I don't know how to take this op-ed column by Bennett Ramburg...I really don't. Is he being serious, or is it sarcasm? The lead-in to the column says of previous instances of America's hastened departure from other countries: "...despite immediate costs to America's reputation, disengagement ultimately redounded to America's advantage." The previous examples cited are Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.
OK, so our departure "redounded to America's advantage" in the sense that American soldiers stopped getting killed in those places, but can anyone really say with a straight face that we're better off with those countries in the state they're in now than if they were thriving under a stable democracy?
How the hell does anyone hold up Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia as examples of the good that can come from us leaving a job undone? Sounds more to me like he's making the case for not intervening in the first place.