Replies

No actually Israel would probbaly be the last place we'd recommend pulling out of, even though they are more than capable militarily of defending themselves from their neighboring countries.

Plus its not military support for self defense of a country that is the main issue. It's US offensives. Ex: Yoguslavia.

Btw when will this 'war on terror' end in your opinion that someone could suggest a change.

So you say that the LP, CP (and don't forget the GP) are in favor of this? But not the DP and RP (who are dominated by those with assets to lose)? Other than a lack of enlightenment, why could that be?

The RP and DP above all desire power. The LP and CP don't. The RP for years believed this as well until more modern times.

Also the LP and CP do not rule out giving weaponry, information or even letting American volunteers help defend allied countries. What we don't want is the US military all over the globe. And by all over the glove I mean that literally as it is now. If we just said we'll defend Israel, Taiwan and S. Korea I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

You're upset with the Yugoslavia campaign, but you must know that most of those who'll want to align with you when your use phrases like, "military spread all over the world" are gunning for our Middle East Policy.

Of course Israel can currently negate any foreign attack. But without our present level of commitment, that can't be assured in the future when faced with another foreign inspired uprising and economic blackmail by the world to limit their response, making their existence a miserable and tentative one.

I gave a big clue as to what difference I was referring to between the fringe and mainstream parties before you took it to be a drive for power. It's that the fringe parties have less an investment in the results of our foreign policy, and are much more free to propose radical (and I say reckless) solutions that are a magnet for people who's minds are perhaps a little too open.

That's fine, it will always be like that. I just don't respect this one during an honorable war. And as long as there's a significant domestic political threat to our upcoming campaign in Iraq, Iran or whatever. It's at least irresponsible to promote policy changes that weaken our position and align with those behind that threat to further their partisan goals.

To some degree I give libertarians and such a little slack in figuring this out. People don't change their message on a dime. But I don't give them forever, and those who are still promoting US withdrawal from the world a year into the war, like this guy, I consider open game.