Typical GOP foreign policy mentality - how to refute?

[Thor]

So I am have an email dialog with my father about RP and how he is doing well with delegates, despite the beauty contests. He is a typical mainstream GOP follower. Here was his reply to RP capturing lots of delegates:

Looks like politics as usual! Ron Paul would pick up a lot of support if he revamped his foreign policy. Most young people in America are part of the "me, now" generation, and they don't think about consequences because most have not had to deal with them before. If all of the U.S. overseas bases were closed and the troops brought home, how long do you think it would take North Korea to invade and capture South Korea? With the financial and technological resources of South Korea, what kind of threat would that make North Korea? With U.S. troops out of the way, how long do you think it would take China to invade and takeover Japan, their staunch enemy for centuries? ...then, why stop with Japan when natural resource rich Australia would appear to be a "ripe plum worth picking?" Do you really want to give China all of those resources? The Middle East will become chaotic and Germany, with all of it's technology and manufacturing capability, will become a target of some tyrant who has designs of "taking over the world" (most likely Islamic, and their intention is to convert the entire world to the Islam or annihilate them, especially Jews and Christians. If you have any doubts about this, read about the Islamic Crusades... they were far bigger and far bloodier than any of the Christian Crusades.) Is that the kind of world you want to live in? Yes, the U.S. would have to protect themselves at their borders, so you will have an opportunity to experience what Israel has been dealing with ever since Hammas moved into the Gaza Strip. ...and it will be close, with resource rich Canada to our north with no way of defending its massive borders, they will be picked off quickly and we will have an enemy, who wants to kill us, along a 3000 mile border that we don't have the resources to defend. ...what condition is your prayer rug in?

How does one refute those "points"? I don't think we need to be policemen of the world. I agree with RP 100% on foreign policy. But he is basically calling me short sighted. His argument is that if we don't, the fight will be at our doorstep in a matter of time. This is what the neocon GOP followers think will happen if we are not policing the world.

Constructive feedback / thoughts?

[Crickett]

Well, he is great on prognosticating what will happen. He thinks ALL these people want to kill and conquer, leaves out Britain fighting these merciless mongols from Canada, and forgets about our WAY beefed up border security. We are not involved to defend Australia, come on..he is just so frightened. It is a shame. Let them fight us on our land and see how far they get. One of our nuclear bombs would devastate a smaller country, and one of theirs would ruin a few cities, here. I doubt they would be so stupid. WE are the war mongers atm, not THEM.

[BamaAla]

I hate to say this about your father, but he is unrealistic and extremely scared for no good reason. Does he really think some third world rag tag militia is going to roll into Germany and wipe them out? China is just going to go berserk and start destroying the markets than make them rich?

Explain to him that, even in the absence of all those military bases, we still maintain defense treaties with Canada, Germany, South Korea, Australia, and Japan and if they are attacked we will still come to their assistance in accordance with U.S. law. There is nothing to freak out over; we would simply be "conservatively" cutting our out of control budget.

[Thor]

Thanks for the feedback.

And just to reiterate, I could be wrong, but I think this is how most of the neocon GOP thinks, and why they don't support RP (at least on foreign policy.) They are extremely scared that if we don't keep "them" at bay on or next to their land, the fight will be on our land. And neocons fear that even with treaties in place, we will get there to lend support after it starts, instead of preventing the start by being there all along.

I know we flat out can't afford it anymore. I think the neocons know it too, but are paranoid of the alternative. What my father wrote they think is the alternative.

[WilliamC]

Just because we aren't being aggressive doesn't mean we can't defend ourselves.

[tod evans]

All other nations are out to wage war on each other and it's only the military might of the USA that keeps them in check?

Does he really believe this?

Attila has been dead for quite a while now.

[ggeezz]

Refuting the points is the wrong direction. It almost never works. (Honestly, have you ever seen this work? more than 1 time out of 100?) If you want to have any success with your father you need to allow him to discover that you're right "on his own" starting from where his now.

My strategy would be to help him to discover that we're best prepared against these crazy war mongers all over the world if our economy is strong and we're not too far spread out. Also we want to be the last country attacked rather than the first. (Have you ever played a game of Risk with 4 or more people?)

Find out whether he really cares about the people of South Korea or just about the implications to us. Isn't the best time to attack North Korea just after they've won a war with South Korea?

Ask him how we fix our debt crissis if military spending only goes up? Show him a pie chart of our spending by category? Can any politician actually cut SS/Medicare without the senior revolting? If you don't cut the military or big entitlements aren't we on a path to self-destruction? And it doesn't matter if you want to cut the big entitlements. It just isn't going to happen.

Say you'd be all for the US policing the world if it was a viable path forward if it was feasible (if you don't have a problem saying that.) But the numbers don't add up. Does he have an answer for how the budget works? If the military budget has to get smaller, then where should we spend it?

[ggeezz]

What are his views on WW2? I mean the actual logistics of it. Basically we were able to come in and mop up the mess because Germany fought a war of attrition with Russia (and others). And we emerged as a superpower afterwards because everyone else spent all of their resources fighting and we waited. (You can make a parallel between us now and England then.) There may have been a window to stop Hitler before he built up their army, but that's hindsight. Not many here realized that at the time. Once Hitler started attacking it was too late for us to do anything until he spent most of his resources.

But it doesn't matter what the truth is. You need to find out what he believes. That's what matters to him. Then you guide him from where he is to where he needs to be.

[otherone]