I've tried in the past to draw attention to the substantial continuities between the "neoconservative" foreign policy of George W. Bush and the classical imperialism of the late-19th and early twentieth centuries. "D" at Lawyers, Guns, and Money
notes some linkages in terms of the rhetoric of gender anxiety as a motivating factor in foreign policy adventurism. And I think there's something to do. This sort of consideration doesn't drive strategic thinking, but it does help create a mentality wherein the destructiveness of war counts as a
benefit rather than a cost of a war policy (see also
"suck on this"). That skewed approach to accounting obviously sends the whole debate off-kilter in very bad ways.
This article available online at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2007/11/gender-anxiety-and-imperialism/46817/