Aye, we do.
We never attacked China during the Korean and Vietnam wars.
That's because it was their forces and their territory. I do concede the point that we did not attack them--although a direct attack beyond the Yalu would have been right into their strength, but General McArthur did want to strike back in diverse other places, but Truman fired him.
HOWEVER, in the case of ISIS and Syria, the Syrian territory was no longer Syrian as ISIS controlled it completely. They beat the government forces there and sent them packing. We were not (or I think we both agree SHOULD not be) fighting Assad's Syria but rather ISIS.
We are allowing sanctuaries to be established in Pakistan hurting our efforts in Afghanistan.
Tell that to the many killed by US drones in Pakistan. We do what we want in Waziristan without asking permission of Pakistan. We don't need or want boots on the ground THERE for a variety of reasons, but we don't let it be a hands-off location for the Taliban to operate from.
I am not against our actions in Syria to take out ISIS, but I don't try to defend it with some cockamamie rationale.
Absolutely!
That could describe so many other countries around the globe. Where do we draw the line on our involvement in these countries?
Just to pursue and defeat our enemies who are actively fighting us from such places, and not other reasons. In this there is no disagreement between us.
And do not forget Patton - he very much wished to eliminate the Scourge that was / is Communism while we had the chance. Some leader have vision, some are scared, others are simply claptocrats
The Chinese came across and attacked us. A friend of mine, now deceased, was with Chesty at the reservoir. Two hundred thousand Chinese came across the Yalu (the army that cast no shadow) marching on foot during the night and hiding during the day. They entered North Korea, their ally. The Soviets provided air cover. They routed the 8th Army and sent them on the longest retreat in their history.
but General McArthur did want to strike back in diverse other places, but Truman fired him.
MacArthur wanted to use air power to attack the PRC including nukes, if needed, and employ Chinese troops from Taiwan. He wanted to win. Truman wanted a limited war, which has been our policy since. Vietnam was the prime example of gradual escalation and an unwillingness to destroy the enemy with nothing off limits, e.g., the dikes and port facilities.
HOWEVER, in the case of ISIS and Syria, the Syrian territory was no longer Syrian as ISIS controlled it completely. They beat the government forces there and sent them packing. We were not (or I think we both agree SHOULD not be) fighting Assad's Syria but rather ISIS.
ISIS was occupying Syrian territory, but it was not a sovereign nation. Just because rebels occupy territory whether it is in Columbia, the Philippines, Ukraine, Iraq, etc. doesn't mean that the territory is no longer part of the sovereign nation. No country in the world recognized ISIS as a sovereign nation.
Tell that to the many killed by US drones in Pakistan. We do what we want in Waziristan without asking permission of Pakistan. We don't need or want boots on the ground THERE for a variety of reasons, but we don't let it be a hands-off location for the Taliban to operate from.
Mere pinpricks and hardly an all out attack to take out the Taliban, AQ, and ISIS. List of drone strikes in Pakistan 2008 to 2018. We have had 10 in 2015, none in 2016, four in 2017, and one in 2018. These have been targeted attacks against small groups and individuals. We have not used massive air raids against the Taliban and their allies who use Pakistan as a sanctuary. The vast majority of the attacks were approved by the GOP, including the ISI. There have been secret agreements with the GOP despite the Pakistani public outcry against them.