Both of you are very wrong. We fight because there are those who will not leave us alone. We fight because the other great powers are too cowardly to solve the problems that they started (i.e. Francophone Africa, Middle East, Indonesia, Pakistan). What is your definition of justice? Ponderous international courts, or laser-guided bombs? I tend to prefer force as an application of justice, it carries much more meaning than some Hague beaureaucrat droning on about 'multilateral consensus'. Genocide? Name one fucking instance in which we have systematically murdered an entire race or ethnic group. "Neo-Imperialism"? Now you're getting way out there. The United States has, historically, gone overseas to eliminate threats to its interests. Indochina? We saw it as just another part of the cold war. Korea? same thing. We had a goal then, to contain and weaken communism. In the end we simply built up our military to the point of Soviet Economic, and therefore political, collapse. Going overseas helped our cause, but cultivating our allies proved more important. This battle is being replaced with the war on terror. Radical Islam poses a threat to not only the United States, but much of the European Continent. Benjamin Franklin said it best, "We can hang together, or hang separately".