Posted: 4/5/2011 8:13:13 PM EDT
|
Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial differences(Self Defense)
We could sure use some of this again, I'm tired of our Military personal being killed and money wasted in places we shouldn't be! |
|
Quoted:
There has to be a top dog. The UN is a toothless hag who only bitches. And takes bribes on the side. Who do you want to be top dog? This isn't a Gene Roddenberry science-fiction drama where needs and wants can ever be eliminated. 
False dichotomy that equates being top dog with having to intervene all over the world in primitive shit holes like Afghanistan where we bleed ourselves for nothing. |
|
Quoted:
There has to be a top dog. The UN is a toothless hag who only bitches. And takes bribes on the side. Who do you want to be top dog? This isn't a Gene Roddenberry science-fiction drama where needs and wants can ever be eliminated. [Geek] The Federation had the Prime Directive, which was a Cardinal Rule against intervening in the affairs of developing planets. Fail.  [/Geek]
Its not about being the top dog, its about putting our values on others where we insist on being the world's referee and float the costs on our own dime. Let them sort it out on their own, and stregnthen our own domestic defenses here and intel abroad. Swat them like flies when they come here to start shit. Save our military, money, and time. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
There has to be a top dog. The UN is a toothless hag who only bitches. And takes bribes on the side. Who do you want to be top dog? This isn't a Gene Roddenberry science-fiction drama where needs and wants can ever be eliminated.
False dichotomy that equates being top dog with having to intervene all over the world in primitive shit holes like Afghanistan where we bleed ourselves for nothing. I'm sure China will have no problems stepping into the top dog slot. Our problem is that we're too nice and care what people think about us around the world. Of course we act in our self-interest but we as a nation and culture go out of our way to be fair now, can't have an overwhelming use of force can we? Keith makes a good point, pulling into Fortress USA would be a disaster that will take it's payment in blood. Both WWI and WWII are pointers of this as time, circumstances and man's greed and pride started balls rolling that led to total war. While our record of 'intervention' post WWII hasn't always been successful, where we've screwed up was not remaining loyal and committed to our 'interventions.' Korea, Vietnam both were strategically the right places to stand but it was done incorrectly and in both case we undercut our allies to rid ourselves of the situation. Gulf War I and II were fought for different reasons but by the time GWII rolled around our self-interests were at more of a risk yet we 'half-assed' it. Same goes for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, etc. At some point we are going to have to grow a spine, stop talking in terms of 'kinetic actions' and only get involved with fights we're willing to win at all costs. All that said, what we've done and are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan is NOT a waste and as I said in the beginning, imagine a Russia or China engaged in either/both countries. Both countries would be a smoldering ruins, massive civilian casualties and national resources raped. For as much as the rest of the world hates us, they know we're very kind and gentle people and for that they're secretly grateful. My $0.02..... |
|
Quoted: Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial differences(Self Defense) We could sure use some of this again, I'm tired of our Military personal being killed and money wasted in places we shouldn't be! +1 The wars have become more and more progressive in nature. They all smack of neoconservative ambitions to nation build. We should not be involved in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya. "We the people" need to focus on getting our financial house in order. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There has to be a top dog. The UN is a toothless hag who only bitches. And takes bribes on the side. Who do you want to be top dog? This isn't a Gene Roddenberry science-fiction drama where needs and wants can ever be eliminated.
False dichotomy that equates being top dog with having to intervene all over the world in primitive shit holes like Afghanistan where we bleed ourselves for nothing. I'm sure China will have no problems stepping into the top dog slot. Our problem is that we're too nice and care what people think about us around the world. Of course we act in our self-interest but we as a nation and culture go out of our way to be fair now, can't have an overwhelming use of force can we? Keith makes a good point, pulling into Fortress USA would be a disaster that will take it's payment in blood. Both WWI and WWII are pointers of this as time, circumstances and man's greed and pride started balls rolling that led to total war. While our record of 'intervention' post WWII hasn't always been successful, where we've screwed up was not remaining loyal and committed to our 'interventions.' Korea, Vietnam both were strategically the right places to stand but it was done incorrectly and in both case we undercut our allies to rid ourselves of the situation. Gulf War I and II were fought for different reasons but by the time GWII rolled around our self-interests were at more of a risk yet we 'half-assed' it. Same goes for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, etc. At some point we are going to have to grow a spine, stop talking in terms of 'kinetic actions' and only get involved with fights we're willing to win at all costs. All that said, what we've done and are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan is NOT a waste and as I said in the beginning, imagine a Russia or China engaged in either/both countries. Both countries would be a smoldering ruins, massive civilian casualties and national resources raped. For as much as the rest of the world hates us, they know we're very kind and gentle people and for that they're secretly grateful. My $0.02..... What you speak of is a never ending black hole with no solution. A self fulling fallacy with the same outcome. People always bring up WWII but the Japanese did not attack us for not intervening, but for intervening and what amounted to our utmost desire to enter that war - which in that case was justified on our part. WWI was a colossal nightmare, and we all know where that lead - not to mention we gained nothing from entering it but a lot of graves of young Americans. No one here is trying to justify isolationism, but there has to be a balance and we can't fall into this dialectic and false choice that it is all or nothing. China? They and others don't want to feel the void and are very happy getting rich with us subsidizing and taking the brunt of everything. If the Chinese want to take over in Afghanistan then by all means lets let them. |