You should never take military intervention off the table. When you do so, you give an out to a rogue nation or rogue actors.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
If there is one lesson for U.S. foreign policy from the past 10 years, it is surely that military intervention can seem simple but is in fact a complex affair with the potential for unintended consequences.
You need to think, when you get involved in wars, how you're going to get out of them.
Countries that intervene militarily rarely do so out of pure altruism.
It's alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States.
You know, the commander-in-chief's first responsibility is look out for those in uniform who fight the wars.
I am certain that we need a solution completely separate from military intervention.
As a Korean War Veteran, I know too well the troubling nature of war. This is why I will always support a diplomatic answer before military intervention.
My own feeling is that one should refuse to participate in any activity that implements American aggression - thus tax refusal, draft refusal, avoidance of work that can be used by the agencies of militarism and repression, all seem to me essential.
My basic feeling about military intervention is that it should be a last resort, undertaken only to stave off large-scale bloodshed.
If you militarise a situation, you beg for an armed response.