• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What happens if the US adopts an "America First" foreign policy?

RBIII

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
125
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In order to have this conversation we must accept the premise that we are not currently putting the Country's best interest up front and instead the policy makers/ruling class are primarily looking out for themselves with a few crumbs for the masses.

If you disagree with the premise, explain.

If you agree with the premise, what happens if/when there is a 180? Countries are left to defend themselves and if a deal is not good for America then there will be no deal.

Do you believe America is the glue that keeps the world from Chaos with our huge Military and Financial reach across the globe? Are we enmeshed with the world to the point of no return?

Take China for example, if we start getting real with China about the future of our debt instead of digging a bigger hole, could that alone start a chain reaction of catastrophic proportions?

What do you think is the cost of the status quo or inaction? Could we have 100 trillion in debt across the world and it would make no difference?
 

HonestJoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
5,875
Reaction score
3,035
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
In order to have this conversation we must accept the premise that we are not currently putting the Country's best interest up front and instead the policy makers/ruling class are primarily looking out for themselves with a few crumbs for the masses.
”America First” is a sound-bite designed to sound positive without actually meaning anything. It can be used to mean almost anything and to support almost any policy.

A key question would be what exactly you’re putting first; the country, the people (or a subset of them), the government (as long as it’s the “correct” type), some underlying principle. And when others answer that question, are they saying one but mean another? You also need to ask whether Americans and/or people currently living in America (another interested question in itself) are really the only human beings on the planet you actually care about. How far are you willing to screw the rest of us over for your own (perceived) benefit?
 

RBIII

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
125
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
”America First” is a sound-bite designed to sound positive without actually meaning anything. It can be used to mean almost anything and to support almost any policy.

A key question would be what exactly you’re putting first; the country, the people (or a subset of them), the government (as long as it’s the “correct” type), some underlying principle. And when others answer that question, are they saying one but mean another? You also need to ask whether Americans and/or people currently living in America (another interested question in itself) are really the only human beings on the planet you actually care about. How far are you willing to screw the rest of us over for your own (perceived) benefit?

Exactly, that is what i'm getting at. What do you think?
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
”America First” is a sound-bite designed to sound positive without actually meaning anything. It can be used to mean almost anything and to support almost any policy.

A key question would be what exactly you’re putting first; the country, the people (or a subset of them), the government (as long as it’s the “correct” type), some underlying principle. And when others answer that question, are they saying one but mean another? You also need to ask whether Americans and/or people currently living in America (another interested question in itself) are really the only human beings on the planet you actually care about. How far are you willing to screw the rest of us over for your own (perceived) benefit?

I would have thought that the actual question is, whether or not it makes sense to tell everyone to shove it.
 

RBIII

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
125
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I would have thought that the actual question is, whether or not it makes sense to tell everyone to shove it.

Yes, should we?

In a effort for self preservation of course.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Yes, should we?

In a effort for self preservation of course.

My experience is that telling people to shove it shortens negotiations and reduces the chances of an amicable solution.
 

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,731
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The USA's foreign policy is based on doing what is best for the USA.

I predict that won't change anytime soon.

Wait and see.
 

RBIII

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
125
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
My experience is that telling people to shove it shortens negotiations and reduces the chances of an amicable solution.

Well to be fair "shove it" wasn't exactly the words i used but just agreed with to get the conversation going. I'm thinking more along the lines where we have little to lose. It's a moral and fiscal question wrapped in one.
 

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,731
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
One thing I'd like to see SOMEONE finally do is to withdraw from Europe and Japan:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

There's well over 200 military facilities in Germany, Italy, and Japan alone. WW2 has been over for 70 years, the cold war for a quarter century. It's time to bring the boys back home.



Not going to happen. Not today,not tomorrow.Probably not this century.

Anyone who dreams that this will happen is totally out of touch with reality.
 
Last edited:

HonestJoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
5,875
Reaction score
3,035
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Exactly, that is what i'm getting at. What do you think?
As I said, the term is a meaningless sound-bite used for politics. In relation actual government (which is a world away from politics), the right answer is almost always some kind of balance, much as it is for our individual lives. You obviously don’t want to give up everything you have for everyone else because you’re never going to get as much back in return but you equally don’t want to become known as the one who does screw everyone over for anything you can get because very quickly nobody will work with you or will just try to do the same. I don’t think this is anything new and I don’t see it changing in the foreseeable future.
 

RBIII

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
125
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

Citizen.Seven

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
1,967
Reaction score
718
Political Leaning
Libertarian
What do you think would happen if we did? Are we critical to the stability of those areas? 200 seems like a lot.

Japan, Germany, and even Italy are prosperous first world countries that should be capable of providing their own defense. The only thing that would happen if the USFG withdrew troops from those countries is a slight decrease in military spending. But, every little bit helps and, more importantly, it would decrease the ability for the USFG to wage casual war.
 

MrShangles

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
356
If you go to a ball game don't you cheer for your team, why can't we want America first.
It's the PC police that are trying to make us feel bad if we want America to win sometimes.
Why don't the countries that have been winning let us have some time when we are on the wining side of trade.
I guess we should cheer for China not America. Go China keep ripping us a new one , it's all our fault.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

RBIII

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
125
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The USA's foreign policy is based on doing what is best for the USA.

I predict that won't change anytime soon.

Wait and see.

Is it though? I guess you disagree with the premise.
 

RBIII

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
125
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Japan, Germany, and even Italy are prosperous first world countries that should be capable of providing their own defense. The only thing that would happen if the USFG withdrew troops from those countries is a slight decrease in military spending. But, every little bit helps and, more importantly, it would decrease the ability for the USFG to wage casual war.

Those are pretty much my thoughts, you've just explained all positive things that would result from a withdrawal. What would someone argue for keeping it the way it is? Clearly that side of the argument is winning.
 
Top Bottom