Unjust Wars Or Unjust Pacifism
SEARCH BLOG: WAR
Most people would do anything to avoid war. War is the result of the failure of leadership. War is always avoidable. War is never justified. War exacerbates problems; war does not solve them. War is the tool of the ruling elite to keep the masses in line.
There are those who would argue that, for example, the U.S. was the cause of WWI and WWII and the conflicts associated with those titles would have been far smaller and shorter if the U.S. had simply allowed Germany, Russia, and Japan to wage their wars and let the chips fall where they might. They would argue that pacifism, outside of the borders of the U.S., is always the best policy. There is no justification for U.S. military action outside of U.S. borders.
For example, if the U.S., under President Wilson, had not sent 12,000 troops into Russia to support the Czar, Lenin and Stalin would not have risen to power. Of course, the fact that the foray was short-lived and the general leading the expedition concluded that the White army was far worse than the Red army and that the best course of action... which was taken... was to leave, is conveniently ignored in the speculation that Lenin and Stalin would not have risen to power.
Likewise, the U.S. reaction to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was simply the wrong strategy according to the pacifists-isolationists who conclude that the Japanese Empire would have simply disintegrated if the U.S. had not become involved.
These, and similar speculations and fantasies, are used to argue that the U.S. involvement in any conflict overseas is unjustified.
That fact is that war is the most unjustified but necessary of human endeavors is disputed at every turn. Better to let an aggressor take whatever action they will and let the consequences occur than to become involved. If a nation that is friendly to us and a strong partner in trade and tradition is attacked, it is better to let that nation fall to the aggressor than get involved.
That is because war is never justified unless you are directly attacked. That is because all humans are open to rational argument and war is never seen as a tool of some regimes. That is because dictators will never arise if the U.S. simply keeps its troops within its borders. After all, there is no moral difference between U.S. actions and those of the dictators... dictators who were just misunderstood and who would not have been such evil leaders if the U.S. military had simply stayed home and played checkers. History would have been different and better if these men had simply been allowed to do what they wanted to do.
Okay, Mao and Pol Pot were simply allowed to do what they wanted to do. See how well that worked out?
From 
