The Obama administration has unveiled a new national security strategy, saying armed conflict should be a last resort when diplomacy is exhausted.

The new strategy is being contrasted to ex-President Bush's concept of pre-emptive war.

Comparing the two approaches, former Pentagon adviser Richard Perle said, "I do not see a fundamental difference except rhetorically in tone."

"Any American administration would move to prevent an attack if it they possibly could", adding that Obama's "diplomacy and engagement" strategy was "not getting results".

Me Perle defended Mr Bush, "the characterisation of the Bush administration is fundamentally wrong", he urged, "he was not a cowboy, he was not trigger happy".

He described the former President's actions as, "a pragmatic response to the challenges we face".

"I don't think you can judge what Bush would've done in other circumstances or what Obama will still do in the circumstances he faces by looking at the statements the two have made".

However he reflected that the Bush administration's "articulation of a policy of pre-emption," was "possibly a mistake".

"It lead to an exaggerated perception of pre-emption as the heart and soul of American policy".

Get in touch with Today via email , Twitter or Facebook or text us on 84844.