Hi Max,
I'm glad you put 'foreign adventures' in quotes . I think that it is important for the US to be extremely careful in how it exercises its power. BTW, while I certainly do call the US an "imperial power" I tend to use it in the "real" meaning of the term "imperial" - i.e. "sphere of influence", rather than the monarchical overtones that got added on during the middle ages.
The use of moral imperatives as adjuncts and "grounds" for the exercise of imperial power are somewhat tricky. Britain used that strategy extensively in the 19th century, and the disjuncture between the moral strategy (unilinear evolution and the drive to "civilize" the world) and the political / military reality of WW I served as the base for the dissolution of the Empire in the 20th century. I've noted similar leit motifs in President Bush's speeches about Iraq, especially his simplistic "morality" equations, which I find very troubling. I think that a systematic comparison of the rhetoric and politics that led to the invasion of Afghanistan and that of Iraq show some basic differences that are worth examining.
As long as there is no major disjuncture between the rhetoric and the reality, it probably won't hurt. There is always a question of motives, and altruism is frequently considered to be BS.
Marc
Bookmarks