and these countries have rebounded from the devastation of war
why should we expect anything else in iraq and now afghanistan ... and probably soon, pakistan, other than generations of spending American taxes to underwrite the military's presence in those nations to assure those nations' political processes are in sync with our own
what pray tell, provides you with a better lens into that region than an other forum member? and if you have an actual advantage, from your posts on this matter, it would appear you have squandered itYour idea of when that is (NOW) has no study, no experience, and no real understanding behind it does it? Just a conclusion made from a reporter's notes and maybe a commentary or two as a base. Ever cracked a book about this region or culture? I doubt it.
that term is worn out from use - because it so aptly describes our foreign policy for multiple generations. what we cannot achieve thru negotiation we compel by military mightWe haven't even tried to police the "entire frigging world." Do you know how big that is? How many troops do you think we have? This "world policemen" cliche is worn out.
you are invited to prove your point, otherwise we can dimiss this attempt at a rebuttal as a lame strawman. but prove me wrong and identify the posts where our members have insisted that we must attain utopia in the USA before we intervene in foreign affairsAnother thing that is worn out is the ignorant -and yes it is entirely ignorant- idea that we have to create utopia in America before we can deal with the world's messes.
that is a poor example of what you would pretend to be intelligent thoughtHow much of a utopia existed in the U.S. at the advent of two World Wars and a nuclear Cold War? Maybe we should have gotten our women's rights messes out of the way before we dealt with Japanese imperialists and German Nazis huh? Maybe we should have gotten our homeless and civil rights movements out of the way before we stopped the Soviet expansion all over the world huh? Get over it and think for yourself.
no one is asserting that our other national interests should not be subordinate to the defense of our nation. but i suspect there are a significant number of us who would object to our nations expenditure of national treasure, reputation and the blood of our youth to initiate misguided offensive actions without purpose. that absence of stated clear purpose to engage in war prohibits the ability to recognize what constitutes victory in those costly military engagements
why is it America's responsibility to cure whatever might ail europe, the pacific, the soviet union, and/or the middle east? why should we not instead tend to our own affairs ... mind our own business ... effect a libertarian philosophy that they are able to do whatever they choose so long as their actions do not intrude on our nation's ability to do the same?But without thinking too hard on the matter, reflect hard on the condition of the environments that have threatened our way of life before we sent troops to fight.
Was Europe healthy?
Was the Pacific healthy?
Was the Soviet's ideas healthy?
Is the Middle East healthy?
By all means let's wait until millions of Americans have to die before we deal with the unhealthy regions of the world so Kali can feel superior to the people who focus so intently on such matters.