An unending "war on terror" in which we hold hands with the nations who provide ideological and financial support to those who want to kill us is NOT acceptable and I see no reason to support that.
Well stated. I think the libertarian philosophy is sound and consistent and the founders could have been said to be libertarians. I think their view on foreign policy today is outdated and what you have stated is exactly right. Say why we are going to war and then do whatever it takes to win and then leave. The whole concept of nation building is not what the founders had in mind. I think as a nation we would be much better off if we adopted the economic policies of libertarians because on spending issues and the role of govt they have it exactly right.
>An unending “war on terror” in which we hold hands with the nations who provide ideological and financial support to those who want to kill us is NOT acceptable and I see no reason to support that.<
I kind of see you point here. I don’t think for example that we should be making nice nice with the Saudis since they back door money and resources to terrorists to keep from being terrorized.
But the statement “an unending “war on terror”” is where we may part company .. perhaps.
If we can’t end our war because they keep sprouting up, then so be it. I think that as long as our national security of the people is threatened then we keep fighting.