I don't believe that one should have one-size-fits-all moral rules for international political action.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think the rule should be that if we're going to take actions overseas that result in the deaths of people, the United States should take responsibility for that.
Politically, foreign policy never matters until it matters, and then it matters a lot.
Where defining foreign policy as 'ethical' went wrong was that it implied that all decisions would be exclusive in every respect of any dealings with unethical regimes.
Of course the UN brings in a lot of moral authority.
The civilized world needs to think about a decision when single politicians are not allowed to stay in power.
Every major power always seeks to justify its action on moral grounds. Such behaviour is almost as old as the hills. The west has been a particularly vigorous exponent of this credo; and there is no reason to believe that China, for example, will be any different. But behind the moral rhetoric invariably lies interest and ideology.
We prefer world law in the age of self-determination to world war in the age of mass extermination.
Yes, America must do the right thing, but to provide moral leadership, America must do it in the right way, too.
A country should be defended not by arms, but by ethical behavior.
I do think the U.S. has a moral and political leadership role to play.