At the risk of sounding a little Ron Paulish, what in the hell are we doing abroad? We have active military engagements in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Somalia. The CIA is running drone missions in Yemen. We have undercut a loyal ally - Hosni Mubarak, who did nothing beyond honor his commitments to the US and Israel, and keep the non-Muslims living in Egypt safe.

We are allowing Iran to develop nukes, and we are sitting idly by while Bashir Assad slaughters and tortures his people by the thousands. Our one true ally in the area, Israel, is painfully aware that they are on their own. We ask again - what the hell are we doing?

Lets go in some sort of order. We went into Afghanistan because that was where the terrorists trained, under the protection of the Taliban government. An act of war was taken against us on September 11, 2001, and we responded in kind. That one was pretty straight forward- send in the military to kill people and break things. It is what the military does. Every nation on the planet stood with us in this mission.

Then we lost our way. The neo-cons wanted to do some nation building in our image. The problem is that democracy is not plug and play. Someone thought it was a good idea to run "our guy" Hamid Karzai for President of Afghanistan, as an example to the Afghan people. The Afghan people learned from the example - there is a corrupt, inept government that controls Kabul, and nothing else. The USMC and Special Forces teams are roaming through the rest of the country playing whack-a-mole with the Taliban. This is not nation building. It is managing a colony.

Iraq was the great detour of 2003. We never understood the diversion, other than Saddam was a thorn in W's side. We tried the same thing as Afghanistan and tried to put our guy in charge - Ahmed Chalabi, who turned out to be equally corrupt. The difference in Iraq was that the government that was formed told us to take a hike, fought it out among themselves, and have the foundations of a democratic government that has been agreed to by all parties (except the remaining terrorists). All we did was provide security for a time, at the request of the legitimately elected government. All we do now is provide training.

Obama promised during the 2008 campaign, that if he recieved actionable intelligence on Osama bin Laden, he would act on it. He took a lot of hell for saying that out loud, but that is what he did. He ordered a military incursion into Pakistan without informing the government, and OBL is dead. Still, if the situation were reversed, we would be talking "act of war".

While we are at it, our military regularly crosses the Afghan / Pakistan border in pursuit of terrorist and Taliban targets. Drones are constantly firing on targets in Pakistan. The Pakistan government constantly objects. The Pakistani government helps our foes as often as it helps us. We are told it is complicated. It is not complicated. Pakistan is not our ally. W ignored the problem and concentrated on Iraq. Obama has decided to treat Pakistan as a rebellious province. Once again, not nation-building - just managing a colony with threats and bribery.

We have no business in Libya at all. No western country has cared one way or the other about Libya since Reagan bombed his compound in the 80s'. Gadaffi presented no threat to us, or to his own citizens who didn't cause trouble. You're not hearing it in the papers, but he still has great support in half the country. These are the people stepping up to fight for him. Whether you think it's our business or not (and we believe not), we are not there for the purpose that Obama claimed - to prevent the bloodshed of Libyan civilians - a lot of them are getting killed. On our watch. Or France's - since that makes us feel better.

We are there for one simple reason - Gadaffi was shaking down Britain, France and Italy for more. More money for Libyan oil. Libya produces 10% of the world's oil, and all of it goes across the Mediterranean to Europe. More favors - BP and Scotland released a perfectly healthy Lockerbie bomber on the humanitarian grounds that he was dying. We guess that says it all about the British healthcare system. And more personal favors - western education at the best schools for his sons, newer military equipment that we are now destroying, and more influence with the West. Quite the bargain for Gadaffi. Maybe we should put him across the bargaining table from Obama.

So how does that get us into Libya? Europe was dealing with it's own rebellious colony. It's their problem. Except that Europe doesn't own a real military anymore. Oh, they will provide some soldiers and pilots, but we supply the equipment, the ammunition, the intelligence, the logistics, and as always, the money. In Libya, we are engaged in a proxy war on a rebellious colony (Libya) for a client state (Europe). On top of that, it is not in our national interest, which we will find out as the Islamists take the levers of power in Libya, as they are now doing in Egypt.

In Somalia were are hunting terrorists and pirates. There is effectively no Somali government, so we are managing another colony. In Yemen we are hunting down the same terrorists that we released there when we emptied out Guantanamo Bay. We are in effect, propping up "our guy" - another corruupt despot, who we put in jeopardy by unloading all of our terrorists within his borders.

There is no strategy - just our armed forces keeping a bunch of random plates spinning on their sticks. It is as if Obama sees that there is some trouble, sends in the military to handle it (whether they are the right tool or not), but tells them not to make too much noise.

In the meantime, Assad and Ahmadinejad laugh at us and do what they want. Both countries fall within our national interest. Both are threats to our actual ally - Israel. Syria will only be a threat to Israel, they have no influence beyond that. Even in defining that threat, they are nothing without Iran's active support. Still, the events there bear witness that the Obama Administration is not concerned with civilians getting killed. Assad has acted in a manner that would make Gadaffi blush.

Iran however, seeks to increase it's influence in the region, and in the world. A nuclear armed Iran would significantly increase it's power and make it the dominant country in an area of vital national interest - the oil fields of the Middle East. The U.S. spent the bulk of the 80's having Iran and Iraq keep each other busy so that neither gained an upper hand. Iraq is hamstrung now, and the only other player of effect in the region, is Egypt. You remember a few weeks ago when the "new" Egyptian goverment allowed passage of an Iranian Navy battle group through the Suez for the first time since the Islamic Revolution? We don't think we can count on Egypt anymore.

Common Sense Dictates

"What the hell are we doing?" is a legitimate question. We have asked it more delicately before. Now we need to be demanding an answer of our leaders. It has been said in conservative circles that President Obama is incompetent. It has been floated in some more passionate circles that he is bent on the destruction of America as we know it. We at TPP do know the reasons and we do not care. We read history, and history instructs.

In the years preceding the fall of the Roman Empire, the sitting Caesars fought numerous ill-advised wars simultaneously to protect distant holdings or to protect friendly vassal states. The mighty Roman Army - at the time the most formidable fighting force on the planet - was stretched to it's limits; beyond it's limits really. So was the treasury of Rome. Wars cost money. This left Rome ill-equipped to deal with actual threats to it's own existence - the "barbarians" of northern Europe. These northern tribes studied the Romans and engaged them in small battles. Eventually they banded together and Rome fell.

We are walking that walk. Our military is overstretched maintaining the "peace" when it should be used for making war. Our treasury is depleted. We have ill-defined missions that have gone way beyond their initial intention. We are involved in conflicts in which we have no national interest, and we are creating problems for ourselves because we are reacting to events, rather than crafting strategy. We have revived colonialism from the dustbin of history as our current means of statecraft. This is what brought down Rome. We would prefer for America to avoid the same fate.

In fairness, this is not just a problem with the Obama Administration. The Bush Administration got sold a bill of goods on nation building. Clinton ignored as much as he could that fell outside of our borders. Bush the first never looked within the borders of our country to determine what was in our interest. The last President who had a well-thought out foreign and military policy was Reagan with regard to the Soviet threat. It sums up simply enough - "We win, you lose". His policies all followed that rule of thumb.

We do NOT seek a Ron Paul isolationism. There are threats in the world, and we need to address them. Sometimes that will require the military to move beyond our shores. We should lead, but we should not let the rest of the world go for a piggy back ride on our military strength, and on our dime. If France needs to protect one of it's vital interests, it needs to do so. Not hide behind America's apron strings, and dipping into our wallets. If that costs them a social program, well choices are what being an adult is all about.

The time has come for us to accept that America needs to act in America's best interest. Peace is not always the answer, and the military should not be the default choice when dealing with the rest of the world. Our men and women volunteer for military service to defend OUR freedom. If that benefits other nations, that's a benefit, not a reason to put them in harm's way.

The State Department needs to act in America's interest. That is their job. We can broker whenever we are asked, but our actions must advance our interests. Our actions must never go against the interest of America. That has too often been the case of late. We need to go back to the Common Sense that what is good for America, is good for the world.

We are not colonizers, we are not seeking hegemony over other people. We defend ourselves, and when possible we advance the cause of liberty. Sometimes it works - as in post WWII Europe and Japan. Sometimes it doesn't - Afghanistan comes to mind. Our way works for our people. Our way works for those who eagerly want our way. Our way does not work by imposing it. It is not our job to take up the "white man's burden" of educating the people we that deem need educating. It is our job to keep our enemies from taking us down. Anyone who wants to come along for the ride, we're fine with it. You need to chip in for gas though. No freeloaders. So says Common Sense.

RLB