Based on the information relayed by this text, I concur with it especially when it comes to the issue of “Just war”. However, the strong insistence that a certain state would result to this remedy in most cases pose numerous questions to the non-involved parties.
Based on the illustrations that you have relayed concerning varied wars, which America involved itself, I agree the magnitude used in executing “Just War” does not commensurate with the case at hand. This is evident during the use of an atomic weapon during WW11 whereby it ended up exterminating numerous civilians than the targeted elements. Hence, proving despite respective authorities allowing “Just War” the remedy ends up being worse than anticipated good for not only results to massive massacre but also disruption of economy of innocent people . In addition, I do also concur with your text regarding impacts that up to date and as detailed in numerous annals of historical accounts when US involved it regional wars. This is encompasses US’ involvement in Iraq that you have stated lightly but on reflecting about the scenario and drawing similar conventional review in other incidents proves how “Just war” may be worse than good. This is because it is acts as a tool that “engulfs” hidden agendas but “sugar-coated” with intentions of ensuring peace, which is not the case. Since, most of US’ motivations range from political to economical whereby in losing these goals is the greatest fear. Hence, result to be more vocal compared to other global states.