I actually liked both threads a lot as well. Perhaps a bit too light on the how, given the complicated nature of geopolitics, but I think there are some fundamental issues that he has exactly right.
I’ve always held that one of the biggest reasons I’m so pro-immigration and in favor of taking in refugees is the extent to which we helped create the conditions people are fleeing. By treating SA nations as vessels for resources rather than sovereign trade partners, we’ve allowed some pretty awful **** to flourish with us pulling at least some of the strings. It’s the same issue in the Middle East. It’s amazing how the places we’ve been bombing for 30 years continue to hold negative opinions on the West.
I think ultimately that there are many on the right with some right ideas on foreign policy, though I differ with some of the conclusions drawn. I don’t think American safety is really being protected when we bomb the **** out of Syria. I also don’t think the answer is isolationism. I think we need to have a robust State Department building coalitions of nations, even if it’s a negative sum game for us. The amount of money we spend instead on bombs and other “defense” would be better served helping those in need across the world. By doing so, we not only make the world just a little bit safer for our interests but also tip the scales of America doing good instead of bad.