Quote:
Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45
Adak, your arguments have no reference point and therefore are worthless.
First, if these state and non-state actors were extremely passive before 2009 and then suddenly became aggressive after 2009 you would have point. That hasn't happened. State and non-state actors have tested every American president since FDR. There is no fundamental difference from what is occurring during Obama's term and prior terms.
Second, if other state and non-state actors did become more aggressive, you would need to make sure that it was due (or partly due) to a belief of American weakness and not outside factors. For example, Islamic terrorists did not just start believing America was weak in the 1990's with that belief increasing in time. An outside factor led to an increase in attacks in the 1990's and that is continuing until today.
|
Kicking a dead horse to make it run again, has no reference points either, but it's common sense that it won't avail you anything.
Yes, there are a plethora of other factors - always are in foreign policy. In general however, we've seen the losses we've had when we were not strong. They don't build up in a straight line, but they do build up, over time.
Believing something different will result, after you've take the same action over and over, is a sure sign of a liberal (and therefore a simple and naive) philosophy.