Other works that echo similar sentiments are: "War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler, which exposes the economic and political interests driving wars. The "The Untold History of the United States" documentary series by Oliver Stone offers a different perspective on American history, highlighting the hidden aspects and overlooked events. And "Dark Money" by Jane Mayer explores the influence of undisclosed political spending in the United States. These works all contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the complex issues surrounding the United States' role in the world.

This is an essential book that narrates the main actions of <>. It is quite the opposite of what one might think. Instead, it reveals the horrors and tortures committed by the US to maintain control at the cost of thousands of civilians.

Reading this will make you stop believing that US interventions are devoid of interests, as is the case in Venezuela. "No one familiar with history should be surprised that the growing democratic deficit in the United States is accompanied by the proclamation of messianic missions to bring democracy to a suffering world... democracy is acceptable only if it coincides with strategic and economic interests" (p.323).

This book provides a crucial perspective on the true nature of US actions and forces us to question the motives behind their so-called "interventions." It challenges the commonly held belief that the US is always acting in the name of democracy and justice.

By shining a light on the dark side of US history, this book encourages readers to think critically and form their own opinions about the role of the US in the world. It is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the complex dynamics of international relations and the true meaning of democracy.

My thoughts on Chomsky’s previous US/global politics book for the general public also apply strongly to his follow-up.

The Missing:

Of the many books by Chomsky, I would recommend starting elsewhere.

1) Intro: “Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky” is an excellent starting point with great editing. “The Essential Chomsky” also contains some of his key essays.

2) Media propaganda: “Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies” offers eloquent analysis and Q&A, while “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media” provides comparative case studies.

3) Intro to current global politics: Although he has published more recent works, I found this book to be rather convoluted. Given the abundance of evidence Chomsky presents to prove his points, clarity should be prioritized.

The Good:

I read “Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance” and this book back-to-back early on, and due to their similar styles, I often got them confused.

They share major themes. The main reason for reading Chomsky’s views on world politics is to evaluate his synthesis of his readings and his prioritization. I still believe it is a solid foundation to begin with:

1) Global power relations 101: Reviewing 20th century history through a systematic overview and case study comparisons to identify the actual aggressors (Imperialism 101).

2) Once we揭穿 the propaganda about “terror” and “freedom”, we can understand how aggression and exploitation are driving two existential threats: nuclear proliferation and environmental catastrophe.

3) How is public opinion/participatory democracy restricted?

The unique theme of this book is to apply the popular Western interventionist propaganda concept of “Failed States” to the United States, with a more consistent application of criteria, of course:

1) Unwillingness to protect its citizens (debunking the “War on Terror” and connecting it with US’s extensive support for global terror to crush competition).

2) Willingness to bypass domestic/international laws and undermine actual participatory democracy.

Though dry, this is a good and fairly updated overview of most of Chomsky's political positions. He continues to be vital, which is my favorite word for him. I would recommend starting with his interviews or conversations, however, as they're more accessible and engaging.

Out of the four books I've read, the most accessible and comprehensive intro to Chomsky is the very lives-up-to-its-name "Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky". What was most valuable about this book is that it gives Chomsky's thoughts on current events up through 2006.

He has predictable positions on 9/11 and U.S. involvement in the Middle-East. This book isn't as jaw-dropping as other books of his I've read because I was politically conscious during all of the events described and had already arrived at many of these conclusions.

The biggest takeaway, unique to this particular book, is the idea that we in the U.S. are no longer actually living in a democracy. Chomsky comparing public opinion polls to actual policy decisions was truly chilling. And really there's no other conclusion to reach: when a nation's government makes policy decisions that directly controvert the will of the (in many times vast) majority of its citizens, that is no longer a democracy.

One of the more interesting parts for me personally was reading Chomsky's thoughts on the retroactive alteration of justifications for the Iraq War. He noted things that I had also noticed around the same time. After a specific Bush speech in mid-2007, I even wrote detailed thoughts in a journal, as shown in the blockquote.

The media's reaction to the speech was also quite something. The Heritage Foundation spokesman's admission and excuse, and the newscasters' confusion about the speech's purpose and timing all added to the complexity of the situation.

We've arrived at the absurd situation where we are staying in Iraq to fight the terrorism that we created by immorally going there in the first place. The Republicans' cynicism in deliberately trying to confuse the public is truly disturbing.

Overall, this book provides valuable insights into Chomsky's political views and the state of affairs in the U.S. and the world.

Not Bad Reviews
@pointblaek

A remarkable work by Chomsky that can transform each page of it into an analytical report. A precise and well-documented story about the dual standards of different states in the United States regarding global issues.

The literature and pen of Chomsky are so brainy, well-founded, and precise that there is no room for any doubt in the reader.

The translation is relatively smooth, and although the translator does not seem to be very familiar with the common terms in the world of politics, he has managed to handle this difficult and large-volume text well.

Chomsky's works have always been highly regarded for their in-depth analysis and thought-provoking content. They offer valuable insights into various aspects of society, politics, and international relations.

Whether it is about the role of the United States in the world or the examination of different policies and their impacts, Chomsky's writings provide a comprehensive and critical perspective.

His works not only contribute to the academic field but also have a significant influence on public awareness and discussion.

Overall, Chomsky's works are a treasure trove of knowledge and a source of inspiration for those who are interested in understanding the complex world we live in.

Reading Chomsky always has a profound impact on me. It leaves me feeling drained and despondent. He描绘 the problems of the world with such vividness that it's impossible to avoid confronting the enormity of the issues we face. He revalues and re-evaluates the commonly accepted wisdom, the kinds of views we get from watching news programs or reading current affairs articles. To such an extent that one is left wondering if everything we're ever told is just another lie. Because that's the truth – after reading a book by Chomsky, one knows that they've been lied to and feels furious at those who have done the lying.

The world must have seemed much easier when the Soviet Union was the so-called "evil empire" and Orwell's vision of 1984 was playing out there. Now, we're all like Winston Smiths – though some of us haven't realized just how many lies we've been told, are being told, or need to be told.

This might make reading Chomsky sound like reading a book by an extreme conspiracy theorist. But no, the most frightening thing about him is that he doesn't require a conspiracy. The system maintains itself and is self-correcting.

This book is even more shocking than Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine. It's hard to say exactly why. Perhaps it's because after reading Chomsky, I feel that there's little or no hope for the world. He has hope, but it's based on people doing what's right, and I've seen too little evidence that people will choose the right when faced with an alternative. Need proof? Just count the SUVs on your street. I'm even thinking of making stickers that say, "I'm an Environmental Terrorist and I Vote" to put on the windscreens of these hideous monstrosities.

Take Chomsky's view on the possibility of a nuclear war. Since the end of the Cold War, one might be forgiven for thinking that this outcome is incredibly unlikely, that it's an eventuality we've somehow managed to avoid. But as Chomsky makes clear, we're at greater risk now than ever before, partly because we think we're under no threat at all. Nuclear disarmament – that seems so 1980s.

The subtitle of this book is The abuse of power and the assault on democracy. The main thesis is that the United States meets the criteria of a failed state. However, when the US acts, both at home and abroad – the kind of dysfunctional society stuff that Bush seemed to have become a specialist in – it's ignored, or in fact, not even noticed, because as the world's only superpower and the center of power, the US can simply write its own rules to suit itself.

Sometimes I meet up with a group of guys I used to work with and have a curry for lunch. We talk passionately about the state of the world. At these times, I quickly realize the gaps in my knowledge of recent events. I'm interested in politics, but it's as if the world is set up to confuse and misinform. At one of the more recent lunches, we were discussing Kosovo and how the NATO intervention was necessary to protect the region from ethnic cleansing and genocide. Here, at least, one of my friends argued that this was a case of pure beneficence on the part of the US, acting as it should elsewhere. Furthermore, he said that this act was unlikely to bring any "benefit" to the US itself. There's no oil in Kosovo, so any aid the US provided was obviously done for altruistic motives.
Unfortunately, Chapter Three of this book, Illegal but Legitimate, disproves this argument. The fact that there was no ethnic cleansing before the NATO bombing, that the bombing was clearly designed to incite precisely this response, and that much of what's said about this war is written backwards – as if the convenient excuse for the bombing was confirmed by what actually happened, rather than completely contradicted by events – all of this is explained in gut-wrenching detail.
The most shocking facts in the book, however, are about the assault on democracy that occurs in the US itself. During the last US presidential election, Kerry made sure that his policy to expand health insurance wouldn't result in a new government program because there was "clearly no support for such an idea." However, surveys conducted before the election showed that two-thirds of the electorate not only favored extended health insurance but actually thought it was already a right of all Americans. So where does this disconnect come from between what the public believes are the key issues (and there are pages and pages of similar statistics) and what their politicians feel able to discuss? Chomsky's answer is that corporatism is perverting the course of democracy away from what the people want and towards what gives corporations more power, more money, and more control.
If Chomsky proves one thing, I think it's that Orwell was too optimistic in 1984. In that book, Orwell assumed that people would seek the truth and eventually react to the totalitarian tactics of those seeking to rule over them and rebel. How naïve! Now we don't even care that we're being lied to. Our governments can take us to war in search of "WMD" and if they don't find any, they don't even bother to build their own "Iraqi" weapons site. They just say, "Bugger, oh well, Saddam was a bad man anyway and once he even threatened to kill my daddy." And people accept it. At least in Orwell's 1984, those who rule find it necessary to lie. In our worst cases, our masters don't even feel this is necessary anymore.
Ironically, even here Chomsky proves that most Americans actually believe in the rule of law and even support the United Nations' role in international relations. This is yet another example of the undemocratic disconnect between the US government and the will of the US people.
Democracy is a precious gift from our forefathers, and it's too important to give away without a fight. If you're not sure what it is that we stand to lose, then this is a good book to read. It's really time to get angry because there's too much at stake otherwise.
Many people I know make the smug statement that, as everyone knows, Americans just don't get irony. Chomsky proves that this isn't the case. His book has moments of blinding irony. But the point is that idiots don't get irony, and that's because they've been trained by our media and our culture not to think. Whether they're in the US, Australia, or Britain, too many people are expected to disenfranchise themselves from the democratic process. We must resist this. Despite the fact that elections today are often far from "democratic," we must do what we can to focus the minds of those being elected on the issues that directly impact the majority of the citizens of our countries.

Okay, this one I finished on the 8th. However, I started it mostly during a BEACH VACATION, like an idiot.

I don't go on vacation very often, so I didn't think about what kind of read I was bringing. I just considered what I currently had. Well, a lesson has been learned.

But here's my summary: There are WAR CRIMES, WAR CRIMES, WAR CRIMES. The government is greedy. Politicians on both sides do the opposite of what the people want. Wages are a joke, and healthcare is also a joke. It feels like we live in hell.

I might have missed a few things, but I think that about covers the main points. It's quite a dismal picture that emerges from this. But perhaps it's important to be aware of these issues and try to find ways to make things better.