Isolationist or Interventionist … I pick neither.
I pick “America First”. If it’s a vital national interest to intervene, to spend our blood and treasure, then intervene. Otherwise, stay out and mind our own business.
WW1: out
WW2: in
Korea: tough call
Vietnam: out
Afghanistan: quick in, then out
Iraq: out
Ukraine: out
Your mileage may vary. Just my two cents. Which ain’t worth much given Biden’s inflation.
The United States should be isolationist by nature and interventionist in rare, exceptional cases. That's the only legitimate political stature for a country that is supposed to be built on the idea of limited government. A government that pisses away thousands of lives and trillions of dollars on military campaigns in Islamic sh!t-holes halfway around the world while facilitating an invasion of Third World peasants here at home has no moral claim on any loyalty from its citizens anymore.
Yet all are related. WW1 helped prepare the US for WW2 (wars, as horrible as they are, yet accelerate advancement of technology), which, much due to the amount of aid to the Soviets under Stalin (and his spies), much enabled proxy wars for the past 80 years. As well as the Space Race and the technology that resulted. (Not the we need it all, except due to competition.)
Butterfly effect at work.
Your mileage may vary. Just my two cents. Which ain’t worth much given Biden’s inflation.
!