Isolationism does not work. It never has, and it never will.
In an interview with Texas Senator Ted Cruz, Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, who thoroughly dismantled the likes of Tucker Carlson in a debate just last week, laid out what he sees as the best way to avoid war. It is not in the fantasy of isolationism favored by Carlson and many libertarians, in which the military is used only after an enemy sets foot on American soil. Nor is it the George W. Bush-era conservative habit of launching two-decade democracy-building projects abroad.
The answer is simpler: build a military strong enough that dictators think twice, and refuse to let them bully their neighbors. In other words, the approach President Trump has pursued.
Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg joined Verdict to discuss his interview with Tucker Carlson. History shows us that isolationism does not work. When a nation is not prepared, it becomes an attractive target. More on Verdict: In Defense of Western Civilization: Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg One-on-One https://t.co/LFcgeizdzu
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) October 12, 2026
"I also thought [Tucker Carlson] fundamentally misunderstood what I'd said about being prepared for war, suggesting this was warmongering, which it obviously isn't," Rees-Mogg said. "Being prepared for war is not warmongering. It's trying to avoid war."
"Well, that is exactly right. And the argument that the isolationists make is that withdrawing from the world and weakness somehow avoids the risk of military conflict," Sen. Cruz said. "And we have only millennia of human history to the contrary, that when a nation is weak, when they are unprepared to defend themselves, that's when they become attractive to bullies and tyrants and invading armies. And history has shown that the strongest, the easiest way, the best way to avoid war is to be so strong that your enemies don't want to mess with you. It is what Ronald Reagan referred to as peace through strength. Yeah. And that's a concept that the isolationists, it simply eludes them."
In his debate with the former Fox News host, Rees-Mogg’s argument was straightforward. A capable, credible military is the surest deterrent against aggression, both against your own country and against your neighbors. And if deterrence fails, defending national sovereignty and borders is the clearest way to signal strength to would-be aggressors.
His examples were Nazi Germany and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In both cases, Europe appeared weak, and that weakness effectively invited expansionist dictators to test the limits. Had the West been better prepared and projected real strength, war would have been far less likely.
Yet some still cling to the fantasy that nations, like individuals, simply want to be left alone. That is not true of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, or any other country the United States counts among its adversaries.
“America First” was the right call from President Trump. But it should not be confused with “America Only,” as Tucker Carlson and his ideological allies seem to prefer. It is in America’s interest to defend its allies, help them become capable of defending themselves, and come to their aid when necessary.
It is not an invitation to seal the borders and assume that perceived strength alone will keep the outside world at bay. Strength, like any other asset, diminishes when it is never used. That is a lesson far too many people appear to have forgotten.
Editor’s Note: Thanks to President Trump and his administration’s bold leadership, we are once again respected on the world stage, and our enemies are being put on notice.
Help us continue to report on the administration’s peace through strength foreign policy and its successes. Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the Conversation
VIP members get the ability to comment on articles.