think you are trying to say that , because we have guided bombs, we can reduce civilian casualties; not that only we have the moral right to bomb people into submission.
Right, we have no more "moral right" to bomb countries than anyone else. But when we do it, we have evolved to a much higher moral standard than any other nation in history. It WAS evolution, however -- it hasn't been that long since we sent B52s over Hanoi...
For the most part It [Bush Doctrine] has been a good strategy so far.
I was, at first, quite uncomfortable with the notion of pre-emption. It did, after all, seem contrary to our nation's recent history. However, on reflection, it isn't that different conceptually from a "Monroe Doctrine", updated for a global era.
The more I've thought of it, the more sense it has made to me. We're living in a different time, and it makes absolutely no sense to adhere to a self-imposed policy that is certainly going to result in making us a softer target. While the Hitler comparisons run rampant, it is predominantly amongst an alarmist Left that really may not comprehend the issues. |
