|
|
|
|
|
by bishoprook2
1762 days ago
|
|
> Someone on the conservative side of the spectrum, please enlighten me what the reasonable argument for justifying the past military action there is at this point... I'd say that it's possible (quite possible) to be conservative and to be against foreign adventures. It's probably better to view a country as being occupied by multiple cohorts of political thought, one of which is a ruling class that likes to play Risk. That ruling class has shifted party allegiance and probably will do so in the future. In any case, from my uninformed armchair, it seems pretty obvious that it's easier to run foreign policy by attempting to influence the existing dictator (whether it's in Iraq or Libya or Syria) rather than install a new one with the attendant cost in blood and treasure. |
|