The reason why we stopped giving Japan oil was due to the fact they where we conquering other nations...
Thank you for pointing out that people like are ignorant jackasses.
Yes, exactly, and a firm "non-interventionist" point of view leads ineluctably to the conclusion that we had no business attempting to stop Japan from her aggression in those countries. And that's really the crux of the matter. The question is to what degree of non-involvement may we adhere to until the world comes crashing down upon us anyway? Saying that that sort of thing "wouldn't" happen is the recourse of a theorist blind to history. Of course it would - it has.
I don't wish to be unfair to Paul here and will allow his enthusiasts to defend him as they might. Perhaps I misconstrue his, or their, position on the matter. But it is a real problem and has been since the ink was still wet on the Constitution, and unless Paul and his people can come up with a coherent policy to address it they're not going to gain any traction in the foreign affairs arena.