I've noticed you have a great talent to read a post and take away a meaning that isn't there.
You mean you don't believe that interventionism is to blame?
Because, that's pretty much the argument posited above...
that's a different animal than saying we started it.
but that is the crux of much of these arguments - anything short of a long term decades long engagement is the equivalent to cutting and run - another idea embedded into the American psyche.
My question is - at what point does our support for a never ending engagement actually force change? When our country's credit rating is shot because of debt? When a loaf of bread is $7 or a gallon of gas is $15? When we can't build a bridge or pave a road? When we shutter police stations, schools and VA hospitals? At what level of pain do we have to suffer before Americans with your perspective say "enough - we're leaving and getting out of this craziness".
Because I believe we can both say that what we are doing is unsustainable yet the middle east issue is never ending. For that matter our world dominance is never ending. Its an ongoing maintenance program costing hundreds of billions if not a trillion+ yearly.
How does that get resolved before our country is tanked and China becomes the worlds newest (and perhaps only) superpower?
Last edited by KFWA; 07/31/12.
have you paid your dues, can you moan the blues, can you bend them guitar strings
