Posted on 06/20/2025 8:46:26 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Neocons like Mark Levin always start screeching ‘appeasement’ to try to shame opponents of forever wars.
Bad World War II analogies appear to have become a dime a dozen in today’s political discourse. In just the past few months, I’ve excoriated Russell Moore for his ridiculous reference to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in response to President Donald Trump’s push toward a peaceful resolution of the war in Ukraine and pilloried Max Boot’s baffling comparison of Ukraine’s recent attack on Russia’s bomber fleet to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Now, Mark Levin, in his zealous crusade to push the United States into directly joining Israel’s strikes against Iran, has invoked the most tired and most misconstrued talking point related to the Second World War: appeasement.
Levin’s screed (it’s far too light on substance to be called an op-ed), titled “Isolationism is the same as appeasement — and it’s keeping Trump, Netanyahu from transforming the Middle East,” does little more than launch ad hominem attacks and provide a masterclass in projection. It’s amazing to read sentences like these: “They’re too self-righteous in their ignorance to realize how absurd they sound. … In fact, they’re so blind and self-important that they don’t see the new foreign policy taking place in real time, right in front of their eyes!” and not even detect even a hint of self-awareness from a man who is advocating for the United States to become stuck in yet another Middle East quagmire.
Remember how all those other times our attempts to “transform” the Muslim world worked out so well?
Afraid that his readers won’t be convinced by merely insulting the intelligence...
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
Drivelous balderdash.
Neo isolationists oppose anything that goes on outside the perimeter of the metaphorical rock they dwell under
Anyone voting with the Dems has lost any moral authority to talk about appeasement.
May, how quickly things have changed.
Fixed it for this naiveté.
I asked perplexity.ai:
What would the world look like American was strict isolationists and withdrew all forces in the world, and what threats would it face?
If the United States adopted strict isolationism and withdrew all military forces globally, the world would undergo profound geopolitical shifts, leading to increased instability, power vacuums, and emerging threats. Below is a comprehensive analysis based on current geopolitical assessments and expert projections.
Power Vacuum and Rival Expansion
Russia would likely expand its influence in Eastern Europe, testing NATO’s weakened defenses. Aggression against the Baltics, Ukraine, or Moldova could escalate, exploiting the absence of U.S. deterrence24.
China would accelerate territorial claims in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, potentially invading Taiwan without U.S. counterbalance. Beijing might also expand economic coercion through initiatives like the Belt and Road56.
Regional Powers (Iran, Turkey, North Korea):
Alliance Fragmentation
NATO would weaken significantly without U.S. leadership, forcing Europe to develop autonomous defense capabilities. However, political divisions and military underinvestment could delay effective coordination24.
New Blocs: Alliances like BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) might gain prominence, promoting alternatives to Western-led institutions5.
Economic Risks:
The U.S. dollar could lose its status as the global reserve currency, leading to financial instability. Trade routes might face disruption from piracy or regional conflicts, increasing costs for goods5.
Security Threats:
Direct Aggression: Adversaries like China or Russia could test U.S. resolve in the Pacific or Arctic6.
Nuclear Proliferation: Allies like Japan, South Korea, or Saudi Arabia might pursue nuclear weapons for self-defense, increasing global nuclear risks56.
Cyber and Asymmetric Warfare: State-sponsored cyberattacks (e.g., from China, Russia, Iran) would target U.S. infrastructure, with reduced capacity for retaliation67.
Loss of Global Influence:
International institutions (UN, IMF, WTO) could become dominated by China or Russia, eroding democratic norms and human rights standards5.
| Region | Key Changes | Primary Threats |
|---|---|---|
| Europe | Russian expansion into Baltic states; NATO fragmentation | Energy coercion, hybrid warfare, refugee crises24 |
| East Asia | Chinese annexation of Taiwan; North Korean attacks on South Korea | Naval blockades, nuclear brinkmanship67 |
| Middle East | Iranian dominance; ISIS resurgence; Israel-Gulf insecurity | Terrorism, oil supply disruptions35 |
| Indo-Pacific | Chinese control of sea lanes; territorial disputes | Trade route instability, resource conflicts56 |
| Global South | Economic collapse in aid-dependent nations; regional power struggles | Mass migration, authoritarian regimes5 |
Conclusion
A strictly isolationist U.S. would trigger a fragmented, multipolar world marked by heightened conflict, economic volatility, and diminished American security. Power vacuums would empower authoritarian states like China and Russia, while threats such as nuclear proliferation, cyber warfare, and disrupted trade would directly endanger U.S. interests. Without forward bases and alliances, America’s ability to project power or shape global norms would erode, potentially forcing costly re-engagement in the future. - https://www.perplexity.ai/search/can-you-provide-an-extensive-l-4sTZONeVTU6opfxvmrptjg?login-new=false&login-source=visitorGate#3
As stated 10 years ago,
Iran, China, Russia, and North Korea all play outsized roles in determining the future viability of the international order—from weakening the nonproliferation regime to establishing alternatives to the IMF and World Bank to violating international law. The next six years will be a critical juncture: Whether these “Big Four” choose to upend the international order, work within it, or create competitive arrangements will have lasting effects. - https://www.hoover.org/research/tomorrows-national-security-landscape
Your AI machine appears to have been programed by neo cons and globalists. It and they have no consideration for the mothers of America’s sons.
To the contrary, the answer is driven by logic, and it is the extreme isolationists that lack intelligent consideration for the mothers of America’s sons. I wonder if there was any war America fought that such isolationists would not have opposed.
And what they imagine the the world would look like if American was strict isolationists and withdrew all forces in the world, and what threats it would face (like China be controlling the S. China sea, and much of Africa, and Iran, the Strait of Hormuz, etc. Russia controlling Ukraine and more)?
Well. Tonight is your night. We’ll see how America’s mothers and their sons feel about it in the coming months.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.