You seem to forget that our founders didn’t want any entangling alliances.
Entangling alliances are what started WW I. One guy got killed by anarchists and millions of soldiers died because of that. Do you really think the arch duke Ferdinand was worth all that?
In the Western Hemisphere, we have had very little of the wars that have plagued the Eastern Hemisphere for 1,000’s of years. Yeah, the Aztec’s and Inca’s had empires, but not to the extent of the Eastern Hemisphere. We’ve had a war or so with Mexico and Canada, but the western hemisphere has been on the whole rather peaceful. Of course, the US pretty much wiped out the indians, in north America. In the late 1800’s we could have easily defeated Mexico and probably Canada, but we didn’t.
If we were a belligerent nation, we could easily have controlled all of North America. Now our foreign policy seems to be that we can control all the world.
I don’t think that is in our best interests.
I don't think that's even a partially accurate statement. We thought (as did almost every other civilized nation) that Saddam Hussein had WMD. I understand that isolationists think that WMDs cannot breach the invisible Constitutional wall around the United States, but that's naivete on display. Thus our involvement in Iraq. If you want to believe that we made up things to go into Iraq, you have to believe that the rest of the world was a willing participant in the farce. Hard to swallow.
“You seem to forget that our founders didnt want any entangling alliances...”
The short of it is, Israel attacking Iran (and vice versa) directly affects our interests. Period.
You mean like the entangling alliance with France that won us our independence?
Funny the "founding fathers" felt so strong about entangling alliances that they didn't even bother to prohibit it in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.