Kuwait was, in 1990-1991, not our "Ally" either.
An "Ally" is a nation-state with whom you have concluded a treaty of Military Alliance.
No such commitment to the autocracy of Kuwait existed in 1990. Nor should there have been -- we do not now, and did not then, have any "need" for Kuwait; nor do we have any compelling National Interest in seeing Kuwait governed by one undemocratic dictatorship, rather than another.
Patriots who value the blood of their fellow citizens, do not endanger them by entangling ourselves in useless Wars where we have no compelling National Interest. Those who stupidly risk the lives of their fellow-citizens by creating hostilities with people whom we simply do not need as enemies, are nearly traitors.
You are on the wrong side of the fence. The fact is, once we have liquidated those terrorist elements (and their national harbors) responsible for this outrage, Foreign Policy should be re-assessed. The Founders never intended an imperial military which engaged in more than 170 multinational military exercises a year, with a military presence in over 100 countries**. They knew for a fact that such imperial overstrech had only one concrete result -- making a whole lot of enemies you don't need to make.
And you know what? The Founders were brilliantly intelligent men. You are not.
The Founders were Right. You are Wrong.
That's the hard Truth. Deal.
And stop getting into the personal attacks. Because you aren't even CLOSE to the founders.
While I can mostly agree with that statement, do you really believe it was not in our national interests to stop Saddam from taking control of the oil reserves in his vicinity?
While I can mostly agree with that statement, do you really believe it was not in our national interests to stop Saddam from taking control of the oil reserves in the region? Most of the experts say Kuwait was just the first stop.
You're right about that. Now, would you please address exactly WHAT should be done, since we know from the example of the Soviet bloc's erosion that the end of imperialism doesn't equal peace?
And you know what? The Founders were brilliantly intelligent men. You are not.
Uh-oh! I am throwing the flag. Personal foul! Ad hominem attack! Fifteen yards!
I refuse to use a capital "F" when referring to the founders as if they were the equivalent of Grecian deities. That's the way a lot of people -- most of them libertarians -- speak of them. They were intelligent men. They formed the foundation of the most stable and prosperous nation on Earth. But they were far from perfect.
In revisiting the shortcomings and disgraces in our nation's recent and distant past, let's not foolishly suggest that they we can channel them for solutions to 21st Century dilemmas.
Let Hamilton speak to your hollow bluster directly:
"A further resource for influencing the conduct of European nations toward us, in this respect, would arise from the establishment of a federal navy. There can be no doubt that the continuance of the Union under an efficient government would put it in our power, at a period not very distant, to create a navy which, if it could not vie with those of the great maritime powers, would at least be of respectable weight if thrown into the scale of either of two contending parties. This would be more peculiarly the case in relation to operations in the West Indies. A few ships of the line, sent opportunely to the reinforcement of either side, would often be sufficient to decide the fate of a campaign, on the event of which interests of the greatest magnitude were suspended. Our position is, in this respect, a most commanding one. And if to this consideration we add that of the usefulness of supplies from this country, in the prosecution of military operations in the West Indies, it will readily be perceived that a situation so favorable would enable us to bargain with great advantage for commercial privileges. A price would be set not only upon our friendship, but upon our neutrality. By a steady adherence to the Union we may hope, erelong, to become the arbiter of Europe in America, and to be able to incline the balance of European competitions in this part of the world as our interest may dictate. "--Federalist Paper #11
Your support of Harry Browne in blaming the victim is akin to the man who disapproves of the lady's dress after she is raped. No act of this nature is justified by anger, or is justifiably retaliatory in its totality or is directly the result of our foreign policy. Acts of this scope are within the capability of our (depraved!!!) human nature. This traitorous accusation of our policies is unpatriotic in effect, political in intent, and cowardly at heart.