You can think this new American caution is potentially dangerous (as I do), but there’s no arguing that it’s deeply felt and (given the immense cost and almost nonexistent benefits of war in Iraq and Afghanistan) understandable. The question is what a president should do about it.What, oh what, can a president do about a populace that doesn't want to spend "immense costs" for "almost nonexistent benefits"? It's a vexing problem for any president to have! Why, back in the good ol' days, people supported any ol' jingoistic adventure that cost lots of money (and dead people too!) for nonexistent benefits. And they were happy about it!
I know what a president should do about it. So do you. What's shocking is how many people in DC are confused about it.