>
"Violence is already endless. It’s just a matter of moral vanity whether or not you feel better about not being personally involved."Nonsense. Violence is still limited, in time and extent, by economic and political forces, and by the fact that soldiers still have some respect for life of other people, because they are in the field, risking their own life and seeing the injustices of war. But put them in control of a violent video game, and that may change.
> We’ve tried non-intervention before, and places like Czechoslovakia, Poland, China, and Rwanda have paid the price.
You've tried intervention, and places like Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Syria also have paid and are paying the price.
Perhaps it is not about the intervention/non-intervention, but about how you engage in the world.
> The only counter to that is precision warfare.
Only if you already decided on the warfare part. An alternative is to stop killing unknown people abroad and in so helping create new terrorists, and instead doing something about cooperation between the governments to stop the violence.