While I don't put any stock in the source....
For the sake of debate, I'll participate.
We should engage only until the point that we can either
A) produce our own semiconductors
B) secure another international partner who can
I don't like the "half-in/half-out" model for globalism.
If we're expected to be the world police then fine, we should get paid for our services, cops don't work for free. If not, then we can't be expected to artificially prop up another country's security unconditionally if there's nothing in it for us, that's the harsh pragmatic reality. (and I would apply that to both Israel and Ukraine...much to the dismay of people on both sides of the political fence)
The harsh cruel reality is, if your country can't stand on it's own two feet and provide for the needs of citizens (and that includes security), perhaps the "less bloody" option is that you be part of someone else's country.
A lot of countries have gotten a sweet ride off of the fact that they can direct their resources to other endeavors (be it education, healthcare, etc...) knowing it's because they can spend a minimal amount on defense because countries who've invested more in defense have their backs. (to only then thumb their nose at the US for not having free college or universal healthcare)
It's one of the few things I agreed with Trump on.