[untenured]

Any foreign policy that thinks spilling American blood and spending American treasure is worth the price in order to install dysfunctional democracies and insure the populace can get an abortion or purchase pornography in countries deemed 'bad' by the liberal elite.

How in these times would that be observationally distinct from "spilling American blood and spending American treasure to protect the security of the people of the United States"?

[JohnGalt]

Since the populace has been disarmed by the DC-tax regime, and the people in charge of deciding who enters the city gates and who is kept out, are still in power, no serious argument can be made that a debt financed war 10,000 miles against a third rate dictator who was hardly the most serious threat the American people face, can in any way make the American people safer.

The idea that somehow after all the obvious government incompetence that has led to the American people's feeling of being unsafe in the world, lies external to the country, is an example of militant liberalism.