Comment by yaddayadda
11 years ago
To be very clear I'm am not defending the attack on Notepad ++!
> Defending yourself doesn't mean attacking ...
Here in the U.S. there's a common sports phrase, "The best defense is a good offense." This carries over into our military policies. For example, while other countries may benefit from our military presence, the reason we send our military into a situation is to protect the U.S.. There may be an immediate benefit of protection or it may be a long-play protection (e.g. "placate the nationals so we aren't contributing to the future pool of terrorists"), but ultimately we send our military in to protect ourselves and this is frequently a preemptive defense that can be seen as offensively attacking.
Again, I'm not condoning any terrorist attack, I'm just not buying your statement that "Defending yourself doesn't mean attacking..." I'm also not saying that preemptive offense is a moral correct policy; just that it is a common policy.
What the United States are doing in the Middle East is not morally okay. Not even close. At best it kind of works.
EDIT: If you have 45 minutes, here [1] is a show by German political cabaret artist Volker Pispers rushing through half a century of history with heavy focus on the USA in the Middle East. With English subtitles. It's a disturbing mix between fun and contempt for mankind.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG0Ql0VfcRg
I think there are very few cases where the use of military force is unambiguously morally okay.
I am more thinking about things like the Iraq War, a invasion without any justification besides a bunch of lies.