ARABIAN GULF (March 5, 2012) A landing craft air cushion assigned to Assault Craft Unit (ACU) 5 departs the amphibious assault ship USS Makin Island (LHD 8) with an M1 A1 Abrams main battle tank. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class David McKee/Released)
I have written here on Richardcyoung.com before that America should avoid any conflict that isn’t directly affecting American citizens. And I have pointed to Weinberger/Powell Doctrine as a good basis for what constitutes a justifiable use of America’s military power.
At The American Conservative, Pat Buchanan examines the same question. He wonders if America should go to war over Crimea or East Jerusalem. What about South Korea? To what extent does America play a role in these far off lands? Pat urges that consideration be given to the fact that the battles America is being urged to wage are of much more consequence to the potential adversaries than to the American people. He writes:
What we are witnessing in Crimea, across the Middle East, in the South China Sea, and on the Korean peninsula, are nations more willing than we to sacrifice and take risks, because their interests there are far greater than ours.
What America needs is a new national consensus on what is vital to us and what is not, what we are willing to fight to defend and what we are not.
For this generation of Americans is not going to risk war indefinitely to sustain some Beltway elite’s idea of a “rules-based new world order.” After the Cold War, we entered a new world—and we need new red lines to replace the old.
Read more here.
