"Muscular liberalism", a new term for classic imperialism, without the negative connotations. I like it - unlike most people nowadays, I don't claim to be strictly anti-imperialist*.
The problems are in the implementation.
- First, a general policy of muscular liberalism is guaranteed to boost nuclear proliferation among non-liberal nations that feel threatened.
- Second, if you consider military intervention in another country, either go in big with a clear objective, or don't go in at all. And never, ever let the success of your operation depend on the cooperation of the enemy or an unreliable ally.
- Third, these interventions are expensive and make little difference in the long term. There will always be another Saddam, it's basic human nature to have some enemies. As far as enemies go, Gadaffi is too much a coward to cause serious problems outside Libya.
* Imperialism, as defined by The Dictionary of Human Geography, is "the creation and maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural, and territorial relationship, usually between states and often in the form of an empire, based on domination and subordination."
