Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
America Should Not Garrison The World: It's Wrong  
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2360 times:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance41.html

For brevity I'm going to exlude a few reasons from the article. Most of the text below is the author's.

1. It is unnatural. It is not natural for the United States (or any country) to have an empire of troops and bases that encircles the globe. Why should any U.S. troops ever leave American soil or American territorial waters?

2. It is very expensive. The money factor cannot be ignored. Even without fighting a war, it costs a lot of money (the American taxpayers’ money) to pay, house, feed, and provide medical care for thousands of American soldiers.

3. It is against the principles of the Founding Fathers. Sending troops overseas, building military bases in foreign countries, and making alliances is foreign interventionism, pure and simple. The Founding Fathers recommended a noninterventionist foreign policy, and for good reason.

Quite simply, the planetary American Empire is un-American.

4. It increases hatred of Americans. One need look no further than the "welcome" our troops have received in Iraq.

5. It perverts the purpose of the military. The purpose of the U.S. military should be to defend the United States. That’s it. Nothing more. Using the military for any other purpose perverts the purpose of the military. The U.S. military has no business attempting to bring democracy to the world, remove dictators, spread goodwill, fight communism or Islam, guarantee the neutrality of any country, change a regime that is not friendly to the United States, train the armies of other countries, open foreign markets, protect U.S. commercial interests, provide disaster relief, or provide humanitarian aid. The U.S. military should be engaged exclusively in defending the United States, not defending other countries, and certainly not attacking them. What are U.S. troops doing overseas when the border between Mexico and the United States is not even secure?

6. It increases the size and scope of the government. There is no way a country can have hundreds of bases and thousands of troops overseas without a substantial and onerous bureaucracy at home.

7. It makes countries dependent on the presence of the U.S. military. This is especially true in countries where U.S. troops have had a presence for decades. Consider the case of Germany.

8. The United States is not the world’s policeman. It’s a dirty job. It’s a thankless job. It’s an impossible job. And no, someone does not really have to do it. Why, then, do we even try? We cannot police the world. We have no right to police the world. It is the height of arrogance to try and remake the world in our image. Most of what happens in the world is none of our concern and certainly none of our business. If the people in a country don’t like their ruler, then they should get rid of him, not look to the United States to intervene. Actually, though, most of the time it is the United States that institutes a regime change.

Thomas Jefferson stated: "I am for free commerce with all nations, political connection with none, and little or no diplomatic establishment. And I am not for linking ourselves by new treaties with the quarrels of Europe, entering that field of slaughter to preserve their balance, or joining in the confederacy of Kings to war against the principles of liberty."

John Quincy Adams said that, "America . . . goes not abroad seeking monsters to destroy."


Bring them home!

[Edited 2005-05-04 04:43:31]

53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2342 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
5. It perverts the purpose of the military.

You know what's HILARIOUS about this point to me?

When W was running against Mr. Personality: AKA Coma Boy, Al Gore. W Said OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER, we should not be in the business of nation building...hummm Can I have Hypocrites for a $Billion Alex?


User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2338 times:

MD-90, maybe if you'd have voted, people would care what you say.

User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2339 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
The purpose of the U.S. military should be to defend the United States. That’s it. Nothing more.

So, you'd rather wait til the assholes get onto American soil before we take action with our military? Personally, if we got to blow the shit out of someone, I'd rather do it elsewhere . . . . . or not all to be honest.

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
It’s a dirty job. It’s a thankless job. It’s an impossible job.

Yes  yes , Yes  yes , Yes  yes 

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
And no, someone does not really have to do it.

Wrongo  no   no   no  . . . we have an inherent responsibility as the worlds remaining military superpower to assist any country or any region in any event where we ahve to capability, be it ridding the world of tyrants or support relief operations due to a natural disaster. Wanna see the world hate the US, go back a few months when we "delayed" in getting assistance to the Tsunami victims . . .

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
Even without fighting a war, it costs a lot of money (the American taxpayers’ money) to pay, house, feed, and provide medical care for thousands of American soldiers.

And without the US military where would this country be? The entire "peacetime" military from the end of Vietnam until the beginning of action in Iraq cost a pittance to maintain and even advance compared to some other programs in this country. Altough expensive, I agree, so is a soldier putting his ass on the line for people that think like you . . . when, by the way, was the lat time you thanked a veteran????

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
hundreds of bases and thousands of troops overseas

Hundred of bases???? Shit, son, we don't have hundreds of bases in total, much less overseas. Lew got you on that one, huh; hook, line and sinker!

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
This is especially true in countries where U.S. troops have had a presence for decades. Consider the case of Germany.

And South Korea. Don't forget South Korea. I suppose it would have been your call to tell Western Europe to go to hell and allow the Soviet Hordes to posture and maneuver at will over there? Just curious . . . . what would YOU (and that idiot Rockwell) have done to prevent Soviet expansionism during the Cold War. What would you (and that idiot Rockwell) do to keep KJI and his North Korean armies from trouncing the South Korean people?

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
. It is against the principles of the Founding Fathers.



Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
Thomas Jefferson stated: "I



Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
John Quincy Adams said that, "

Smallll suggestion for you and your Buddy Lew . . . move into the 21st century. Might be painful, but not any more pain than the ret of us must endure every time you post this drivel.

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
Bring them home!

You don't have to yell, it's rude, it's ignorant.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2336 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 2):
MD-90, maybe if you'd have voted, people would care what you say.

I wasted all that time on someone that didn't even VOTE!!!

Damn I hate that, someone lives in this country and doesn't have the balls to vote . . . .

Geez, I'm sorry I wasted my time writing all that.

MD-90, you have NO dog in the hunt. I'm done with you . . .  talktothehand 


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 21385 posts, RR: 54
Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2332 times:

Excuses for not wanting to address the real problem: The military´s job can not be to clean up the mess made by irresponsible and reckless government policies.

That is the problem.

Although it´s on a completely different scale, I have no problem with our Bundeswehr being active in Kosovo, Afghanistan and in several other places and the ongoing change of transforming it from a purely territorially-defensive to an intervention-capable force - provided that our politicians take the utmost care to decide wisely where to deploy our troops, for which purposes and with what legitimation.

By completely ignoring those crucial issues the Bush administration has done more damage to the US military than any adversary on the planet ever could have. And Abu Ghraib or not - the troops deserve better than to be sent abroad without legitimacy, with insufficient training, with ill-conceived strategies, with no backup plans, with lacking support, with morally indefensible tactics and without a viable exit strategy.

Don´t amputate the limbs when it´s the head that´s rotten.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2322 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 5):
The military´s job can not be to clean up the mess made by irresponsible and reckless government policies.

Perhaps in the current circumstance, you have a point - we can debate that elsewhere. That said, what say you about the US assistance in clearing up the mess in Japan post WW2? About the US assistance in western Europe Post WW2? What about our protection of South Korea? Assistance in the Sanai? Assistance in Kosovo? Assistance in Macdeonia, Bosnia?

Just curious, where, Klaus, do you draw your line? What is a "Go mission" versus a "No-Go Mission" for you my friend?

Quoting Klaus (Reply 5):
with insufficient training, with ill-conceived strategies, with no backup plans, with lacking support, with morally indefensible tactics and without a viable exit strategy.

I have one word for you: DUMSFELD.

Saw it coming a long time ago . . . pre Rumsfeld even. Pre-Bush2. About the time Bush1 and CLinton swapped office space.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 21385 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2304 times:

ANCFlyer: Perhaps in the current circumstance, you have a point - we can debate that elsewhere. That said, what say you about the US assistance in clearing up the mess in Japan post WW2? About the US assistance in western Europe Post WW2? What about our protection of South Korea? Assistance in the Sanai? Assistance in Kosovo? Assistance in Macdeonia, Bosnia?

I was strictly referring to messes made by the troops´ own government, of course.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2298 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 7):
was strictly referring to messes made by the troops´ own government, of course.

I good with that . . .

My questions perhaps might have sent MD-90 into fits  biggrin .

Seriously, I understand. Governments can get carried away . . . all governments. And unfortunately, often the military are pawns for the whims of it's leadership.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2292 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 2):
MD-90, maybe if you'd have voted, people would care what you say.

Gee, I choose not to give the tyrannical office of the president any "mandate" and boy does it distress some people for whom politics is almost their religion. But considering how many people don't understand that, left and right, they're both wings of the same establishment bureaucracy.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
So, you'd rather wait til the assholes get onto American soil before we take action with our military?

And just what government is going to invade the US?.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
we have an inherent responsibility as the worlds remaining military superpower to assist any country or any region in any event where we ahve to capability,

You and the neocons who suffer from delusions of grandeur may think so, but that is not the responsibility of the America that our founding fathers created.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
The entire "peacetime" military from the end of Vietnam until the beginning of action in Iraq cost a pittance to maintain and even advance compared to some other programs in this country.

And you arrogantly talk about ignorance. My hometown is right next to Huntsville, Alabama. I know that staggering sums of money that even a peacetime military requires to control the world.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
Shit, son, we don't have hundreds of bases in total, much less overseas. Lew got you on that one, huh; hook, line and sinker!

Now you're displaying true ignorance. Not only did Lew Rockwell did not write that article, you are completely in the dark about US projection of geopolitical power.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0115-08.htm

According to the Defense Department's annual "Base Structure Report" for fiscal year 2003, which itemizes foreign and domestic U.S. military real estate, the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries and HAS another 6,000 bases in the United States and its territories.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 9):
Gee, I choose not to give the tyrannical office of the president any "mandate" and boy does it distress some people for whom politics is almost their religion.

By voting you make a decision, a commitment, and stand behind your values. If you don't vote, you're telling the world you're unable to make up your mind what you stand for, or care so little about your value system you can't be half arsed to endorse it. It has nothing to do with mandates, or anything else you've claimed, but if you don't vote it makes your rhetoric valueless, since you're unwilling to stand behind it.

Case closed.

[Edited 2005-05-04 06:40:31]


International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7112 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2271 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
Damn I hate that, someone lives in this country and doesn't have the balls to vote . . . .

Yep, sometimes it's the little thing that make the big things matter. It's not even a big task to complete. Tick once for for the person who best reflects your ideals to represent your constituency, and once for the party you want to govern. I can't wait to vote in this year's election in NZ. I've already reregistered. People not voting is usually the sole reason for bringing polarising leaders like Bush into power in the first place.

As for the whole topic of the post, I hate the whole thing as much as most people, I despise Bush but the fact is, it's flogging a really dead horse. It's already had it's hooves chopped to make glue, and the flesh sent off to the factory to make Pet Food.

I've given up caring about what Bush does now - If there was a hell, I would be happy in the knowledge he was gonna be burning there for a long time.. If he wants to piss off the world that's fine by me - it is unlikely to affect me directly anyway. I just hope he can handle the consequences it will have on the USA once he has left office for years to come. Without the power over the button he can't do much when the world backlashes...


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2262 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 9):
And just what government is going to invade the US?.

Doesn't take a government . . . only takes 19 angry men and some airplanes.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 9):
that is not the responsibility of the America that our founding fathers created.

And the isolationist attitude of the United States was eliminated in WW2, and as I mentioned before - come on in to the 21st Century, you'd be amazed at the advances we made.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 9):
My hometown is right next to Huntsville, Alabama.

Nice country, very, very nice in fact. I like Madison County. I made way too many trips there in the mid-1990s, to a contractor in HSV working out of Redstone and a facility over the mountain. I like that whole area. Have family in Lauderdale County and other parts of Alabama . . . Northern Eastern Alabama is definitely a nice place.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 9):
Not only did Lew Rockwell did not write that article,

It's on Lew's site, good enough for me. Your link in the Thread Starter is Lew's site . . . again, good enough for me.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 9):
the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries and HAS another 6,000 bases in the United States and its territories.


Reading from my source below, these "bases" include ranges and training areas and places where there is absolutely nothing - but a gate. Black Rapids Training area in Alaska . . . .absolutely nothing but a gate and a few old buildings and a huge training area on a Glacier. Ohhh, now that's a built up costly item to maintain.

Continuing, the Whittier to Anchorage pipeline. No buildings, no nothing, just a pipeline providing jet fuel.

Haines Terminal. Mothballed umpteen years ago. Was used to transfer fuel at the sountern end of a pipeline terminus.

Using the word "Bases" as you have above, is very fuckin' misleading. Par for you. Read below, it's the real deal, doesn't hide anything and doesn't exaggerate or expound on the facts as you do.

Enlighten yourself. . . .

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2003/basestructure2003.pdf

[Edited 2005-05-04 06:51:03]

User currently offlineCptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2250 times:

I've successfully (until now) avoided these endless yes/no, do/don't do, you're bad/you're good crapolla, socio-politico threads. Now me succomb to offering a personal opinion (after hearing this shit for the last whole bunch of years - I'll be 62 in a few days).

My personal opinion is basically a question...why do so may of the the howlers in this forum degrade the US for the current campaign (only because the reasons for the campaign are, or apparently are, misrepresented) and they disregard that a positive result may very well be experienced to the citizens of Iraq, but the howlers are screaming for the US to get envolved for the "same" reason in (name WTF genocide you want to name)?

Look at the threads on this forum bleeding their heats out for the US to help (you name the friggen' country, tribe or people-eat-people village), but many of the same SOBs are squalling about US interference or policing in the international theatre.

Talk about hypocritical. Sheesh. It would be cool if a non-interested party could devise a somewhat indicative value chart of how many of the
posters in this forum can actually think (hey, there are many that can, and I very much value reading those expressions, but, there are so many that are simply venting for whatever conviction or reasoning).

Well, I'm going to bail out now. But, lastly, can someone express what's right or what's wrong? Yeah, I've read the other threads...the anti-USAers bitching about the Bush "lie" in Iraq still support an adventure to curtail the current genocide in Africa (for basically the same reason) want the US to get envolved? What's wrong with this picture? Regards...Jack



all best; jack
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2230 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 12):
Doesn't take a government . . . only takes 19 angry men and some airplanes.

And invading Iraq, or any other military operation, could've stopped that, how?



I'd agree that the 6000 "bases" statement is misleading. An aerial gunnery range out west is probably just some dirt, rocks and targets, which is hardly a base. But that's a quote from the article, not me. But some of those small installations/locations are indeed genuine bases.

At least we can agree that Huntsville, Decatur, Madison, Athens is a nice region. It's not LA, for sure. Huntsville is even reputed to have the highest per capita concentration of people with PhDs of any city in the nation.


User currently offlineAirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2226 times:

MD-90, are you kidding who is gona look after the rest of the needy countries? France? US has troops around the world for aid around those areas not because it is some sort of a police base. U.S IS NOT POLICING THE WORLD give me one example that shows they are. They are helping countries. The United States has never done anything bad in the long run in history when they have invaded countries Japan, Germany, etc. and the invasion of Iraq is for the better. I doubt somebody from Mississippi knows how much the Unites States is needed through out the world.

User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2226 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 14):
At least we can agree that Huntsville, Decatur, Madison, Athens is a nice region.

Hold on to your asses world! MD-90 and I agree on something.

Yes, Sir, it is a great area. I spent so much time there, I don't need a map. Matter of fact, at one point National Car Rental called HPD to look for me, I was there 33 days with one of the Pontiac Bonneville's and apparently, they like you to check in occasionally   .

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 14):
And invading Iraq, or any other military operation, could've stopped that, how?

This thread had nothing to do with that . . . but if you'll start another thread, we can go round and round in there . . .

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 14):
But some of those small installations/locations are indeed genuine bases.

And the DoD info lists them, including military population. I'll gladly go through the entire Alaska list for you - not that I think it necessary, I believe you can read - and you can see for yourself, even facilities such as Aircraft Hangers, if they are stand alone, are listed . . . now, you've got to admit - an airplane hanger does not a "base" make . . . .

EDIT: Let me add that when you (IF you) read this list of "bases", please also note that when you see an Recreation Center, such as Seward Army Rec Camp, Alaska or the HaleKoa Hotel in Honolulu, these are NON-APPROPRIATED funds operations. No tax payer money goes to these operations. They are self-sustaining. So you can wipe that off your list of "Costs" to the taxpayer.

Ahhh, Huntsville . . . very good memories . . . .   

[Edited 2005-05-04 08:37:13]

User currently offlineS12PPL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2220 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 2):
MD-90, maybe if you'd have voted, people would care what you say.

Ahhhhh, that's right. People under the age of 18 can't possibly know what they're talking about. I'll tell you right now, I know a few people 18 and younger that probably have a better idea about our government, and how it works than you do. I'd be glad to put them up against you any day. Perhaps people might care what you say if you didn't act like such an a** hole twards people like MD90

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
So, you'd rather wait til the assholes get onto American soil before we take action with our military? Personally, if we got to blow the shit out of someone, I'd rather do it elsewhere . . . . . or not all to be honest.

We wouldn't have to worry about people trying to invade America, if we weren't bussy invading them ourselves. Perhaps if we would mind our own damn business, and stop trying to solve everyone else's problems...we MIGHT have a better standing in the world.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
we have an inherent responsibility as the worlds remaining military superpower to assist any country or any region in any event where we ahve to capability, be it ridding the world of tyrants or support relief operations due to a natural disaster. Wanna see the world hate the US, go back a few months when we "delayed" in getting assistance to the Tsunami victims . . .

Excuse me? We have a duty to go around bombing the shit out of countries on a hunch there might be WMD's...even though we don't have good intel. that there actually are WMD's?? Gotcha. We certainly don't have the "duty" to rid the world of Tyrants. If a country wants to have a dictatorship...where is it ourbusiness to go in there and MAKE them run it democratically? And I promise you...had we had a natural disaster of our own...Very few countries would have come running to our aide. We've done a good job of telling everyone else to f**k off so many times the last 5 years, no one would want to help us.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
Altough expensive, I agree, so is a soldier putting his ass on the line for people that think like you . . . when, by the way, was the lat time you thanked a veteran????

I'm sorry...but they wouldn't have to be putting they're asses on the line if it weren't for Bush going into Iraq without a credible shred of evidence Sadam even had WMD's. The real fight was in Afghanistan...which he knew he had no fricken chance of winning. And what does thanking a veteran have to do with Iraq?? Give me a break. I'll thank veterans for they're service in past wars...But don't even try to compare thanking a veteran for past wars, to the current conflict in Iraq...which, again, Bush had no business starting.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
Hundred of bases???? Shit, son, we don't have hundreds of bases in total, much less overseas. Lew got you on that one, huh; hook, line and sinker!

We don't have hundreds of military bases? Really? Shit...I must have been out in left feild these last 21 years...What was I thinking?

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
Smallll suggestion for you and your Buddy Lew . . . move into the 21st century. Might be painful, but not any more pain than the ret of us must endure every time you post this drivel.

Smaalllll suggestion for you and your redneck buddies...Move into the city and listen to what the rest of the country has to say about this pointless war Bush has gotten us into. It might be painful for you to realize that the most populated states in the country again didn't support that moron in the White House....But it'll be fun to watch you realize that alot of people really are against this war.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
You don't have to yell, it's rude, it's ignorant.

You don't have to be a sarcastic ass, either...But that hasn't stopped you I see....

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 6):
Perhaps in the current circumstance, you have a point - we can debate that elsewhere. That said, what say you about the US assistance in clearing up the mess in Japan post WW2? About the US assistance in western Europe Post WW2? What about our protection of South Korea? Assistance in the Sanai? Assistance in Kosovo? Assistance in Macdeonia, Bosnia?

Well, typically when you nuke a country, the polite thing would be to clean up after your mess....

Same goes for post war Europe.

Same goes for the other instances you mentioned. When you bomb the s**t out of a country...typically you should clean up after yourself.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2210 times:

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
We wouldn't have to worry about people trying to invade America, if we weren't bussy invading them ourselves. Perhaps if we would mind our own damn business, and stop trying to solve everyone else's problems...we MIGHT have a better standing in the world.

Didn't you spew this same drivel in a thread in the last two days in this same web site?

USA: Boy Are We Hipocrits! (by S12PPL May 2 2005 in Non Aviation)

Yup, thought so . . . .

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
Gotcha.

You got shit . . . .

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
And I promise you...had we had a natural disaster of our own...Very few countries would have come running to our aide.

Because we can take care of ourselves. Once again, might I remind you, it is a responsibility of a superpower. Our support in the recent Tsunami crisis had nothing to do with anything except helping thousands - hundreds of thousands of people less fortunate than ourselves - in a world of shit.

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
Shit...I must have been out in left feild these last 21 years...What was I thinking?

That would be my thinking . . . read the link I provided above, and my info to MD-90 . . . perhaps you might learn something. A glacier is not a frickin' base in anyone's imagination - well, except maybe yours    .

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
Move into the city

Gawdamn, I live near downtown? How much closer you want me to move!?

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
Well, typically when you nuke a country, the polite thing would be to clean up after your mess....

And typically, one doesn't just fly in on a Sunday (or Tuesday 9/11/01) morning and blow the shit out of a naval base without warning or a declaration of war (or fly planes into buildings).

Interesting signature you have . . . .21 years you haven't learned shit.

[Edited 2005-05-04 09:03:50]

User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2199 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 12):
And the isolationist attitude of the United States was eliminated in WW2, and as I mentioned before - come on in to the 21st Century, you'd be amazed at the advances we made.

I would say that this countries isolationist policies ended LONG before that. Could say it even began with the Monroe Doctrine. Don't forget our intervention in the Phillipines. Or our war with Spain. Or Mexico. WWII was what propelled us to where we are now politically, but sadly we're giving it all back. All the goodwill, its going down the drain.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2197 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 19):
I would say that this countries isolationist policies ended LONG before that.



Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 19):
Don't forget our intervention in the Phillipines. Or our war with Spain. Or Mexico

Yeah, I'd agree. The big push, was as you say, the entry into WW2.

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 19):
All the goodwill, its going down the drain.

History will tell that tale TBar . . . only history. None of us here are prognosticators . . . (some of here are in fact bullshit artists though). History will tell. As far as I'm concerned . . . the game is still afoot, and all is not yet lost.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2191 times:

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
Ahhhhh, that's right. People under the age of 18 can't possibly know what they're talking about.

I'll be 21 in June, S12PPL. I could've voted for Peroutka or Badnarik in the last presidential election, but I decided that I didn't want to participate in our sham election system.

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 19):
I would say that this countries isolationist policies ended LONG before that.

In 1861, I'd say.

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
We wouldn't have to worry about people trying to invade America, if we weren't bussy invading them ourselves. Perhaps if we would mind our own damn business, and stop trying to solve everyone else's problems...we MIGHT have a better standing in the world.

That was George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin's position.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2188 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 21):
Quoting S12PPL (Reply 17):
We wouldn't have to worry about people trying to invade America, if we weren't bussy invading them ourselves. Perhaps if we would mind our own damn business, and stop trying to solve everyone else's problems...we MIGHT have a better standing in the world.

That was George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin's position.

MD-90, if we still lived in the 1700s/1800s that might be a sound practice. However . . . since we no longer communicate by carrier pigeon, pony express and telegraph wire, and it doesn't take two weeks to cross the continent on a train, and we have put people on the moon, and I'm "talking" to the world (literally) with this post, you simply must realize that any of their thinking, while sound 200 years ago, simply cannot and will not work in the 21st century . . .

S12PPL makes it sound as though every other week we're bounding off with the US military to invade some other country. . . . normal spew from him.

So, other than Iraq, please help me out here, in the last 30 years, who have we "invaded". And, when you answer state the reason why. I can't wait for this answer.


User currently offlineCaptOveur From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2187 times:

The same people sitting here saying we should go back to being the pre 20th century isolationists our founding fathers wanted us to be would also be the first ones throwing a hissy fit if:

We did not send aid to a disaster

We did not protect an ally or economic interest from invasion or worse

We had to endure further terrorist attacks on 9/11 scale or larger


Taking the advice of the founding fathers is not an all or nothing proposition. The world was a different place in 1787. The reason they made it possible to amend our constitution was the simple fact that TJ and his cronies were bright enough to know that the world was not going to be the same forever.


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 24, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2177 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 20):
As far as I'm concerned . . . the game is still afoot, and all is not yet lost.

I hope not. I really hope all is not yet lost. Problem is, I see a decline, I definitely believe we are no longer respected in the world like we were after WWII. I question many of my government's policies around the world in the last sixty years, most recently Iraq. Ultimately, agree with what the U.S. has done or not agree (as an American), I think we can all agree that our standing in the world is declining.



NO URLS in signature
25 Pepef : 1 out of every 138 americans is in jail. You have a horrendous drug problem. People are afraid to go out after dark in the big cities. There are subur
26 CaptOveur : Ever actually been here? Maybe you have been here, if only to spend time in prison. If you don't want to get raped in prison maybe you should try not
27 Post contains images FDXMECH : What you don't understand is people over 18 were once 18 themselves. Thereby in retrospect remember how they harbored the illusion of wisdom and know
28 S12PPL : Do us all a favor....if my words are spew, what are yours? Get off your fricken high horse. If you want to play that game...Fine. If mine is spew, yo
29 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Not at all, war is an ugly nasty business. Have you ever participated in one? It's the last thing I want to do again. Diplomacy is definitely the bes
30 Greyhound : It's dissapointing every time I see some new location our troops are deployed to. But I saw an interesting point in this thread... I would agree there
31 Post contains images S12PPL : Some how that is the type of response I would expect fro you.... Way to show that maturity! You would sit there and lay into someone young, though, i
32 Diamond : MD-90 ... I commend you for having political views that don't fall neatly into a liberal or conservative label. You do have some very traditional view
33 Greyhound : You're right... I'm perfectly content to leave a regime alone that murders other people. Hey, they ain't bugging me. If you get mugged and stabbed wh
34 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Age had nothing to do with the response I sent . . . it had everything to do with how funny your post struck me . . . sounded like my 11 year old whi
35 Greyhound : Good reason for them to keep him in power.
36 S12PPL : I'll agree with you America's political parties are pretty screwed right now. I'll still identify myself as a democrat simply because I can't stand th
37 Post contains images ANCFlyer : There we agree . . . and of course, the Republican's tossed Bob Dole to the Lions, remember . . . I don't know which candidate was more boring in the
38 Greyhound : Where did I label EVERY dictatorship like that? I can't remember saying EVERY dictator MURDERED and TORTURED those who spoke out against them. It was
39 Post contains images Greyhound : I don't know, ANC... you sound a little to me. j/k And I agree with that neocon thing... just too annoying.
40 Post contains images S12PPL : No, I answered your question about why his army never put up a resistance....Go back and read what I type, k? Thanks... Hmmmm...Never said you did, d
41 Greyhound : I would have to agree with you on that. I lean conservative... but I think the extreme people in both parties are doing too much talking, and not eno
42 B757300 : More Lew Rockwell kookism and the Loser, err Libertarians wonder why they never get more than 1% of the vote. And since he didn't vote he has no right
43 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Thanks, Capt . . . saved me the trouble! I'm not even close to being Anti-America and I simply can't stand you. "No matter what party" . . . . . hell
44 Post contains images Mir : Hell, was there even a single person on here who thought that that guy was making the least bit of sense? I know which answer my money's on. -Mir
45 FlyMIA : Thats wrong. People will always hate America. If the United States were to do nothing about terrorism and just let countries do what ever they want t
46 Daedaeg : So you suggest we let Canada(haha), the EU(more haha) or the UN(i'm dying here) handle global problems? MD-90 the world would be a far worst place if
47 Post contains images Biggles : Yeah,we can't help . Our soldiers are still in Afghanistan,trying to keep the peace there. We had more soldiers, but a couple of gung-ho ANG F-16 pil
48 MD-90 : People didn't, especially in the Middle East, for all of our history until after WWII when we became a superpower and had a nonstop succession of pre
49 FlyMIA : Well if it was not for the US who knows how WWII would have turned out. The French should have admired us we saved them two times in WWI and WWII. An
50 S12PPL : riiiiiiiight. The French should just get down on they're knees and kiss our boots.
51 Post contains images Boeing Nut : ............. I agree with these......... 1) - Somewhat 2) - Oh hell yes it is... 3) - It's a much diferent world than our founding fathers lived in
52 Post contains images JGPH1A : Ahhhh - Dexedrene. The breakfast of champions
53 Toulouse : Wake up and stopping listening to the censored rubbish from the Bush administration. Read a few international newspapers. Many European and other int
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Ahmadinejad Will Not Attend The World Cup posted Mon May 29 2006 22:55:57 by LTU932
Does The World Feel Wrong To You? posted Mon Oct 10 2005 08:41:16 by DaddiesSecret
Why Does America Want To Rule The World? posted Thu Oct 3 2002 21:35:14 by Caravelle
America Is Not What's Wrong With The World posted Tue Sep 26 2006 08:44:30 by UH60FtRucker
Is America Eating The World? posted Wed Oct 11 2006 17:00:39 by Pbottenb
It’s Not Against The Law To Have Sex With A Corpse posted Thu Sep 28 2006 20:50:14 by AAFLT1871
Why Gays Should Not Serve In The Army posted Fri Sep 22 2006 00:10:03 by Braybuddy
Should Oz Host The Soccer World Cup? posted Tue Jun 27 2006 01:01:31 by Alessandro
Limitless Energy: How Would It Change The World? posted Mon Feb 13 2006 21:10:47 by AerospaceFan
What Is Wrong With The World? posted Thu Jul 28 2005 10:35:53 by AAFLT1871