Re: Is the US the ultimate rogue nation?
I'd say even the third choice is biased.
We've established and defended certain charters which give every sovereign nation the right to its own existence. The norm has been attack in retaliation, or in view of immediate threat.
We don't really have that right now. Our modern era is on the brink of devolving into the age of Empire, where a sovereign nation's existence is a right only insofar as nobody else wants to challenge it. The United States, historically the keeper of such covenants in the past century, is essentially about to embark upon a mission of conquest. A pre-emptive strike such as is suggested by our current administration, where there is no immediate threat visible, is little more than a sugar coating on colonialization. Invading a nation with no reason, deposing its ruler, this is all something we sought to stop ten or so years ago when Hussein did the same thing.
That Saddam Hussein is a horrible human can go unargued...but when he's kept his nose clean (seemingly) for the charges leveled against him...do we have the right to step in and destroy the very principles we've defended?
And if we do so, how much longer will the Republic stand? Will the administration stop with Iraq, or will it set a precedent? Can the Empire remain a Republic?