"The answer to this might surprise you. Is the whole strategy working or is it just making the whole region from Libya to Pakistan to Turkey less politically st

"The answer to this might surprise you. Is the whole strategy working or is it just making the whole region from Libya to Pakistan to Turkey less politically stable and more violent? It's not an easy question to answer, but we've been doing it your way since 2001 and the situation has got worse. I'd like to propose the radical strategy of "not killing people" and see how it works out." I feel like this is hard to quantify. The thing is we are going to continue exploiting these regions and generally doing things that the people of these regions don't like. We can't really have a live and let live policy where we keep fucking people over so I feel like that is kind of off the table. On the other hand, there haven't been any attacks on our soil or even high impact attacks really since we started blowing people up with robots. If there was another high profile attack it would result in an intensely hawkish political environment where we would lose more civil rights and most likely blow up another country like Iraq. That would really kill a lot of people. So if blowing away a bunch of people in countries that barely have sovereignty keeps things in check then it isn't really the worst plan. It is really not worth talking about idealistic ideas about: A) not fucking over people B) not doing anything option B is way too politically dangerous for our leaders anyway, and it is obvious that A isn't going to happen. I think the best we can hope for is improvements in targeting for the assassination of people with interests that are opposed to US interests.