Can someone, pretty please, articulate any argument-- any argument at all-- that Oakeshottean or Burkean conservatism could ever support the Libyan war? I am truly straining to imagine any space whatsoever for such support.
Those arguments stand. I would not have initiated this war at this time in this way for these reasons. But it is perfectly possible to take that position, yet realize it's now a fait accompli and be glad that Qaddafi is no longer able to massacre thousands by brute force.
Or to put it another way: If one has failed to help prevent a war, that does not commit you henceforth to hoping for its failure, or not being relieved when it temporarily prevents mass murder.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.org.