Talk politics.

In the end, the so-called nation builders wrecked far more nations than they built and the interventionalists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand themselves

Okay, obviously, not he, but whomever the speechwriter was. However, the implications are, forgive me for this, absolutely yuge if true.

Are we going to see a new era of American isolationism? Or is this a signal that the US may actually be willing to participate in the newly emerging so-called "multipolar" world? 

It's not, or shouldn't be, controversial to say that American involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc, has been an unmitigated disaster. The Taliban are back in power, Iraq's an unstable shithole despite more than a decade of efforts to the contrary, Syria has an extremist Islamist president or; at least what's left of Syria does. And the less said about Libya the better.

Here's a provocative question for you, would these countries have eventually stabilized and grown economically had the US not intervened? Trump certainly seems to think so.

It's almost bizarre to consider, but could President Trump be remembered not for all the covfefe and Big Mac dinners but for being a consensus-maker of a new international world order?