I see what you're saying, the contrast between these positions seems black and white, but in many cases it's not.
For example, open borders vs a wall. A wall doesn't stop illegal immigation. And immigration is absolutely vital for a strong economy. The answer isn't "keep everyone out" and it's not "let everyone in". It's a balance between the two.
Foreign intervention vs bringing troops home. Interveing in foreign situations keeps countries safe. That's why they do it. You even give a good example in your next paragraph. North Korea and ISIS are both foreign concerns, but ignoring them would have put America and the rest of the world in danger. The answer isn't "let the foreigners sort their own problems out", nor is it "send troops to deal with every single dispute". It's a balance between the two.
The rioting in the streets we're a little closer on. I agree that Kamala and Biden were horribly ineffective at condemning the violemce we saw. But sending out troops in unmarked vans to round up people who weren't even being violent certainly isn't the answer. These people weren't protesting for fun. And most of them weren't violent. The president has a duty to represent his citizens, if he refuses to do so, a reaction, likely a violent one, is inevitable.
The answer isn't "crush any sign of rebellion", nor is it "say nothing and pretend nothing bad is happening", it's somewhere in between.
We can only arrive at these "somewhere in between"s by talking to each other and not assuming the other side is crazy or evil or stupid. Most of the people you disagree with aren't your enemy, they just have a different perspective.