By “doesn’t directly affect us”, do you mean unless we are attacked on U.S. soil?
America has been strong because our military was strong. Obama doesn’t want a strong America. Sure, they can make spending cuts but not in benefits to our men and women in uniform. Why not just cut Obama’s vacations? That would be a good start.
America doesn’t need to ‘be strong’ for the world, it needs to be strong for the Citizens of the U.S. That does not entail throwing our men/women into every damn conflict on the planet with some damn goofy RoE so that the fight can never be won.
Military does not ‘win hearts and minds’, it does not fight emotion (’War on Terror’); it is used to defend and, if needed, WIN the fights/battles and WIN peace. But should never be used on the weakest of pretense to shove the Federal leviathans nose into every country on the planet.
I’ll post the question, as I’m ignorant of the answer: In what post-conflict(s) has the U.S. pulled entirely from the region?
“America has been strong because our military was strong”
Ummmm, no. That is fascism defined.
We are strong because of our individual abilities and our collective ability to put those talents and resources to use if need be. We cannot, and never should, define our strength as our military. Our strength is ourselves and our resources.
We were “weak” by your standards prior to WWII but we were actually strong because we could assemble to fight and we did.
Anytime a nation defines herself by her military she is a fascist state.