Imagine that after the terrorist bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, the federal government engaged in cruise missile attacks of known and suspected training sites of the Michigan Militia. Pretty crazy, huh?
We would expect a fair trial of the accused. We would also consider collateral damage to people not directly involved in the terrorist bombing unacceptable.
So why do we, citizens of the U.S., accept our government bombing known and suspected terrorist sites in other countries, like Afghanistan and Sudan?
Many people would answer that international law is not sufficient to deal with criminals like international terrorists.
Yet the U.S., as represented by the Clinton administration, and the Chicago Tribune opposed the creation of the International Criminal Court, which would allow the international community to hold individuals accountable for crimes against humanity.
In the post-Cold War world we, humanity, are faced with a choice. We can create stronger international institutions for enforcing the rule of law or we can continue to have the cycle of cruise missile attacks in retaliation for low-technology bombings in retaliation for cruise missile attacks, etc. Eventually one of the bombings will be a weapon of mass destruction.
