Hey, wait a minute, John! Just because I reported on “Losers for Peace” doesn’t automatically make me a peacenik. And merely quoting Bill Kauffman’s arguments shouldn’t be interpreted as my belated endorsement of the American First Committee.
But this “humanitarian” invasion idea is one of the looniest things I’ve ever heard of — hostile humanitarianism? armed compassion? militant charity? This is the same “meals on wheels” approach to the military that conservatives mocked when the Clinton administration did it. A foolish consistency may be the hobgoblin of little minds, but Emerson’s aphorism doesn’t justify veering wildly all over the place.
“Humanitarian intervention” either is or is not liberal nonsense. If it is nonsense, then its opponents are not to be confused with pacifists.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.