[ReaganGeneration2]

The core of this debate that will divide the Tea Party is America’s role overseas. I hope the ad hominem, straw man, and guilt-by-association arguments will STOP and the debate can be genuine.

My 2 cents: we can’t afford to be the world’s policeman, nor do we have the moral obligation. Yes that strategy may stop a few attacks, but it’s not clear they won’t find other ways around that bankrupting, devastating strategy. Bring ALL the troops home and defend the homeland.

[RaceBannon]

Guilt by association??

By a MAN WHO SUPPORTED NDAA??

His association was proven, not innuendo, he is NOT the patriotic man people claim!

[cripplecreek]

War is an expensive business and our founders made it clear that it should used sparingly lest it break us.

As far as drones are concerned, they have a role but push button killing has gotten to be far to easy with an expanding range of acceptable collateral damage. If we had killed Bin Laden and his entire family with a drone strike, I could accept the collateral deaths because they were intimately associated with him. On the other hand, if a drone kills a terrorist sitting in traffic....and everyone in traffic around him, you’re losing your moral high ground and very likely creating or solidifying opposition.

As for drone strikes on American soil, its insanity that its even up for discussion.

[Yosemitest]

"... this debate that will divide the Tea Party...."

Is that your goal?

"Bring ALL the troops home and defend the homeland."

You've obviously NEVER served in the military.
While I agree in general with that premise, I know that you must have refueling points along the way to respond to threats.
That is ... unless ... you want to respond to all threats with NUKES.
Do you really want to fight a threat on your homeland soil?
It's better to destroy the threat on THEIR soil.
Only Liberals want us to be "the world's policeman", but most conservatives want us only to respond IF IT'S IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST, something Liberals know little about.
You need to rethink your position.
It doesn't take many troops to hold a refueling or staging area, so we can bring a lot of our troops home.
But you fight like you practice, and good will with the people in the country you're fighting the threat in ... goes a long way.

[Marine_Uncle]

I respect your two statements. Agree fully on the first.
Then on the second have to introduce what Ronald Reagan so
eloquently spoke of. Peace through strength.
You understand the world is quite a complicated place.

The Marshal Plan driven by so many factions within the
International Banking system, certain statesmen, including
of course key members within the Congress and Executive Branch,
created what we now have to deal with.

I too can question much of what goes on within the foreign affairs circuit.
Things are really quite complicated. You full well know,
that what you wish could happen is not so easy to arrange.

Just the concept of Peak Oil. Which until a short time ago,
was considered one reason to maintain the world presence we
have embarked on for the past some seventy years or so, can
be used as a reason for not becoming Isolationist.

Where sort of stuck in this position if I can put it that way.