In 2014 President Barack Obama claimed that the United States should intervene in an attack on the Yazidi people in Iraq by ISIS in order to prevent genocide. An interventionist might argue that the United States was justified in such an attack, just as a bystander would be permitted to intervene if they were to see an innocent person being threatened. Required:
What would be the best response that the non interventionist would give to the interventionist argument?

Laissez-faire Versus Government Intervention. Historically, the U.S. government policy toward business was summed up by the French term laissez-faire -- "leave it alone." The concept came from the economic theories of Adam Smith, the 18th-century Scot whose writings greatly influenced the growth of American capitalism.

Former President Bill Clinton had publicly noted in April 2011 that the United States should “not rule out” arming the opposition, and in emails with Mr. Sullivan, her policy adviser, Mrs. Clinton discussed using private contractors to do just that. Mr. Ross, speaking generally, said she had frequently consulted her husband: “I’d say ...

Explanation:

it looks like its all of the above. [.wpal1kojopfdpojfrfionrnif.knfdsnksjosjo]

explanation:

you have to combine all of your answers together to

.wpal1kojopfdpojfrfionrnif.knfdsnksjosjo

the density would be a smaller number.