The U.S. Needs to Reject Preventive War

It was relatively easy for Trump to initiate a war against Iran because so many people in and around our government take for granted that the U.S. can and should attack other countries.

Janan Ganesh comments on the problems caused by Western leaders’ fixation on WWII:

When Sir Keir Starmer did not support the Iran mission, Donald Trump likened him to Neville Chamberlain. From the Vietnam war in the 1960s to the Iraq war this side of the millennium, the slur of “appeaser” has been used to hush dissenters against foreign interventions. This would be easier to take if the hawks occasionally emulated the Allies by winning. Instead, the post-1945 record is so often one of outright military defeat or unintended consequences. Obsession with the second world war keeps getting the west — especially the Anglo-American world — into trouble.

One of the most pernicious ideas to come out of this obsession with WWII is the enthusiasm for “preventive” warfare. The flip side of hawkish disdain for appeasement is the insane belief that Britain and France ought to have struck first. This sort of thinking has warped our debates around military intervention for decades. We have seen this several times in just the last 25 years.