So I'm really enjoying the pro-Empire stuff filtering through conservative writers. It started a decade ago in The Weekly Standard with "The Case for Empire" and has hit hyper drive (sorry, had to) with the Force Awakens coming soon (already have tickets!!!). A few days ago, there was an actual defense of the destruction of Alderaan, comparing it to the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki:
So, Alderaan was a legitimate military target. Was the level of force used against it justified? It’s a tricky question, but it seems the least bad of all the alternatives. Consider another option the Empire could have taken: invading Alderaan, removing its leaders and installing a pro-Empire regime. However, putting boots on the ground in this manner would likely have destabilized not only the planet but also the entire region, creating a breeding ground for religious terrorists and draining blood and treasure for decades. It’s not hard to imagine a Jedi State of the Alderaan System (JSAS, for short, though they’d likely prefer the simpler Jedi State (JS)) arising from the ashes of some ill-conceived invasion and occupation.
The destruction of Alderaan, then, is more analogous to the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki than it is to a “genocide.”* Yes, it was horrible, and yes, it would be nice if it didn’t happen. But it was an attack on a legitimate military target and defensible under Just War Theory, an attack intended to save lives by deterring other major powers from beginning conflicts of their own. The Imperial Grand Moff Tarkin is no worse than Democratic President Harry S. Truman — and no one worth listening to considers Truman to be a monster.
Then in the Free Beacon, the writer who defended the obliteration of Alderaan laments the Nazi like qualities of the pasty rebels, with the picture below being the cherry on top: