Geez, where to start. I should get a rebate on your tuition for this. And remember, you have stated at least twice now that liberals and classical liberals are the same because all liberals are the same - showing a blithering ignorance right off the bat: but here I go nontheless:
(2) There is no such thing as an “isolationist.” There was never a point in American history where the United States was “isolationist.” ((( You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say there are “globalist and neocons” but there’s no such thing as isolationist. There are certainly shades of both and you are a shade of isolationist)))
(3) There are “anti-imperialists” and “anti-colonialists” in America: people who believe that it is not the responsibility of the United States to coddle foreigners ((( only modern liberals coddle)))
who oppose taking under our wing foreign dependencies like Puerto Rico and Iraq, ((( equating those two says it all)))
who oppose intervening in other parts of the world to promote liberal causes like “democracy,” and who oppose “nation building” or “policing the world” and so forth.((( all of which is well and good, but what if there are actual dangers to the US in foreign lands? Oh wait, you’d rather fight them here. How will taht work out with an Iranian Nuke. )))
(4) The Iraq War really was fomented by neocon globalists in the Bush administration who believed that “democracy” could be transplanted there. ((( My name is William, and I spout mind numbed sound bytes I cannot explain))))
The country agrees that it was the worst mistake of the last decade and is relieved to be rid of the neocons who started it. (((I don’t think the country agrees on much of anything, but if I concede that point for the sake of argument, it would not preclude that something much worse might have happened had we not done it. But I don’t necessarily concede the point but I will say it was poorly carried out in many respects.)))
(5) Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Bin Laden was in Pakistan, not Iraq. (((Hitler was in Berlin, but we started in North Africa to get him. Tojo was in Tokyo, but we started in Guadalcanal and other such places to get him. And besides, do you think Bin Laden’s influence was limited to that little compound? )))
(1) This is a straw man. I haven’t claimed that classical liberals, progressive liberals, and libertarians are the same. They are more like species of the genus “liberalism.”
(2) Japan was “isolationist” before the 1850s. The United States has never been “isolationist.” There was never a point in American history where the United States was not actively involved in the world.
No one who is called an “isolationist” is really advocating an “isolationist” foreign policy. They are more accurately called “nationalists.”
(3) Bush justified both the Iraq War and Afghanistan on the grounds that women’s rights and democracy would be promoted through American intervention.
There is no difference between a neocon like George W. Bush and a “duty to protect” liberal like Bill Clinton or Barack Hussein Obama on that subject.
(4) Like Puerto Rico, Iraq is an albatross that we acquired through imperialism, where we have remained long after the war ended, on the basis that “we broke it, so its ours.”
(5) Mexico is invading the United States, not Iran. Why don’t you attack North Korea? Unlike Iraq, North Korea developed real nuclear weapons. Maybe it is because North Korea is a real threat and can defend itself whereas Iran doesn’t possess that capability.
(6) No, I am not afraid of “Iranian nukes.” Iran has no capacity to attack the United States. It was Sunni terrorists who where behind 9/11, not Shiites.
(7) The idea that Saddam Hussein was anything like Adolf Hitler or Tojo is risible. Thanks for the lulz.