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.
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?
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
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.
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?
Hmm yes I wonder why the Houthis just suddenly decided to attack a global supply line
Did Israel try stopping their genocide.
Some problems are very easy to solve.
Just out of curiosity, how do you believe blockades are enforced?
What do you think happens(ed) to ships approaching Gaza BEFORE the war?
Removed by mod
Nope. You’re just simply wrong here