What does that have to do with anything?
Do you simp for everything America does? Even if it's not being attacked?
When i don't simp for something America does, i will tell you, though i do not guarantee i will disagree in the same direction you do.
For example the fact that Iraq is now both a single country and has a government in which Iran is allowed to have any influence is a huge mistake. As is continued existence of Iran's Islamic Revolution.
Here is the thing, on the whole I support forcing the Emperor to renounce his divinity because he is not a God, he is just a man(as can be seen by his nation being beaten and him not using God powers to destroy the US) but I don't pretend that we did not force them to change their culture and meddled with it.
Real life is not fucking Star Trek, there is no inherent expectation of or moral virtue to larping a strict non-interference doctrine, in fact i think it belongs in fiction and anyone who proposes it be followed in real life is a retard, a child or an agent of a rival power.
I mean "Perhaps they shouldn't have done whatever" can be applied to anything. If we got in a war with some other nation occupied them and then imposed a communist government on them would you suck our dick about that?
"They lost the fucking war which they started btw" is an argument with a lot of mileage in it.
Not infinite, but it's a lot.
And do not use "got into a war" type language with me, we know who started that war, don't act otherwise, some politicians do better verbal tricks than you, you can't do it better than them, don't bother trying on me, it's annoying and it won't work.
If you go commie, you will always find an excuse to go to whatever war you want, and if you win, you will find an excuse to do whatever you want anyway, so it's redundant to tailor doctrines to such hypotheticals that will inherently make them obsolete.
Commies/islamists/nazis/whatevers never care what your rules are about "international interference", they have their own, and they won't change theirs for you if yours are isolationists enough. No, they will call you self-handicapping retards for being ideological isolationists and exploit it to defeat you or others easier.
Yes that’s true but an alliance sees two to tango. Yes Eastern Europe wants in NATO but the question you aren’t asking is does NATOs current members want more Eastern European nations to be Allie’s. Like Eastern Europe gains protection by being our ally. What do we gain by having them be Allie’s besides Russia as a rival?
NATO had to ask that of every single member states before the joined and get their ok, that's an actual condition, hence current drama with Sweden, Turkey and Hungary.
Russia was your rival already anyway, if you believe otherwise, you are as willfully blind as German establishment.