Is Gorka's Moralizing Actually Moral?

Gorka moralized both on the Ingraham show and earlier on Hannity.  I saw the Hannity offering and Gorka was near-whining while maintaining his "White-Knight-USA" position.  It was tiresome listening.

The gist of his argument was not that the US should resolve every 'problem' in the world, nor even every instance of use of chemical weapons against civilians--but that the US must act on those instances "where we are able."

Since the US maintains a military presence in Europe and in SE Asia and is able to strike about 90% of the Earth's surface, Gorka's formula makes the US liable for a helluvalot of rescue activity, no?

Unfortunately, Just War Theory as currently iterated makes Gorka's moralizing ...ahhh....immoral.  JWT demands that the US be attacked by Syria.  One could--possibly--stretch JWT to cover the "US National Interest" being under attack, but Gorka did not make that case, much less a case based on current JWT.

Maybe instead of being a tiresome nag, Gorka could come up with moralizing that is actually moral.  It would make for much more interesting TV.