Of military assurances firepower, in east asia, in europe and this is a replica in a sense of american the pattern of American Foreign policy behavior after the First World War. People with good historical mind know that we had a president named Woodrow Wilson who win to war to make the world safe for democracy, and after the war was over and after it was won, a lot of americans concluded that as the british like to say, the game hadnt been worth the candle. They did not want to remain engaged in global affairs. They did not want to police the world order that had been established at versailles. And we turned inward in the 1920s, under republican administrations and again in the 1930s fores much of the roosevelt administration, at least until the late 1930s. The retreat im speaking of now largely replicates that pattern, that history. And the argument im making is doing so, is not going to mean that our foreign problems are going to abate. In fact theyre going to become worse. We are i
Administration, the george w. Bush administration. We want less engagement in the middle east. We want to turn our backs on a war on terror that seems to many people to be unwinnable. We want to provide less by way of military assurances, fire power in east asia, in europe and this is a replica in a sense of a pattern of American Foreignpolicy behavior after the First World War. People would take the stargel mind now that we had a president named Woodrow Wilson who went to war to make the world safe for democracy and after the war was over and after it was one a lot of americans concluded that the game hadnt been worth the candle. They did not want to remain engaged in global affairs. They did not want to police the world order that had been established at versailles so we turn inward to the 1920s and a Republican Administration and again in the 1930s for much of the roosevelt of administration at least until the late 1930s. The retreat im speaking of now largely replicate that pattern