I have not written anything to suggest that I advocate standing by while children are raped or that the U.S. should not have fought WWII. Indeed I specifically wrote that the U.S. should have fought WWII. How does one draw such wild and clearly false conclusions? You should try reading what I wrote without already forming a conclusion. I didn’t even say that intervention in Syria was wrong. I just said that the situation there was nuanced and suggested that in depth analysis was warranted. How does that imply anything about my beliefs on WWII or the rape of children?
You’ve committed numerous argumentative fallacies. It behooves you to reflect on your responses and reflect on how it came to pass that you think a person who claims the situation in Syria is complicated implies they are a piece of shit and implies that they would not try to stop Hitler.
Where have I suggested that inaction is always the best course? Where have I suggested that intervention is never warranted?