ISIS on the offensive in Iraq

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

We're assuming an independent Scotland, then?

Anyway, while you're doing that the Balance of Power shifts to a catastrophic degree towards China in asia and Russia in Europe.

Without American backing Israel looks like a soft target and a new and bloody war breaks out between Israel and the non-genocidal Levantine States on one side, and everyone else on the other.

Without American leadership military co-operation in Europe unravels into smaller blocks, the UK likely withdraws from the EU as a result, Germany either becomes the axis on which everyone turns, or abdicates responsibility - lots of nasty ways for this to go, including opportunistic Russian Invasion.

China begins to threaten Japan openly - lacking American backing Japan aggressively re-militarise....

All HELL breaks loose.

I sympathise with your desire to downsize your military commitment, but isolationism just ends up dragging the US into the war late, rather than keeping you out.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

We're assuming an independent Scotland, then?

Anyway, while you're doing that the Balance of Power shifts to a catastrophic degree towards China in asia and Russia in Europe.

Without American backing Israel looks like a soft target and a new and bloody war breaks out between Israel and the non-genocidal Levantine States on one side, and everyone else on the other.

Without American leadership military co-operation in Europe unravels into smaller blocks, the UK likely withdraws from the EU as a result, Germany either becomes the axis on which everyone turns, or abdicates responsibility - lots of nasty ways for this to go, including opportunistic Russian Invasion.

China begins to threaten Japan openly - lacking American backing Japan aggressively re-militarise....

All HELL breaks loose.

I sympathise with your desire to downsize your military commitment, but isolationism just ends up dragging the US into the war late, rather than keeping you out.

It is not the downsizing of the military commitment per se which is the issue. Yes, it is expensive but if it is used effectively than it justifies its cost. My objections are to the half-***ed way it gets done. Either commit with the intent to use the requisite force to win, or don't. ALL of our allies -- including the best of the lot which is you folks in the UK -- want to commit the military to various interventions without committing them to win. I'm staunchly in favor of a lot less in the way of interventions while using an Almighty-huge malfing hammer when we DO intervene. Absent that option, isolationism kills fewer yanks.

Dragged in to something bigger later? Quite possibly, but then we might take it seriously enough to resolve it as thoroughly as we did in WW2. Efforts to curtail victory always seem to backfire even worse.