That’s a pretty tortured understanding of Washington’s words. “will forever keep at a distance those painful appeals to arms with which the history of every other nation abounds”,
He is simply stating that we should not shrink back when challenged as we soon were with Barbary pirates interfering with our trade, or Brits interfering with our shipping and kidnapping sailors. He was the polar opposite of the idea that we should occupy Europe or engage in wars of sport and convenience worldwide.
You are living in 1898, imagining that if we do not grab some empire, that the Euros will. The correct interpretation of Washington is that everyone should know we will fight IF our actual interests were challenged. But that we would never engage in wars on behalf of European nations.
Europe is no friend of the USA. This includes the Brits. All of them have one goal and one goal only. Use the USA to be the muscle to achieve EU policy goals. This explains the Balkans, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, etc.
So the reassertion of the Monroe Doctrine is not a priority, for example?
The EU getting its own military is against the USA’s interests specifically; this has been the case ever since the early twentieth century. Every iteration of a united Europe was always with an anti-US agenda.
The USA was not designed to assert its own empire, but to keep others at bay.
BTW, thanks for the Obama-ite view of Britain.
“You are living in 1898, imagining that if we do not grab some empire, that the Euros will. The correct interpretation of Washington is that everyone should know we will fight IF our actual interests were challenged. But that we would never engage in wars on behalf of European nations.
Europe is no friend of the USA. This includes the Brits. All of them have one goal and one goal only. Use the USA to be the muscle to achieve EU policy goals. This explains the Balkans, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, etc.”
Nailed it.Well said