Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais
Wars of Pure Defense: an interesting review of the literature.
Wars of Pure Defense: an interesting review of the literature.
WPD would meet actual attacks on national territory while declining to devastate the invaders’ home territory and society. It would therefore undertake no colossal overseas operations, invasions, surrenders, occupations, and the rest. Nor does WPD require granting semi-magical war powers to state bureaucracies while rationalizing the damage done to law and liberty. We could quit agonizing over the “laws” of war, except perhaps to exceed them on the side of humanity. The world-striding U.S. unitary executive, stripped of his mercenary companies, could shrink into a glorified sewer commissioner. Alliances would be the exception, never the rule. Agreements whereby an attack on Micro-Magnesia is fictitiously seen as an attack on U.S. soil would not arise.
With invaders repelled, there would be little to do except to arrange prisoner exchanges and discuss damages, perhaps in a real peace treaty (out of fashion since 1945).
Where mere money is concerned, pure-defense planning would surely be cheaper than constant preparation to invade and bomb the world. With respect to a pure-defense budget, libertarian realists have made useful suggestions (despite the lack of commitment to strict nonintervention). Earl Ravenal’s “Case for Adjustment” (Foreign Policy, 81, Winter 1990–1991) outlined a massive reduction of U.S. defense spending simply by assuming withdrawal from Europe, protection of sea lanes and essential allies, and a minimal nuclear deterrent.
With invaders repelled, there would be little to do except to arrange prisoner exchanges and discuss damages, perhaps in a real peace treaty (out of fashion since 1945).
Where mere money is concerned, pure-defense planning would surely be cheaper than constant preparation to invade and bomb the world. With respect to a pure-defense budget, libertarian realists have made useful suggestions (despite the lack of commitment to strict nonintervention). Earl Ravenal’s “Case for Adjustment” (Foreign Policy, 81, Winter 1990–1991) outlined a massive reduction of U.S. defense spending simply by assuming withdrawal from Europe, protection of sea lanes and essential allies, and a minimal nuclear deterrent.
Comment