Nothing could be more UN-secure. The world organizations (NATO, UN, and the like) have shown that they are NOT committed to preserving the world's peace and security, but are swayed by political pressure, and will willingly abandon citizens to the vagaries of their country's (or a near neighbor's) imposed government. So few of the UN's members qualify as having a freely-chosen government, they can't honestly take on the responsibility of policing the world.
Not to mention the disgrace that many UN troops have become; stories of UN sexual assaults, even on children, have become commonplace.
In our effort to NOT have "another Vietnam", we have enshrined chuckleheaded policies.
Rather than spend money on defending ourselves, the thinking went, all we
needed were smarter, more honest and compassionate leaders who would tame the
world with their sincerity.
These were convenient, convincing and comforting arguments to cut military
spending. They were also just wrong. The U.S. economy worsened, and the world
Now we’re hearing the same arguments all over again. The answer to all our
ills is "end this war." Of course, ending wars won’t solve
irresponsible tax-and-spend fiscal policies, rebuild the military or restore
global confidence in American leadership.
And that’s assuming we could just "end" wars — and you can’t. You
can lose, quit or win wars … but you cannot end them simply by walking away.
Wars have two sides and the enemy, as the saying goes, "gets a vote."
This is the real lesson of Vietnam.