US Government response: “unfortunately we weren’t able to achieve any of our stated objectives. We promise we didn’t try to at all. The following is unrelated I promise, but Congress is meeting to give Bibi $69420Ungabijillion for self defense and we’re sending every troop, drone, and warship we have to Iran.”
The fun problem with isolationism is it just allows problems to fester; then you have something much worse to deal with later. You may want to ignore the world, but the world won’t ignore you.
Edit: An Iranian proxy has been shooting civilian shipping and civilian crews from all countries for the last year. There are problems one cannot simply ignore.
An Iranian proxy has been shooting civilian shipping and civilian crews from all countries for the last year. There are problems one cannot simply ignore.
Hmm yes I wonder why the Houthis just suddenly decided to attack a global supply line
That’s like poking a bear and then halfway through your shenanigans claim you’ll have to put it down because you’re in danger. What a bunch of hollow rhetoric. There’s 3 sentences in your paragraph and each one is just a slogan. Each one vague enough that it means both nothing and anything you can think of.
Diverting from the usual warmongering is not isolationism, in fact, the problem you allude to is the result of the former, not the other way around.
I know it’s a crazy idea but perhaps we should look at our failed approaches from recent history and try to learn from it. But judging from your edit, you have an extremely short attention span mixed with tunnel vision. Where were you when the US and its allies assassinated people inside Iran? Funded terrorist groups to carry out attacks in Iran? Sabotaged their nuclear facilities? Or, you know, when the idea of another pre-emptive attack on that nation was so imminent that one presidential candidate figured it’d be funny to fuel that by singing “bomb bomb Iran”, based on nothing but the lie that they were close to getting a nuclear bomb?
Was all that a festering problem that Iran should’ve responded to, or is it different when you’re on the receiving end?
Objective 1: Stay the fuck out of it.
Objective 2: Stay the fuck out of it.
Objective 3: Stay the fuck out of it.
Objective 4: Stay the fuck out of it.
US Government response: “unfortunately we weren’t able to achieve any of our stated objectives. We promise we didn’t try to at all. The following is unrelated I promise, but Congress is meeting to give Bibi $69420Ungabijillion for self defense and we’re sending every troop, drone, and warship we have to Iran.”
The fun problem with isolationism is it just allows problems to fester; then you have something much worse to deal with later. You may want to ignore the world, but the world won’t ignore you.
Edit: An Iranian proxy has been shooting civilian shipping and civilian crews from all countries for the last year. There are problems one cannot simply ignore.
Hmm yes I wonder why the Houthis just suddenly decided to attack a global supply line
That’s like poking a bear and then halfway through your shenanigans claim you’ll have to put it down because you’re in danger. What a bunch of hollow rhetoric. There’s 3 sentences in your paragraph and each one is just a slogan. Each one vague enough that it means both nothing and anything you can think of.
Diverting from the usual warmongering is not isolationism, in fact, the problem you allude to is the result of the former, not the other way around.
I know it’s a crazy idea but perhaps we should look at our failed approaches from recent history and try to learn from it. But judging from your edit, you have an extremely short attention span mixed with tunnel vision. Where were you when the US and its allies assassinated people inside Iran? Funded terrorist groups to carry out attacks in Iran? Sabotaged their nuclear facilities? Or, you know, when the idea of another pre-emptive attack on that nation was so imminent that one presidential candidate figured it’d be funny to fuel that by singing “bomb bomb Iran”, based on nothing but the lie that they were close to getting a nuclear bomb?
Was all that a festering problem that Iran should’ve responded to, or is it different when you’re on the receiving end?