The 'Wars of Necessity' vs 'Wars of Choice' Distinction is False and Dangerous
Source: https://www.facebook.com/americanspectator/. "A False Choice: ‘Wars of Necessity’ v. ‘Wars of Choice’ | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics." March 7, 2026. spectator.org
The Gist
The author argues that calling some wars 'necessary' and others 'choice' is misleading and dangerous. He believes democratic countries should attack threatening enemies before they become too strong, because waiting usually makes things much worse, as history shows with Hitler and North Korea.
Conclusion
The distinction between 'wars of necessity' and 'wars of choice' is essentially arbitrary and dangerous, as it prevents democratic nations from taking necessary preemptive action against aggressive regimes before they become too powerful to stop
Premises
- Historical examples show that delaying action against rising threats leads to worse outcomes (Hitler's Rhineland rearmament, North Korea's nuclear development)
- Modern democratic nations don't wage wars for arbitrary reasons like glory or conquest, unlike historical empires
- Nations must make military decisions based on imperfect information unless they wait until after being attacked
- Aggressive regimes like Iran openly declare hostile intentions and have already killed Americans
- In the age of weapons of mass destruction, the consequences of waiting too long are catastrophically higher than acting preemptively
- The Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) was ineffective because Iran blocked inspections and continued missile development
- Waiting for perfect justification or complete threat development gives advantages to potential aggressors
Assumptions
- Preemptive strikes can be morally justified against declared enemies
- Democratic nations are inherently more peaceful and reasonable than authoritarian regimes
- Intelligence assessments about weapons programs are generally reliable enough to justify military action
- The costs of preemptive action are typically lower than the costs of delayed action
- Aggressive regimes will inevitably use their weapons capabilities if given the chance