Some of us believe the more realistic long-term defense posture for the US is to let regional problems be solved by nations in the region. We cannot forever be inserting ourselves into conflicts of secondary American importance as if they were all a life and death affair for our security.
yes but when one of those nations screams almost daily that it plans to destroy its Great Satan (USA) and .. when (as now) it is testing long and longer range ICBM’s... (not that they are necessary but they surely could be used to attack USA), and when that country’s leaders are spending billions of dineros building nuclear bombs to put on those ICBM’s (or to just smuggle into USA what with our open borders)
then it is time to pay attention (and eliminate the danger before it causes us tens of millions of unnecessary casualties)
we can AGREE that we should try to avoid getting bogged down in conflicts (and especially with the crazy Islamicists) like in Syria, Egypt, Libya, Somalia, Central African Republic, and everywhere else Obama has been sending American troops to overthrow governments and install his Muslim Brother and other terrorist comrades and friends
three days of the USAF could eliminate the Iranian nuke threat to America NOW, before it is ready to strike our large cities
how to get Obama to stop his illegal bombing and overthrowing of foreign governments to install IslamoNazi terrorists into power?
I don’t have a solution to that, sorry
That's funny . . . I can remember when "palaecons" were all for fighting for Rhodesia, South Africa, Nationalist China, Nicaragua, El Salvador . . . even South Vietnam. It's just when those pesky Israelis are in someone's crosshairs that they suddenly become isolationist and neutralist. Now ain't that a shiner?
I guess unlike Nationalist China, Israel just isn't a "white, chrstian" nation within the pale of "western civilization."