Replies

We have not had a non-interventionist foreign policy for over 50 years. Sometimes the intervention has been more obvious and exaggerated, other times less so.

As to why we have not have another 9/11 type attack, I don't know all of the reasons for that happy circumstance. I am sure that is it due to a number of reasons, including the fact that Americans are now aware of the terrorist threat and can be counted on to do their part to repel another such attack.

As I have stated, I would not call our initial invasion of Iraq as an initiation of force, but as defensive and legitimate retaliatory use of force. But then you are obviously too ignorant and too much a moron to engage in a reasoned discussion of foreign policy.[return gratuitious insult]

As to why we have not have another 9/11 type attack, I don't know all of the reasons for that happy circumstance

Seems to me you really don't want to know, much like Ron Paul.

Hint: It's called killing the A, B, and C teams of Islamofascists pre-emptorily with our "interventionist" foreign policy. Those that aren't dead are running or in caves and can only spout KOS and Dem talking points in F grade videos.

Claiming it's our "interventionist foreign policy" to blame as you do is so lame. If that's so, why don't the Poles and Czechs and Australians go after us with the Islamofascists? Doh! Perhaps it's because it's Islamofascism that is the true aggressor. Doh! Never thought of that, did you? Perhaps you should spend more time actually reading about this war we're actually in, one that was waged on us for over almost a decade before we had to respond.

Your man Ron Paul has no clue what to do, and you should know better, but you don't want to know, you just want to believe in Ron Paul as savior. BTW......I only called Paul's supporters morons about foreign policy because they appear to be so ignorant and allow him to say all these ignorant things so worshipfully, I never directly called you one.

It's becoming more evident that perhaps I should have.