Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on May 4, 2012
Ambassador John Bolton first claims to have a principle to determine when we should go to war. He says that the Iraqi war was justified because they had attacked another country, had weapons of mass destruction and had attacked their own people. On further questioning, it turns out that if another country like North Korea is in the same situation, we should not attack them, thus that is not his principle. The same thing happened when he justified the war in Afghanistan based on them harboring terrorists that have attacked us. It turns out that that's not a principle either because he doesn't want to apply it to Pakistan. Ultimately it becomes clear that he has no principle that he can use to determine when we should go to war. He finally admits that his decision "is not reducible to a formula" i.e., to a principle. The purpose of the powers of Art. 1, Sec. 8 is stated clearly at the beginning, that with regard to war the purpose is "to provide for the common defence". The preamble of the Constitution says the same thing - "to provide for the common defence". Nowhere does it say to liberate and, or protect foreigners!