Your refusal to see that weapons drive strategy and tactics, and attempt to crown philosophical ideas as superior to reality is wrongheaded and dangerous. Obviously you see this differently than I do.
My China hypothetical was attempt to move our discussion into an area I would find interesting: at what point would you be willing to enter into “entangling alliances” and your reasons at that point. Since you decline to respond to it, I have to presume you have no criteria, or at least none that you can articulate. I find this wrongheaded and dangerous as well. And again you see this differently than I do.
I see no need to continue this discussion. Good luck to you in the future.
There are too many real, current & vital, issues, to engage in fantasy conjectures, such as you find interesting. There are certainly many situations, where we would be forced to act in ways that we would prefer to avoid, if possible. But we are being embarrassed, right now, because of the poor judgment of many in this Administration, who have mouthed off, when they should have held their tongues.