A HEAD FOR AN EYE – WHY DISPROPORTIONATE FORCE IN WARFARE IS MORALLY REQUIRED
On Thursday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced that Tehran would answer America “an eye for an eye,” which he intended not as proportionality but as a threat.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio responded that the President’s policy is “a head for an eye.”
The usual pearl clutchers erupted in horror. But this is exactly the right policy. And not just “right” in the sense of “correct.”
War is terrible, and should not be engaged in lightly. But once the decision is made to go to war, America must use disproportionate force to actually win, as it did routinely prior to Korea and Vietnam.
The days of Colin Powell’s “you break it, you buy it” rule are over.
Iran—which has considered itself at war with the United States for 47 years and acted accordingly—can stand down, stop attacking its neighbors, stop attacking civilian ships, stop destroying civilian water plants, stop attacking hotels, or we will compel it to do so in the most “convincing” ways available.
Which one is up to Tehran.
Join the forum discussion on this post
I’d like to speak today about revolutionaries and counterrevolutionaries. Whether we realize it or not, we’ve been in a progressive revolutionary cycle for about 50 years.
Over its long history, New York City has had every kind of mayor under the sun.
Perhaps it got too obvious not to notice.
Today I want to talk about the positive state that we want to aim for most of the time – which will connect us with the emotional resources and clear thinking we need to make our best decisions.
