Should We Defend Our Allies?

[Tigerace117]

And then they intervened in Poland, started a war that ended with one of the biggest military defeats in history, got split up into 2 different countries and committed crimes so terrible that they remain a stain to this day.

Clearly intervening for them did not work out.

Except that wasn’t an “intervention”; that was an outright war of annexation. Duh.

 

[Tigerace117]

Why? Because your country fights too many conflicts against the will of your own people. Your national debt is ballooning because of national security and defence spending as well as unfunded wars of adventure. Your Congress and constitution is being side-stepped by successive Administrations devoted to forever-war and your government's over reliance on militarism.

Taiwan is not a true democracy. It is a restricted democracy which leans towards oligarchy. Same with South Korea. South Korea is now militarily stronger than North Korea except in nuclear weapon capacity, so if the North invades conventionally, then it will be mauled by the ROK. If the DPRK resorts to nuclear, biological or chemical weapons then China, Russia and America should each pick one major North Korean city to strike with NBC weapons as a warning to all states about the prohibitive cost of using such weapons of mass destruction as a first strike strategic option.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

Again, how are South Korea and Taiwan “not real democracies”? Unless you are using the definition by which America isn’t a “real democracy” either, in which case I would suggest starting to live in the real world.

I hate to break it to you but both Iraq and Afghanistan were extremely popular with the American people until they got bored. The national debt is already long past the point of being solvable, and abandoning a democratic country to the tender “mercies” of a genocidal dictatorship wouldn’t save us a cent.

 

[highroller]

Wrong, as history shows quite clearly.

China was a world power before it embraced isolationism. After it did.....was the Century of Humiliation

Isolationism doesn’t work. Never has, never will.

The world doesn’t exist in a vacuum.

 

[antiquity]

The real question is would our so called allies help to defend us.

 

[Yes_Minister]

Except that wasn’t an “intervention”; that was an outright war of annexation. Duh.

Annexing is not intervening, is that an extension of intervening? Wouldn't leaving other countries alone be the opposite of intervening and annexing?

It's not like the British Empire had a live and let live policy.

 

[Tigerace117]

Annexing is not intervening, is that an extension of intervening? Wouldn't leaving other countries alone be the opposite of intervening and annexing?

It's not like the British Empire had a live and let live policy.

Uh....no. Not even close. The last time the US intervened to annex territory was well over a hundred years ago.

If you seriously don’t understand the difference between invading another country to annex it and overthrowing a brutal dictatorship, that’s on you.

 

[Yes_Minister]

Uh....no. Not even close. The last time the US intervened to annex territory was well over a hundred years ago.

If you seriously don’t understand the difference between invading another country to annex it and overthrowing a brutal dictatorship, that’s on you.

King Leopold intervened in the Congo to stop "Arab slave traders" and turned it into his own fiedom, how did that work out?

 

[Tigerace117]

King Leopold intervened in the Congo to stop "Arab slave traders" and turned it into his own fiedom, how did that work out?

Uh....actually, he gained the support of the other European powers by making a wide range of different promises, such as....

“ also secretly told British merchant houses that if he was given formal control of the Congo for this and other humanitarian purposes, he would then give them the same most favored nation (MFN) status Portugal had offered them. At the same time, Leopold promised Bismarck he would not give any one nation special status, and that German traders would be as welcome as any other.

Leopold then offered France the support of the association for French ownership of the entire northern bank of the Congo, and sweetened the deal by proposing that, if his personal wealth proved insufficient to hold the entire Congo, as seemed utterly inevitable, that it should revert to France. On April 23, 1884, the International Association's claim on the southern Congo basin was formally recognized by France on condition that the French got the first option to buy the territory if the association decided to sell. This may also have helped Leopold in gaining recognition for his claim by the other major powers, who thus wanted him to succeed instead of selling his claims to France.[18]”

Congo Free State - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Trying to equate late 1800s colonialism to anything the US does today is beyond dumb

 

[Yes_Minister]

Uh....actually, he gained the support of the other European powers by making a wide range of different promises, such as....

“ also secretly told British merchant houses that if he was given formal control of the Congo for this and other humanitarian purposes, he would then give them the same most favored nation (MFN) status Portugal had offered them. At the same time, Leopold promised Bismarck he would not give any one nation special status, and that German traders would be as welcome as any other.

Leopold then offered France the support of the association for French ownership of the entire northern bank of the Congo, and sweetened the deal by proposing that, if his personal wealth proved insufficient to hold the entire Congo, as seemed utterly inevitable, that it should revert to France. On April 23, 1884, the International Association's claim on the southern Congo basin was formally recognized by France on condition that the French got the first option to buy the territory if the association decided to sell. This may also have helped Leopold in gaining recognition for his claim by the other major powers, who thus wanted him to succeed instead of selling his claims to France.[18]”

Congo Free State - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Trying to equate late 1800s colonialism to anything the US does today is beyond dumb

How did it work out for the Congo and its people?

How about all the people that died in Iraq and Vietnam wars? What about the fact that Saddam was once an ally of the US?

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[vegas giants]

How did it work out for the Congo and its people?

How about all the people that died in Iraq and Vietnam wars? What about the fact that Saddam was once an ally of the US?

Our interventions have created our worst enemies

 

[Grand Mal]

The real question is would our so called allies help to defend us.

Two Portugese soldiers died in Afghanistan because America had been attacked. Two Latvians too. And a few from other countries. A few allies died in Iraq as well.
Remind me, when did America last come to the aid of an ally?

 

[Tigerace117]

How did it work out for the Congo and its people?

How about all the people that died in Iraq and Vietnam wars? What about the fact that Saddam was once an ally of the US?

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

So what? We once allied with Stalin, and he makes Saddam look like a choir boy. Hell, we allied with the British Empire, and the same goes for them. Alliances change. That’s not an excuse to turn a blind eye to a genocidal dictator like Saddam

Colonialism, again, is not even remotely similar to intervening.

How did it go for Belgium, wrecked by not one but two wars because they were dumb enough to think the rest of the world would leave them alone?

 

[Grand Mal]

Nice of you to openly admit what some of us already knew, you actually hate America.

You reckon? Tell you something, I have a higher regard for America than most rightists. Higher than the previous President too.

 

[OpportunityCost]

You reckon? Tell you something, I have a higher regard for America than most rightists. Higher than the previous President too.

Your own words indicate you are lying, and doing it badly.

 

[Yes_Minister]

So what? We once allied with Stalin, and he makes Saddam look like a choir boy. Hell, we allied with the British Empire, and the same goes for them. Alliances change. That’s not an excuse to turn a blind eye to a genocidal dictator like Saddam

Colonialism, again, is not even remotely similar to intervening.

How did it go for Belgium, wrecked by not one but two wars because they were dumb enough to think the rest of the world would leave them alone?

Your cries of moral intervention seem insanely hollow if you are fine with supporting the same dictator one day and declaring him a murderer the next.

The US intervention is for economic purposes, not human rights, if it were, the US would not support say the Saudi regime.

 

[Tigerace117]

Your cries of moral intervention seem insanely hollow if you are fine with supporting the same dictator one day and declaring him a murderer the next.

The US intervention is for economic purposes, not human rights, if it were, the US would not support say the Saudi regime.

I’m simply pointing out the fact that the US has a long history of supporting a bad regime against a worse one. That doesn’t mean the overthrow of said bad regime is evil.

The left’s desperation to cling to the “war for oil” stupidity is pathetic.

 

[Helix]

No more undeclared wars with no exit strategy.

The profit that arms manufacturers can make off of war needs to be strictly regulated.

A wartime tax that is paid by most people, not just the rich, stays in place for the duration of the war.

That's the minimum, IMO.

 

[Yes_Minister]

I’m simply pointing out the fact that the US has a long history of supporting a bad regime against a worse one. That doesn’t mean the overthrow of said bad regime is evil.

The left’s desperation to cling to the “war for oil” stupidity is pathetic.

You mean like supporting a coup in Iran that kept the Shah in power, which eventually resulted in the Iranian revolution?

And who was the worse the guy that made supporting Saddam okay in the 80s?

You are living off fumes from WW2, it's not WW2, Saddam is not Hitler or Stalin. You keep on referring to WW2 because that is the only modern military invention that actually worked out, nothing has since.

 

[SMTA]

We haven't been isolationists for a long, long time and I don't see us going back to that...ever.

Ironic
That goes against the actions of your boy Trump.

 

[Mycroft]

Ironic
That goes against the actions of your boy Trump.

No. It doesn't.

Trump is no isolationist. He's a nationalist.

 

[Yes_Minister]

No. It doesn't.

Trump is no isolationist. He's a nationalist.

He seems to flip flop on whether he wants to end the forever wars or not.

 

[Grand Mal]

Your own words indicate you are lying, and doing it badly.

Bullshit.
The average American rightist thinks America is a hopelessly corrupt failure of a country. I don't.
Want examples? Here's one...

"FB paid 300 million dollars to have ballot boxes in primarily Democrat strongholds. No monitors, no cameras. Easy to take sack fulls of ballots and dump them in those boxes."

"I am just a reporter here who found a story. I am not holding my breath that the FBI or DOJ will do a thing because they are Marxist Obama/Jokers Wife lovers who are experts at burying the truth and witnesses."

That's a poster here who identifies as conservative. What's that guy's opinion of America?
Maybe I should open a thread in the basement for dumping examples of rightists badmouthing America.

 

[Tigerace117]

You mean like supporting a coup in Iran that kept the Shah in power, which eventually resulted in the Iranian revolution?

And who was the worse the guy that made supporting Saddam okay in the 80s?

You are living off fumes from WW2, it's not WW2, Saddam is not Hitler or Stalin. You keep on referring to WW2 because that is the only modern military invention that actually worked out, nothing has since.

Lol yeah, the regime which replaced the Shah, again, made him look like a Boy Scout. Even Saddam was better than those psychopaths.

Saddam was a genocidal thug, and no amount of squirming can change that.

Gulf War, Korea, Bosnia and Kosovo, Somalia(eventually), Cambodia.....and that’s just a FEW examples.

 

[Yes_Minister]

Lol yeah, the regime which replaced the Shah, again, made him look like a Boy Scout. Even Saddam was better than those psychopaths.

Saddam was a genocidal thug, and no amount of squirming can change that.

Gulf War, Korea, Bosnia and Kosovo, Somalia(eventually), Cambodia.....and that’s just a FEW examples.

Why the Iran revolution had happened if US didn't cause a coup that kept the Shah in power?

I find those examples debatable, I find those examples debatable:

The Vietnam War helped Pol Pot take power in Cambodia.

The Gulf War set up the Iraq War that ended by being a disaster and did not help the people of Iraq.


US interference in Somilia did not help in many cases:

The Biden administration could change failed US policy towards Somalia

The Black Hawk Down military raid in 1993 transformed US policy in Africa, but the intervention had a longer historic legacy embedded in Cold War politics.

blogs.lse.ac.uk

 

[Mycroft]

He seems to flip flop on whether he wants to end the forever wars or not.

Again. No.

Trump has always said he wants to end the US involvement in the wars...and he worked to do it.

I have to think that you really don't know anything about Trump.