The French Foreign Legion has a special place in history, known both for its bravery and for its failures, but mostly for its association with the ills of imperialism and colonialism. That's why comments like this stand out.

“…on a hot autumn day on a remote parade field at Ft. Benning, GA, Garrison told the 700 members of the 3rd Ranger Battalion that we were as close to America’s Foreign Legion as you could get. He went on to say that our job was to fight the dirty little wars that nobody else wanted, was capable of, or could stomach."

The French Foreign Legion has long been known for being committed to France's dirty little wars overseas, wars that France would prefer not to sacrifice French lives for. This condition, of not having to risk lives of value, changes how politicians feel about wars.

“More than any other of the advanced industrial states, France has been willing to engage in peace enforcement operations. Perhaps this is because, relying largely on its Foreign Legion, French political leaders have not had to be as sensitive as others to the risk of casualties.”
- Carl Kaysen & George W. Rathjens (2010)

The French Foreign Legion was created in 1831. It was originally intended for foriegn nationals and only to serve overseas, but nearly a quarter of its recruits are French citizens today. A soldier wounded in battle can become a French citizen by "Français par le sang versé" ("French by spilled blood"). The Legion was originally used as a dumping ground for disruptive elements of society, such as revolutionaries and prisoners.
The Legion was primarily used to expand the colonial empire, which is managed to do in Algeria, Indo-China, and the Sub-Sahara. It's most famous battle was the Battle of Camaron, where just 65 men held off an army of up to 3,000 for nearly 10 hours. When the last five remaining Legionnaires had ran out of ammo, they made a final bayonet charge against a Mexican army of over 2,000.

Today the French Foreign Legion is used as a rapid deployment force to preserve French interests overseas.

"Any time there's a conflict anywhere in the world that involves France, the French government sends the Legion, and if we get wiped out and destroyed, the people in France don't give a damn because its a bunch of foreignors. We know we're going to get sent where no one else wants to gets sent and that's what makes us unique and that's what makes us deadly."
-Nick Hughes, former Legionaire

The United States has never had an American foreign legion, but it has played with the idea, as the 1st American Volunteer Group (AVG) of the Chinese Air Force in 1941-1942, famously nicknamed the Flying Tigers. President Eisenhower, in particular, endorsed the idea of a “Volunteers Freedom Corps.”
America's Special Forces is gradually becoming the successor to the French Foreign Legion.

These days, the sun never sets on America’s special-operations forces. Over the past year, they have landed in 81 countries, most of them training local commandos to fight so American troops don’t have to. From Honduras to Mongolia, Estonia to Djibouti, U.S. special operators teach local soldiers diplomatic skills to shield their countries against extremist ideologies, as well as combat skills to fight militants who break through.
The budget for Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., which dispatches elite troops around the world, jumped to $10 billion in the fiscal year that ended on Sept. 30, from $2.2 billion in 2001. Congress has doubled the command to nearly 70,000 people this year, from 33,000 in fiscal 2001. The Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force provide further funding.

Like the French Foreign Legion, our Special Forces are a rapid deployment force to preserve commercial and political interests overseas, with little to do with national defense.
Most Americans are completely unaware of how far-flung our Special Forces are, and how they have their hands in just about every single conflict in the world.
I'm sure that French citizens at the time of their Empire were also similarly ignorant.

Of course there are significant and fundamental differences between the all-American Special Forces and the mostly foreign, French Foreign Legion, but there are also similarities that need to be acknowledged.
For instance, we must look at how our forces are used.

The second contention is that this direction-of-change is giving rise to a new principle (of a sort)—neither Gaullist “the defense of France must be French” nor collective defense—of simply outsourcing Europe’s defense to the United States. Among its several effects, it construes American armed forces as a foreign legion of sorts, in the sense that when NATO makes war (or tries to deter it, as in Ukraine), it is largely not a NATO campaign waged collectively. Instead, it is a NATO campaign waged largely by American armed forces.

A good example of this is Bush's Coalition of the Willing, where the international community was bribed into being used as political cover for an American war.
Obama's current anti-ISIS coalition, which largely doesn't even exist, is also similar.

Another factor to consider the composition of our far-flung forces.
For instance, in South Korea we have created a binational division.
However, the more alarming trend is the privatization of our military forces.

For instance, there are security companies like Triple Canopy and Defion Internacional. They have been given missions in Iraq by the US Department of State.
Maybe you are thinking, "Sure they are mercenaries, but they are still Americans, right?" Wrong.

Triple Canopy, like Defion Internacional, is known to employ discount South American soldiers.

In 2012, Triple Canopy still had an army of about 1,800 troops in Iraq — mostly from Uganda and Peru - on a State Department contract.

Welcome to globalization. Capitalism is being used as a backdoor for America to create its own Foreign Legion.
Triple Canopy and Defion Int. are two of eight private mercenary companies that the Pentagon has contracted with. However, if you wanted to learn more about this relationship, well, tough luck.

The firms themselves can be more opaque than the US military or intelligence agencies, because they are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act or similar legislative tools that impose transparency. Even members of Congress do not have direct access to the contracts by which these firms are employed, even though Congress is writing the checks....
Government inquiry into the industry is limited and, at times, convoluted. Currently, there is little, if any, meaningful regulation of or reporting requirements from this industry, which is remarkable given that the firms are authorized to use lethal force abroad under the US flag.

The trend toward using increasingly small, elite forces in remote parts of the world, without oversight is undemocratic and imperialistic. The trend toward using private mercenaries from foreign nations in place of American soldiers is beyond stupid and outright dangerous.
Nothing good will come from this. These trends have always led to disaster historically.