There are precedents going back centuries, maybe millennia, that if a private (or rebel) army which intends to attack country A receives either support (money, arms, or food) or sanctuary from country B, that support or sanctuary is an act of war by B against A, and A may retaliate. This means that when (for example) Lebanon permits Hezbollah to arm and plan an eventual war with Israel from within Lebanon’s borders, then as soon as Hezbollah attacks, Lebanon and Israel are at war.

Allowing this situation to exist is a bad idea for the country in Lebanon’s position, because it effectively means Lebanon’s government has delegated to Hezbollah its right to declare war, and thus may be forced into a war at a time when its national army is not prepared for one.

I’m not saying that I agree with the prosecution in the case at hand. I would like to see the Hmong liberate their homeland, and if I had Hillary Clinton’s job I would lobby the president to permit it. But there is a good reason for the Neutrality Act, which prohibits the organizing or training of private armies in the US without permission from the State Department — without it, we could never count on staying at peace.