That sounds so…1930’s.
We went to Europe in 1917 after saying it didn’t matter. After millions had been killed.
Then we stayed away for 20 years, saying Europe didn’t matter.
Then we went back. Millions more died. Then stayed for 75 years…and there was relative peace.
Clearly the past has shown us that a stable Europe is in the interests of the US. Ukraine isn’t asking for our troops, they are asking for the tools we produced for EXACTLY this fight. These tools are coming out of inventory that has been sitting around for a long time.
I don’t need to see a few million killed in Europe to want todo something about it.
This concern from this post is that our industry lacks the ability to make the tools we need to make the arms we might need in the future. That should have everyone a little worried.
A proper historically informed answer.
And the logic that has driven US foreign policy since 1945.
With great success I might add. The Pax Americana has been the greatest boon to the entire world that has ever been.
> Clearly the past has shown us that a stable Europe is in the interests of the US. <
You make an interesting argument, and I agree with the above statement.
But much of Europe’s prior instability was due to Germany and France being at each other’s throats. That period is gone now, and it’s not coming back. So does Europe really still need us to maintain stability?
Europe can pay for its own problems. Our protection of Europe has allowed them to spend money, not on their militaries, but on all their socialism. That has to end, particularly before we go broke. Europes inaction on this war just shows that they are freeloaders. I have greater animosity for European nations than I do for either Ukraine or Russia. There’s no Spend-Lease agreement in place with any party. Just watch, we’ll end up paying to rebuild after this is all over. Biden eff’s up everything he touches.