More Theorizing About Security and the New World Order

Lee Harris and Robert Dreyfuss have written intriguing articles about the world historical gamble that George Bush and his neoconservative, hawkish advisers are taking with Iraq.

Although the gamble is huge and the downsides could be massive I find the arguments for reshaping the world more persuasive than the pallid arguments made by the Bush administration up to this point. Tentative links to terrorists and uncertain proof of weapons of mass destruction seem pale by comparison. Perhaps this means I’m an idealist who hopes we can actually change the world instead of resigning ourselves to the status quo. What a surprise that the conservatives who once were so dismissive of liberal attempts to enforce human rights are now defending an interventionist foreign policy on a scale undreamed of before?