The liberals' conundrum: When is "supporting war" justifable?
I dunno. It's easy to say we're for "peace," and certainly unnecessary wars (like W Bush's foray into Iraq) were utter financial and humanitarian disasters, with no kind of success to point to. Cynics say that the US gov't does whatever it needs to, to boost the profits of the weapons makers. Mere lives are expendable. I'd like to support the (below cut-and-pasted) sentiment by World Beyond War), but it feels naive. It's catchy to say "let's spend the next $100 trillion on the needs of our own people." If only we would. The biggest reason that the US remains unattacked--the reason you don't have to worry about missiles or vengeful enemy soldiers entering your house-- is our powerful military. It's not because everyone loves us; they know we are one of the most-violent, most-meddling countries on the planet. The biggest reason Ukraine is still a free country is our military aid. Probably could say the same about Israel; not sure...