"Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint."This passage struck me with its reference to America's current military prominence and how that alone is not enough to overcome obstacles. In fact, the wars that we as a nation tend to derive pride from (such as our role in WWII and the revolutionary war) were either against a more powerful adversary, as in the revolutionary war, or where we had to build up the economy and military to prepare, like when Pearl Harbor was bombed. My knowledge of history being the patchwork shanty that it is, I am under the impression that we went into Vietnam with confidence, but lost. Some might say that there was no winner or loser, but I think if a nation starts a war and doesn't win, it counts as losing (not that it's a bad thing).
I suppose the excerpt speaks to the higher morality of just about anything, from international relations to personal conduct, and could support equally impressive arguments and counter-arguments for either.
No comments:
Post a Comment