69 million page views

A problem

Reader comment on item: War as Social Work?

Submitted by David Isecke (United States), May 14, 2003 at 17:48

Dear Dr. Pipes,

This is one of the few times I must respectfully disagree with an article of yours.

I strongly believe that 'social work', or humanitarian war, is moral and ultimately strategically beneficial to us. To see why it is moral, consider the cases of both World Wars, and most of our wars since. In all of these cases, there were stong isolationist elements at home, which correctly stated that there was no credible threat of a foreign invasion of our soil. Indeed, even in WWII, the Axis powers did little more to us than a few attacks on shipping lines and an attack on a relatively minor naval base on land that was not actually part of the territorial US yet. These were threats, but the magnitude of response required, both in lives lost and treasure spent, was orders of magnitude higher than could have been justified by the actual threat to us at the time. However, if we did not get involved, one shudders to think of what the state of the world might be today for untold billions of people. Others have already pointed out some of the nations and peoples who have been saved. The morality of this speaks for itself.

On a strategic level, I think it is important for people to realize that globalism cannot be fought; it's here now. The humanitarian crisis spots of today are the security crisis spots of tomorrow. The countries we have liberated are the very same ones from whom we have nothing to fear (French venility nonwithstanding). Furthermore, due to the very nature of international trade, the prosperity of one country is not really a threat to another; it is a boon. That we are trading partners with Singapore, Canada, Britian, and South Korea (just to name a few) is a boon to the economies of all involved. Over the long haul, real world prosperity grows cooperatively. Vile dictatorships are wretched at adding to it, and in fact, sometimes subtract from total world wealth by adding security concerns.

One clear example: The Korean war could not have been justified in terms of our security interests at the time. Yet, if that war had not taken place, our dear friend Kim would now control the entire Korean peninsula, and probably would be an even greater threat than he is today. This is, of course, besides the millions of South Koreans whose lives and prosperity they literally owe us.

It is for this reason that I also disagreed with your idea of installing a strongman in Iraq. Understandable, perhaps, in reducing the impression that we are an occupying force. However, those who are determined to see the US as evil will see the new government we install there as a US pawn. The world press will surely place every one of this strongmans' questionable actions at our doorstep. Remember, when we supported Saddam against Iran, it was the same princople: support a strongman who seems like less of a problem against a known threat.

Putting Iraq prematurely in non-US controlled hands seems to risk creating a future crisis that we could have avoided. If we want a say on how the world will look to the next generation of Americans, even on a purely national-interest and threat containment level, nation-building has to stop being a dirty word.

Finally, I'm sure you didn't intend it this way, but what if Hitler had not started WWII with the invasion of Poland, and contented himself with just gassing Jews from Germany, Austria, and part of Chechoslovakia? Remember, it would not have been in anyone's security interest to intervene. Would such 'social work' be justified?
Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment      Next Comment >>

Reader comments (51) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
1A new military strategy in Afghanistan that might work. [353 words]Bill PazaratzNov 6, 2010 22:46179994
"War As Social Work" [201 words]Renee BouvierNov 8, 2007 15:32113438
Enhancing America's Security vs. War as Social Work [22 words]jennifer solisOct 13, 2007 14:40111385
WELcome democracy [92 words]samanJul 12, 2005 22:1623422
The Long Term [180 words]AdamJul 23, 2003 11:5010178
War as Social work [164 words]A.K. LenceskiMay 23, 2003 02:149196
A problem [605 words]David IseckeMay 14, 2003 17:489069
Brilliant! [26 words]Carmen Waggoner, Ph.D.May 14, 2003 11:159053
reason for military intervention [102 words]dave morrisMay 9, 2003 19:528979
Real war [189 words]A.A.May 9, 2003 18:388978
Strengthening alliances [247 words]Antonio ChavesMay 8, 2003 14:278960
USA saved Aussie bacon as well [166 words]Craig LawrieMay 8, 2003 00:418939
Social Work and National Interest [171 words]William KinneyMay 7, 2003 23:018937
The administration has an obligation to the American people to provide what it promised [223 words]Alex CMay 7, 2003 20:098934
Altruism benefits no one [125 words]Maryallene OtisMay 7, 2003 18:418933
Thank you for calling attention to the media's spin [171 words]K WallMay 7, 2003 16:308930
How about DeSoto property rights? [48 words]Jules C.May 7, 2003 13:178929
Well Done [14 words]Moshe CohenMay 7, 2003 12:488927
Then why....? [73 words]Barbara RunkelMay 7, 2003 05:428921
Remember 9/11 and American security? [160 words]Ivan BarnaMay 7, 2003 01:268919
Amen [131 words]Jim FitzgeraldMay 7, 2003 01:108918
Well put! [15 words]PennyMay 7, 2003 00:018916
The road to hell [16 words]Vivek L. DevMay 6, 2003 23:358915
It doesn't follow [226 words]Jim RyanMay 6, 2003 21:498914
Unique point of view [22 words]Ann CiccolellaMay 6, 2003 19:568912
Brilliant Insight [62 words]Peter H. RonaiMay 6, 2003 19:328911
Whose Security? [305 words]Giulio BattistonMay 6, 2003 18:328909
Take a Spin [5 words]N. HayesMay 6, 2003 18:288908
Americans help make the economic recovery become possible... [84 words]Tilman WinklerMay 6, 2003 18:188907
Islamist Schools [95 words]Graham Rael-BrookMay 6, 2003 16:538906
Nation Building [152 words]Paul M. NevilleMay 6, 2003 15:008904
Very well-said about war [125 words]rjalexandMay 6, 2003 14:518903
Amazing [51 words]Larry BensonMay 6, 2003 14:298902
War against Iraq [72 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Samir Khalil SAMIR, SJMay 6, 2003 14:098901
Philanthropy is our interest! [191 words]AvrahamMay 6, 2003 13:368900
I respectfully disagree [128 words]Boris GurevichMay 6, 2003 13:268899
Surrender And Be Free! [176 words]EdMay 6, 2003 13:208898
Thank you: intelligence with common sense [25 words]Marcella JenkinsMay 6, 2003 13:158897
Social work required [131 words]JockoMay 6, 2003 13:108896
Right on!!! [107 words]Jacob B. Padgug, Ed.D.May 6, 2003 12:588895
A ray of sanity [126 words]Patrick BramwellMay 6, 2003 12:148894
Other Wars [88 words]Jeff FosterMay 6, 2003 12:068893
Pipes says what Bush Admin Thinks [180 words]Larry DerfnerMay 6, 2003 11:278892
With respect, this time you're off-track. [239 words]David ScholemMay 6, 2003 11:198891
Iraqi Freedom [24 words]Ron WeinerMay 6, 2003 11:178890
Germany after WWII [54 words]G.C. Colan, Esq.May 6, 2003 10:568888
"Moral" interests [233 words]Ali LebanonMay 6, 2003 10:138884
The Ultimate War Goal? [146 words]Alain Jean-MairetMay 6, 2003 09:578882
Dr. Pipes has identified a MAJOR guiding principle. [86 words]DSm.May 6, 2003 09:518880
Nemesis of Islamists [180 words]R.D. CrockettMay 6, 2003 09:198879
Oh how the truth hurts! [155 words]Daniel LenardMay 6, 2003 09:168878

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)