Nipping it in the bud. That's this author's answer.
Think of the lion approaching all the scared zebras in the open field. None step forward to fight because they don’t want to be the victim. Together they could take them on but it will always be too late.
Think of all the help Gary Cooper had in High Noon.
I don’t know any answers. I’m just awestruck at people who choose a profession where their decisions are this important. I wouldn’t be able to sleep at night.
My favorite isolationist was George Washington. We should have listened to him.
I bet this guy’s bud isn’t going to get nipped.
Naturally I didn’t read the article; just the exceprt.
But is the author really equating a sound conservative policy of America First isolationism to Nazi Germany?
Hoo Boy.
He can suit up and fight if he wants to.
And he can suit up his kids and grandkids.
It was hard enough saying ‘no’ to mega-donor Musk.
This is a whole other level of challenging, but critical for the three legs of his admin:
1) deport, deport, deport,
2) peace by not letting them suck him into war
3) tariffs for returning critical supply chains from China, etc.
So the authors idea of peace is US troops all around the world in perpetuity fighting those who “could” harm us. By his logic we should be in a hot war with China right now. After all, like the Germans pre WW2 they are vastly expanding their war machine.
What a mess the cabal has made. All because they chose not to love the truth. How low IQ of them. Well now they’re going to pay the piper.
Nation building is at one extreme. Isolationism is at the other extreme. Something that falls somewhere in the middle will usually make the most sense.
The knee jerk reaction of Rand Paul calling this a “forever war” was idiotic. Apparently, he will automatically say that in any situation where using military force is being considered. Nation building in Iran probably would turn into a forever war (or an ultimate defeat).
Lindsey Graham is an example of the other extreme.
Every time I think Trump is making a mistake I’m proven wrong.
When he wiped out Iran’s nuke program the world should thank him and Israel.
The United States should be isolationist by nature and interventionist in rare, exceptional cases. That's the only legitimate political stature for a country that is supposed to be built on the idea of limited government. A government that pisses away thousands of lives and trillions of dollars on military campaigns in Islamic sh!t-holes halfway around the world while facilitating an invasion of Third World peasants here at home has no moral claim on any loyalty from its citizens anymore.
There's a reason people don't start wars, and it's the same reason you don't start fights with strangers: You have no idea whom you're dealing with, and you've no moral high ground to claim when he beats you senseless. (You've broken the first rule, why should he follow any of them?)
If we had been more “isolationist”, we wouldn’t be having all the protests, we wouldn’t have CCP bringing in fugus to kill our crops, Laken and a hundred thousand victims would be alive, there wouldn’t have been 9/11, we might have more America first congresscritters not selling us out and we wouldn’t have had Covid.
The DC war culture is like a woman on crack… jonesing for just one more hit on the pipe. “Please baby… I’ll do anything… just one more rock”, as she drops to her knees…
I actually read the article and it is full of nonsense and bs.
Example: “Removing the Iranian regime does not require boots on the ground.”
That is the author’s opinion, not a fact. Iran lost over 1 million men in the war with Iraq, they had no problem getting/forcing their people to fight.
The assumption that if we drop a few bombs and then the war is over is ridiculous. It will be the beginning of the war, not the end. Other nations may join Iran (Turkey, Pakistan) and we will be hit at home.
Trump is right in resisting joining this way and trying to negotiate a way out of this mess.
Finally what the neocon’s just don’t get is that the American public do not want to get involved in another ME way. They were suckered into the last one, the way way they were suckered into WWI.
Notice in the article he never mentioned what is best for or what they American people want.
This won’t be Trump’s most important decision.
Blah blah blah spew blah... yammering opinions from a 3rd rate journo at his 3rd rate internet rag.
So sick of the "fight/fund all wars or else" harpies.
Sticking our noses and ill-spent riches into every s**thole is exactly how we got worldwide enemies and unsustainable debt.
Even with Obama afterwards. The beginning of his anointed reign, the Iranian (Tehran) Arab Street full of youngers who wanted freedom from elder suppression, etc. were avidly demonstrating and protesting - HOPING that Obama would join them on the world stage of discontent. However, President (Ayatollah) Ubama completely ignored them. There were heavy prices to pay, none of it included Mr. Hope and Change.
If Bush and Schwartzenegger had found Saddam’s WMD they would have been considered heroes. There was widespread consensus at the time that the WMD existed and it was appropriate to neutralize it based on the risk factor. The mistake was to then think that we could invest US lives to democratize people that were not culturally ready for it.
Isolationism is not an option in a world with ICBMs and nuclear bombs. The evidence for Iran’s nuclear weapons program and solid and the risk of doing nothing is greater than neutralizing it now. What we don’t want to repeat is the exercise in nation building. We can offer to facillitate a peaceful transition, but we can’t change a culture to a Western democracy.
Theodicy isn't for the proud.