- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 3,357
- Reaction score
- 986
- Location
- Alabama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
We weren't in Afghanistan, before we were forced to invade Afghanistan. Maybe, had we been in Afhganistan, prior to 9/11, 9/11 might not have happened. Ultimately, how much more money and blood was spent, because we weren't proactive?
The ironic part of this post is that, as an isolationist country, we wouldn't have had to be proactive prior to 9/11 because al-Qaeda wouldn't have even wanted to attack us...since we wouldn't have been involved in their regional politics.
Al-Qaeda is far too spread out to honestly and realistically say that had we been in Afghanistan prior to 9/11 that the attrocities would never have happened.
Notice, I said, "maybe". I didn't make that statement with absolute certainty.
McCain is fundamentally wrong. The Republican party has been anything but isolationist and the current GOP candidates fall within the geographic paradigm the GOP has set for its vision of interventionism. There is little dispute amongst GOPers that the US should defend Israel from the big bad Muslims at all costs. If it is an African nation? The debate rages for months. Case and point: Somalia, Rwanda, Burundi, Liberia etc. These candidates are no different. They are in favor of intervening in the US' historical battlegrounds.
First and foremost, he lost for a reason. That being said, we have no business in Libya and very little if any in Afghanistan. It would save a lot of money if the troops were brought home.
Hey why not completely withdraw from the world? Give up your colonies in Guam, Puerto Rico and all the other islands you still occupy. Dump your bases in Germany, Spain, UK, South Korea, Japan, Diego Garcia and every where else ... would save you a ton of money and make a lot of people happy. And since you are doing that, then you dont need your massive military.. cut up the fleet!.. you only need the Coast Guard and they dont need carriers. And your bombers... who needs bombers if your Air Force is only for patroling US soil! Nukes.. dump them too.. since you are isolated, then who would want to attack you with nukes?
Oh and while you are doing your isolationist thing... how about stop buying goods from overseas? You know... basically everything non food wise?
And while you at it, why not give all the blue states the finger and cut them off.. Bye bye California and New York and hello the Christian States of America!!!!!
And in the sane and real world.. Isolationism has never ever lead to anything good.
Actually, isolationism led to a lot of good to the United States. Prior to WWI and WWII, the United States was pretty isolationist and then we only got involved in both wars at the very end and watched everyone else destroy each other. Then we were left to contain a single power and now the US is the most powerful country in the world.Hey why not completely withdraw from the world? Give up your colonies in Guam, Puerto Rico and all the other islands you still occupy. Dump your bases in Germany, Spain, UK, South Korea, Japan, Diego Garcia and every where else ... would save you a ton of money and make a lot of people happy. And since you are doing that, then you dont need your massive military.. cut up the fleet!.. you only need the Coast Guard and they dont need carriers. And your bombers... who needs bombers if your Air Force is only for patroling US soil! Nukes.. dump them too.. since you are isolated, then who would want to attack you with nukes?
Oh and while you are doing your isolationist thing... how about stop buying goods from overseas? You know... basically everything non food wise?
And while you at it, why not give all the blue states the finger and cut them off.. Bye bye California and New York and hello the Christian States of America!!!!!
And in the sane and real world.. Isolationism has never ever lead to anything good.
As a more isolationaist country, there would have been alot more than 3,000 people die on 9/11. Ever since The Big Lie, in 1967--where Egypt, Syria and Jordon reported seeing U.S. troops and aircraft fighting on Israel's side during the 6 Day war, the Muslims have hated us and there's nothing, at this point, that will change that.
Isolationism didn't revent WW2 and it wouldn't have prevented the GWT.
While I don't believe the President alone should have the power to declar war, I do believe he should be able to take action, including militarily, on behalf of peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts. We all agree that one basic human right in this country is the right to keep and bear arms. We preserve this right so that we can keep a tyrannical government at bay. We believe in democracy, freedom and liberty. As such, shouldn't we do whatever we can to ensure people of other nations have these same rights?
No. As a more isolationist country, there wouldn't have even been a 9/11 since al-Qaeda would have had no motive to attack us.
WW2 helped the the United States a lot, so my point stands.
Hey why not completely withdraw from the world? Give up your colonies in Guam, Puerto Rico and all the other islands you still occupy. Dump your bases in Germany, Spain, UK, South Korea, Japan, Diego Garcia and every where else ... would save you a ton of money and make a lot of people happy. And since you are doing that, then you dont need your massive military.. cut up the fleet!.. you only need the Coast Guard and they dont need carriers. And your bombers... who needs bombers if your Air Force is only for patroling US soil! Nukes.. dump them too.. since you are isolated, then who would want to attack you with nukes?
Oh and while you are doing your isolationist thing... how about stop buying goods from overseas? You know... basically everything non food wise?
And while you at it, why not give all the blue states the finger and cut them off.. Bye bye California and New York and hello the Christian States of America!!!!!
And in the sane and real world.. Isolationism has never ever lead to anything good.
What are you saying. WWII not only helped the US economy, it also destroyed most European powers, enabled the United States to rebuild Germany and Japan as democracies dependent on the US and left the United States and Soviet Union to compete for the top spot, which the United States won. The US benefited a lot from WWII, it took the world from multi-polarity to bipolarity and finally unipolarity. Study history and use logic for once.There's zero evidence to support any of that. Losing a half million Americans is hardly proof that WW2, "helped the United States a lot".
There you have it, folks -- the world is held together by the glue of American military intervention!
What are you saying. WWII not only helped the US economy, it also destroyed most European powers, enabled the United States to rebuild Germany and Japan as democracies dependent on the US and left the United States and Soviet Union to compete for the top spot, which the United States won. The US benefited a lot from WWII, it took the world from multi-polarity to bipolarity and finally unipolarity. Study history and use logic for once.
WW2 didn't help the American economy.
Actually, isolationism led to a lot of good to the United States. Prior to WWI and WWII, the United States was pretty isolationist and then we only got involved in both wars at the very end and watched everyone else destroy each other. Then we were left to contain a single power and now the US is the most powerful country in the world.
WW2 didn't help the American economy.
There are a lot of reasons we became the most powerful country. Staying out of other people's politics for such a long time was one of them.You only became the most powerful country because you had your industrial base intact after the two wars.... and you used that to "influence" all other countries with your products.
How did things work out when there was no American intervention?
C'mon, man you don't really mean that. Seriously? World War II was basically a huge wartime stimulus, and a hell of a lot more effective than FDR's New Deal even.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?