Sending two carrier strike groups (which is just the tip of the iceberg of aid and involvement) is hardly “to sit this one out”.
Generally, I think the US is involved in all continents not because of humanitarian / world police reasons, but because they protect their economic and geostrategic interests. Viewed from this perspective, being involved is the selfish stance. Reducing engagement would mean to lose power and influence, rivals gaining ground.
Obviously I don’t get consulted when deciding whether or not to deploy military assets. I’m saying I would prefer to let other countries deal with their own problems. That’s what everyone says they want us to do when there’s no bombs currently exploding. Sometimes that means two groups of people will want to fight each other. Why should that change anything? It seems pretty hypocritical to call for a hands off approach so long as everyone keeps doing what we want them to do. That’s not removing ourselves from the situation, it’s just making veiled threats.
It also seems pretty clear that our previous actions haven’t done much to ease tensions in the region. These guys have been at each other for almost 100 years. Do you really think playing the referee and sending them back to their corners is going to end the fight?
Sending two carrier strike groups (which is just the tip of the iceberg of aid and involvement) is hardly “to sit this one out”.
Generally, I think the US is involved in all continents not because of humanitarian / world police reasons, but because they protect their economic and geostrategic interests. Viewed from this perspective, being involved is the selfish stance. Reducing engagement would mean to lose power and influence, rivals gaining ground.
Obviously I don’t get consulted when deciding whether or not to deploy military assets. I’m saying I would prefer to let other countries deal with their own problems. That’s what everyone says they want us to do when there’s no bombs currently exploding. Sometimes that means two groups of people will want to fight each other. Why should that change anything? It seems pretty hypocritical to call for a hands off approach so long as everyone keeps doing what we want them to do. That’s not removing ourselves from the situation, it’s just making veiled threats.
It also seems pretty clear that our previous actions haven’t done much to ease tensions in the region. These guys have been at each other for almost 100 years. Do you really think playing the referee and sending them back to their corners is going to end the fight?