You miss what I am saying. I never said our domestic policy is mainly based on our foreign. I stated that our foreign policy is linked to our livliehood.
Yes, our foreign policy and our domestic policy have their individual areas, but they are inextricably linked. If Europe were attacked, we would feel the financial downturn through loss of business, and the cost involved with aid,etc. after the fact. The same follows through with any of our other allies, all of which we make it a point to do the most amount of business that we can with.
Being a Utopia isn't a prerequisite to protecting your interests outside of your borders.
Prioritization allows one to choose what problems to solve first. If someone threaten to attack Europe, your logic says that unless we have all problems fixed here, we have no moral justification to choose a side in said conflict. I disagree fully.
If someone is acting Unilaterally, that means that someone is acting alone, not alone and against allies. While our allies may disagree with us, it does not change the definition of the word 'unilateral'. You are making a reference to Iraq. Again, I don't see how this has to do with my statements. It falls right in line. I never said anything about there being a requirement that everyone is happy with our actions, and the fact that they some would have preferred an alternate situation does not affect the topic at hand.
