We don’t have to get theoretical here. We can look at every US military “intervention” and find that every single one (other than the usual WWII response) was wrong. These are not “mistakes”. The US is a militaristic, aggressive rogue state that is a threat to the world.

The justification for war needs be immense. In the case of the US, it would need to be a direct, unprovoked, and sustained attack on US soil with no path available for diplomacy.

When humans are being horrifically mistreated, like in Palestine, Syria, Sudan, Daesh/ISIL, etc., I propose that the US confer with all the other nations of the world to seek consensus on what action to take. Then we take that action. If it’s war, then we go to war alongside the other nations of the world. If it’s not war, then we don’t withdraw from the agreement and start sending drones. It’s probably best to add that language to every agreement made among the nations, a sort of cold shower for the US war hawks. Peace and luck

Only when all else of restoring Peace for all is exhausted.
Only when as above comment that the rest of the nations of the world agree on a course of action after peaceful solutions fail.

If it were up to me, the US would use its influence and military power to protect the planet from ecological damage first:

* Fracking would stop.
* US corporations would be compelled to clean up their ecologically damaging and endangering activities.
* The Canadian Tar Sands would not be allowed to continue.
* Brazil would be intimidated into stopping deforestation of the Amazon.
* Special forces would be assisting wildlife reserve officials in taking out poachers of endangered species.
* Orangutan forest habitat would be protected by military intervention.
etc.

Then actual (not politically picked & exaggerated) human rights cases might be considered.

But we would not be inventing false excuses to attack countries so that oil corporations can make more predictable profits.

It would be interesting to stay out of everyone’s wars for a decade to see what happened. I for one am all for it, but that would need to include withdrawal of all aid- monetary, weapons, food, emergency health care, etc…all of it.

War, should be an absolute last resort. A failure.

When all other options have been taken and have failed. Then war should be all out, none of this half-assed crap like Viet Nam was.

@hmmmmmm The United States belongs to an organization of countries, the United Nations, that have pledged to come to the aid of any member country that is attacked by another country. The U.S. seems dominant in these military affairs because they have so many resources to offer and, as a world power, they set the standard for what must be done by one and all. They lead by example.
So, before you go jumping up and down on the U.S., get your facts straight.

@kritiper Amen. It’s not like Democrats havent voted for these wars.

Not all military engagements are war. Sometimes military actions are to prevent war.

Sometimes an outside military presence steps in to obtain or sustain order when a nation finds themselves un or under governed, such as the loss of a leader, or a change in governmental structure.

@KNOWITALL I wonder if withdrawing everything, including aid, is what some of the “America 1st” crowd want. Might have to get me a “U.S. out of Everywhere” bumper sticker…

@Patty_Melt Yes, there are actions in-between doing nothing and a full-scale invasion. Strikes on specific military targets, for one.

@Demosthenes Well yes, I’m right here in red Trump country and I assure you, we’d be happy to not send any of our family to war again.

Where do you think all the soldiers come from that liberals call stupid sheep? We call them patriots here, and it’s a generational sacrifice. When I was told the Air Force didn’t want me, I was shattered for awhile-that’s just how we are.

Despite that, roughly 45 percent of troops polled said they intend to back Republican candidates, even though less than a third say they are registered with the party.

Similarly, about 28 percent said they plan to vote for Democrats in the upcoming contests, even though only about one-fifth consider themselves members of that party.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/10/17/troops-see-rising-political-tension-in-the-ranks-poll-shows/

@KNOWITALL From one stupid sheep to another (ie, whatever I might call you, we’re the same species, and I daresay roughly peers in most respects)—why “patriot”? Surely you agree that there have been wars the US should not have conducted? Or military operation of some kind that was done for all the wrong reasons? If you don’t, then never mind. But is it patriotic to participate in an immoral act commanded by your superiors? Maybe I should post this as a formal question to the whole group. I’ll let your answer guide me. If you say something thoughtful and informative, I’ll post to the group. If you talk about me, or some other inconsequential thing, hmm, I’ll post to the group anyway, just to annoy you.

Peace

@SaganRitual Interesting. Condescending and name-calling already, you’ll fit in just great with the bulk of the jellies here. I’m not interested.

@KNOWITALL I urge you, in all sincerity, to read it again. Please. You have completely misunderstood me.

If I disagree with a war, I don’t fault soldiers (unless they commit war crimes), I fault the government and politicians that send the soldiers. The people that spit on returning soldiers from Vietnam—ridiculous; spit on the presidents and politicians that got us and kept us involved in those conflicts.

@Demosthenes Exactly.

@SaganRitual Don’t worry about me, I don’t like many people and have very little patience for nonsense and you seem like a more whimsical type of person. Just personality clash, no worries.

@KNOWITALL Again, I urge you, read it again. You have misunderstood me. I was asking a question. I seek your answer. Whimsical? You misunderstand me. It’s not whimsy. It’s mockery.