I would expect some negatives. As to trade, so far as

Posted on: April 14, 2017 at 12:40:10 CT

I know, we import far more from there than export so there may be positives, long term. Also, I'm not remotely suggesting a NoK attack, even non-nuke could be ignored. I've said closer to just the opposite. And if the conflict becomes as extensive as you suggest - very unlikely - WHY do we have to enter it?

You aren't giving real life reasons for anything you suggest. And you "explain" your view with a bunch of cliched generalities that have no real meaning. "vacuum created", "force for good", "moral obligation" (total bullshlt), "good of other people", "lead from behind", "what we stand for", etc. Thats all meaningless drivel, until you explain why it is not.

As to my rationale for not being there, its rather obvious. It saves a huge cost in wealth, and now potential further cost of lives. Thats enough for me. And please don't try to tell me we benefited from the 50,000 killed in Korea already.

Thats my rationale. You've still given not one recognizable reason for your rationale. If you can't, you aren't thinking clearly. As I've told many a liberal. I expect that from them but not the rest of us.

Edited by GA Tiger at 12:42:31 on 04/14/17