Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/12/2001 4:13:04 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2001 4:13:32 PM EST by 71-Hour_Achmed]
In the last 36 hours, I've posted a few messages on this board and received a stream of hateful ranting in reply. The message that I have tried, repeatedly, to get across is that to reduce the risk of such attacks, the U.S. should stop getting involved in situations which have no bearing on, nor any benefit to, the U.S. and its interests. The following says it a hell of a lot better than I did.
Libertarian Party Chairman James W. Lark writes: Finally, the Libertarian Party hopes these attacks will elicit a thoughtful national discussion about how we can prevent similar tragedies in the future. Of course, there is no way to guarantee that evil will not strike again. However, a foreign policy that limits our intervention in the affairs and quarrels of other nations is a foreign policy that will reduce the chance that terrorists will want to strike at America. Peace and free trade with all nations, and entangling alliances with none, is a time-honored prescription for an America that is at peace with the world, and for a nation that has little to fear from the savage and bloodthirsty actions of terrorists."
View Quote
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:17:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2001 4:29:19 PM EST by platform389]
Yes, there is much truth in these statements. Certainly something that bears close consideration later. Now, however, it is the time for the sword. Blood in vast amounts must run. Vengence is the word.[%(]
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:18:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2001 4:19:12 PM EST by BYU]
THIS JUST IN******71-HOUR_ACHMED IS A ZIT ON THE AZZ OF HUMANITY/GUN OWNERS AND SHOULD BE POPPED. SERIOUSLY, DO YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND JUST HOW STUPID THIS POSITION IS AND JUST HOW DUMB YOU SOUND WHEN YOU FURTHER IT BY BEING PARTY TO IT? GO READ A HISTORY BOOK AND STOP INHAILING! (EDITED CAUSE I WAS ANGRY WHILE STROKING THE KEYS)
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:19:50 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:21:45 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:24:11 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2001 4:24:34 PM EST by HKocher]
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: In the last 36 hours, I've posted a few messages on this board and received a stream of hateful ranting in reply...
View Quote
Not trying to make a lot of friends around here I see??? It sounds to me as if you are gloating, like: "ha ha, I told you so!" Now is not the time to place blame within this country. If you truly feel that way, maybe you don't belong here.
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:29:50 PM EST
.Peace and free trade with all nations, and entangling alliances with none, is a time-honored prescription for an America that is at peace with the world.
View Quote
Sounds like the "Ferengi" on Star Trek. Never worked, never will. This statement is an oxymoron. I can't believe the naivete of that party. What kind of idiots are running that party?
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:32:36 PM EST
71, I respect your point of view on this. Not because I agree with you, rather, that is what this country is all about. However, I have lost a lot of tolerance for your point of view AT THIS MOMENT after seeing all of your posts since yesterday. I have seen you come just short of saying that we deserved it. The right to think, feel, say, and opine whatever the hell we want is a cornerstone of our nation. If you think for a minute that those rights are not really yours, just take a look at what is going on in Patterson, NJ. People are dancing in the streets just like the Palestinians were. The fact that neither I nor anyone else has put a bullet through their black hearts is proof enough. With freedom comes certain costs. More importantly, with liberties come certain responsibilities. Perhaps you should have exercised a little compassion and common sense and NOT purposely enraged others on this board with inflammatory spoutings about national policy and 'brought this on ourselves' kind of talk. Now, please listen to this part carefully: I do not hate you. I do not even know you. I hope that I have not made an enemy of you today. I respect your right to form your own beliefs and opinions and whole heartedly support your right to go and vote your conscience and help affect a change in OUR country. I just think that you should have saved this kind of posting (that you HAD to know would only succeed in pissing off people who were already hurting) until the uncontrollable (and completely understandable) emotional extremes in people had passed. That said, I offer you my hand in hopes that we can shake and move on.
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:32:40 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2001 4:48:42 PM EST by zazou]
71, There is a significant amount of truth to this. And I agree almost completely. I am a damn near staunch Libertarian. [b]But under no circumstances did we desrve this or have it coming. Period.[/b] That said, while this may be true, there is litte "I told you so's" can do at this point and action must be taken to attain justice. BYU, The history books are pure evidence of this so perhaps you should study. And kill the caps key. I'd rather not have to B'Slap you harder. Raf, Relax, buddy. This is a long thing between you and us Libertarians, but I am with you on this. They (we libs) must save the theoretical politics until this is finished. Ultimately I don't think, from what I have read of your posts, that you and I are much different at the core of our beliefs in the political avenues. I believe they (libs)are right at the core and we need to strive for that. However we don't live in a fastrack to Libertarian Utopia world. All of us, brothers in Nation and Arms. Zaz {edit to clarify}
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:34:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:40:46 PM EST
Originally Posted By Maynard: Are you that naive to think that it isn't in our interest to protect Israel? Are you that naive to think that if we left the Mid-East that we wouldn't still be targets for most of these religous zealots. We are after all the "Great Satan".
View Quote
We wouldn't BE the "Great Satan" if we hadn't been screwing them over politically for the last seventy-or-so years. First off, where did I say that Israel was the problem? It's one of the problems, but not the only one. And after that, what's Israel ever done for us? Shot up the USS Liberty? Avoided mentioning terrorist information to us because they didn't want to reveal any sources? Being the world's policeman means pissing off a large part of the world.
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:43:30 PM EST
Of course you conveniently ignore the very pertinent truth that if WE were not acting as the world's policeman, SOMEONE ELSE would be, and we would most likely not like how that someone else did that job. But why confuse your fantasy politics with facts, huh?
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:43:40 PM EST
It sounds to me as if you are gloating, like: "ha ha, I told you so!" Now is not the time to place blame within this country. If you truly feel that way, maybe you don't belong here.
View Quote
Actually it sounds alot like George Washintons farewell address
"    The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. "
View Quote
Learn your founding fathers. Food for thought, gentlemen. Zaz
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:44:02 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:46:01 PM EST
zazou, SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS, Oops sorry about the caps, however, i am not sorry about this [-!-!-]
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:47:41 PM EST
I think there are just a bunch of little kids on here that have been watching History and Discovery channel so much that they want to see another war live on t.v. That is their extent of understanding foreign policy.
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:48:21 PM EST
Originally Posted By BYU: zazou, SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS, Oops sorry about the caps, however, i am not sorry about this [-!-!-]
View Quote
Absolute class! Zaz p.s. wasted time
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:50:43 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:51:40 PM EST
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: Being the world's policeman means pissing off a large part of the world.
View Quote
I don't agree with the US as a world policeman, but for that sake of argument, would you similarly blame a police officer for the death of his wife at the hands of angry criminals seeking revenge???
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:51:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: I think there are just a bunch of little kids on here that have been watching History and Discovery channel so much that they want to see another war live on t.v. That is their extent of understanding foreign policy.
View Quote
I think you mean 'revisionist History Channel' don't you Imbro! [;)] Zaz
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 4:55:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2001 11:36:34 PM EST by Maynard]
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 5:05:15 PM EST
Oh, that's right, it is all coming back to me now-all of you guys have been on the sharp end of the knife,have worn the uniform, sworn to defend the nation & constitution against all enemies, and have seen first hand the direct results from the USA having an impact for good around the world. Either pull your head out of your butt or get a pleix glass belly button-we are the enemy of those who are evil because we represent what is good and what can be accomplished through having beneficial relationships with other nations. If you really believe what you say you do, how about a few questions 1. Do you own stocks, bonds, have a 401(k), or mutual funds-hate to break it to you, but corporate america is world wide and the returns on your investments are the result of having friendly relations with other nations that include trade among other things. 2. Do you drive a domestically made/produced car-sorry, there is no such animal? 3. Are you american indian? If not, then you are the product of "friendly relations" with other nations and the USA? 4. Do you work for yourself, or are you employed by a corporation-the vast majority of both are directly/indirectly involved in foregin trade which is a direct result of both scarcity, supply & demand, and the relationships that have developed between nations over time? 5. Do you have blinders on? Read the WSJ and drink some imported coffee so you can wake the hell up!
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 5:12:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2001 5:13:30 PM EST by MagiKid]
I think you keep forgetting something-- First of all, (for most of us) we are AMERICANS with rights and freedoms too often taken for granted. Free trade wth all and alliances with none will protect no country. United we stand, divided we fall. Tariffs, international trade alliances, and other foreign trade measures are necessary to protect these freedoms you so enjoy. Hmm. Does "free trade" include nuclear weapons? What is free trade? (By who's definition?) The United States DOES have a right to interfere with international relations you might perceive "we have no bearing in." I'm sure if it sparked US interests, it has something either directly or indirectly with YOUR freedoms-- either the freedom to buy gasoline at a reasonable price, national security, etc. Sure WE may be at peace with the world, but as you saw, it only takes a relatively small (compared to national governments), independent group(s) to wreak havoc anywhere. Just because there may be no perceptible logical reason, doesn't mean it's not gonna happen. Stand up for your country, your freedoms, and your rights. Maybe in some nambi pambi world there's no violence-- but it's a damned harsh reality in this one. And it requires "entangling alliances" with other democracies. Wake up. We live in a global market. Luckily we live in a land that has enough natural resources to survive on its own for some time--but not necessarily under missile attacks.
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 6:22:00 PM EST
71-Hour: I totally agree. People have completely ignored George Washington's Warning. The Founding Fathers never intended for the US to get POLITICALLY involved in other country's affairs. We are not supposed to have a standing military, much less troops in every part of the globe.
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 6:32:56 PM EST
71-hour. I have not read all your posts, so I'm only going to comment on this one. I agree with THIS POST completely. Please see my recent post at the end of the mess I started yesturday. Some people cannot debate an argument without behaving like children. I'm sure we differ on many things, but I think it takes a man to stand by his convictions. Many people here are not.
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 8:14:25 PM EST
Here's some reality... Done some more reading, and apparently.. [b]Terrorists were attacking DEMOCRACY ITSELF, not US policies![/b] Democracy goes against the fundamental beliefs of the terrorists themselves. This argument goes to support the democratic international allies the US gained so quickly. Hmmm. Maybe we should just be socialist instead as to avoid terrorism and be at peace. Hmm. Maybe if we WERE REALLY peaceful, we should give up our guns. Argue THAT ONE!!
Link Posted: 9/12/2001 11:24:11 PM EST
DEMOCRACY goes completely against the REPUBLIC, which is what this country was created to be. You watch too much tv.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:26:28 AM EST
Originally Posted By HKocher:
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: In the last 36 hours, I've posted a few messages on this board and received a stream of hateful ranting in reply...
View Quote
Not trying to make a lot of friends around here I see??? It sounds to me as if you are gloating, like: "ha ha, I told you so!" Now is not the time to place blame within this country. If you truly feel that way, maybe you don't belong here.
View Quote
Well HK'er he *WAS* correct all along. If people have been trying to wake up the nation to the inescapable result of globo-cop *BEFORE* the shit started and you have to pile bodies to the ceiling then they have every damned right to look you in the eye and say "I f*'ing told you so, you wouldn't listen, are you f*'ing happy now?" Since I have an "unpopular" worldview and apply my rights to express it I guess I get to be deported too? rDAm
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:28:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By RikWriter: Of course you conveniently ignore the very pertinent truth that if WE were not acting as the world's policeman, SOMEONE ELSE would be, and we would most likely not like how that someone else did that job. But why confuse your fantasy politics with facts, huh?
View Quote
Jeezus Rik. Fine let someone else be the target of terrorist activities at their own peril! If someone else wants to see the blood of their own civillian population flow so be it their problem! Fantasy? Damn you are delusional. rDAm
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:39:00 AM EST
Originally Posted By mattja:
.Peace and free trade with all nations, and entangling alliances with none, is a time-honored prescription for an America that is at peace with the world.
View Quote
Sounds like the "Ferengi" on Star Trek. Never worked, never will. This statement is an oxymoron. I can't believe the naivete of that party. What kind of idiots are running that party?
View Quote
In 1796, Washington warned against "the illusion of animaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists [the rise of] corrupted , ambitious or deluded citizens who devote themselves to the favorite nation to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gliding even with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation." He concluded "It is our policy to steer clear of permanent alliances it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; it must pay with a portion of independence for whatever it may accept under that character; it is an illusion which experience must cure." (the above with thanks to Dr. Solarin) That was George Washington by the way you know the old guy on quarters and dollar bills. I can't believe the naivete you posses. What kind of idiots are you that knows not his own history? How pathetic we have become. Sorry George we couldn't seem to keep it together, if we had stuck to your plan we wouldn't be in this world of shit. Instead anyone who claims kindred belief in your spirit is deemed a moron. "Ferengi" ??? Damn matt, if it wasn't GW some would cut you slack, but you have self declared idiocy syndrome. rDAm
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 3:02:39 AM EST
In Stephen Ambrose's book [u]Undaunted Courage[/u], which was the story of the Lewis & Clark Expedition, he pointed out that despite all the growing interest in new-fangled inventions at the time, [u]Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers never conceived of the idea that mankind would ever travel at speeds greater than that provided by horseback.[/u] That had been the 'land speed record' for the many millennia before, it would be so for the future as far as they were concerned! So the Founding Fathers never conceived of airplanes either, nor missiles, nor any of the other modern weapons with which we are presently (all too) familiar. Now, you are going to tell us that we should conduct our foreign policy in a manner that is hog-tied to the views of men who thought that if our country was to be attacked at all, it would be attacked by an army on [b]horseback![/b] C'mon you guys, if George Washington were alive today, he would be assisting George W. in the War Room in DC, plotting an attack on the SOBs that devastated the city in which [u]he[/u] took the Oath of Office as our First President! BTW, [b]screw you![/b], if you choose to say that America should abandon its allies at a time like this. [b]Screw you[/b] even more if you think that America should ever abandon Israel! [b]Israel has been attacked in the past by the [u]same[/u] bastards that attacked the US on Tuesday![/b] [b]The a-holes that did this, WANT to punish the US for its assistance to Israel AND to scare the US into abandoning Israel![/b] [b]Now, do you want their plan to succeed or not! That's the ONLY question we should be consider at this time![/b] Eric The(ScrewYouOnceMoreForGoodMeasure!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 3:50:22 AM EST
we are the enemy of those who are evil because we represent what is good and what can be accomplished through having beneficial relationships with other nations.
View Quote
-BYU This is the reason for their hatred. We're better than them and they know it! Norm
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 4:07:02 AM EST
Originally Posted By Invictus: In 1796, Washington warned against "the illusion of animaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists [the rise of] corrupted , ambitious or deluded citizens who devote themselves to the favorite nation to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gliding even with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation." He concluded "It is our policy to steer clear of permanent alliances it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; it must pay with a portion of independence for whatever it may accept under that character; it is an illusion which experience must cure." (the above with thanks to Dr. Solarin) That was George Washington by the way you know the old guy on quarters and dollar bills. I can't believe the naivete you posses. What kind of idiots are you that knows not his own history? How pathetic we have become. Sorry George we couldn't seem to keep it together, if we had stuck to your plan we wouldn't be in this world of shit. Instead anyone who claims kindred belief in your spirit is deemed a moron. "Ferengi" ??? Damn matt, if it wasn't GW some would cut you slack, but you have self declared idiocy syndrome. rDAm
View Quote
I fail to see how "Peace and free trade with all nations, and entangling alliances with none..." was ever possible. Nations form alliances to foster trade and hopefully, goodwill. To think one can trade at will with whomever he chooses is ridiculous. Trade forms relationships and results in expectations on both sides. This is the real world -- not the theoretical fantasyland I see proposed by the Libs. At one time I kind of considered myself to be somewhat of a Lib, but as I studied their policies in more detail I realized they are so out of touch with human nature as to be nothing more than a political farce. You obviously have no knowledge of the "Ferengi", but that's okay. Their motto is trade with everyone, seek profit above all else, yada, yada, yada, and as a result they are disliked by all. Again, common sense dictates that we cannot trade with whomever we choose and not expect there to be repercussions. Think about it. If you sell rocks to both bullies on the block, most likely the majority will end up coming through your window. And perhaps you should take GW's thoughts in context. Those were different times. That kind of thinking – that level of political isolationism -- is an anachronism today. In fact, it led to WWII. Tell you what, put your money where your mouth is. Give me an example of one nation that lived by that motto that was not ultimately destroyed or withered into nothingness (i.e. Venice). I'm all ears smart guy.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 4:19:03 AM EST
With all due respect, I believe that the emphasis in George Washington's admonition should be on the '[u]entangling[/u] alliances' part. He surely didn't believe that the Revolutionary War-era alliance with Bourbon France was an 'entangling' alliance, now, did he? And if ANY ally of ours does something stupid or in absolute defiance of the interests of the United States, then we can 'disentangle' ourselves rather quickly from such an ally! Eric The(Reasonable)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 4:20:53 AM EST
Originally Posted By libertyof76: 71-Hour: I totally agree. People have completely ignored George Washington's Warning. The Founding Fathers never intended for the US to get POLITICALLY involved in other country's affairs. We are not supposed to have a standing military, much less troops in every part of the globe.
View Quote
Exactly we shouldn't care about anything outside this country. In fact it's all citizens duty to stay inside your houses. Only through individaul policies of isolationism can we be isolationist as a nation. In fact if yo live with other people you should stay in the house in seperate rooms. Your theory of isolationism works until we need to buy gas, oil, or any other raw materials from any other country. Or we are trying to sell or buy finished products, cars, computers, ships, etc to/from any other country. Like it or not we are the worlds banker. Its impossible to ignore every other country if we want to trade with them.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 5:01:06 AM EST
Hey, who needs gas, oil, or raw materials? If we didn’t have those things we could live like a third world country, and everyone would like us. This land of opportunity thing is really over rated. Who ever came up with this home of the free and the brave nonsense was a wacko. Our real goal should just be to get along with everyone else. Either that or we should roll on to our backs and piss on ourselves! For the simple minded out there. This is sarcasm!
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 5:22:09 AM EST
OK, so maybe the US decides that we don't belong in other's business. We go isolationist, you countries are on you own, please don't pick on us as we'd rather play PS2 & watch cartoons. Now what? The world is a peaceful place & everyone sings Cumbaya (in thier own language of course). Nirvana? Utopia? Cool, sounds good. Oh wait a minute! Iraq decides to roll-over Kuwait (like it's never happened). While they are at it they take a stroll through Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc. Hmm, the Serbs & Croates are back at it whole sale slaughtering each other. Wow, Isreal rolls thier whole army through Palestinian territory, expands security zone into Lebanon. Gee, that's never happened, except this time they decided to just push the Palestinians into the sea. Refugees flood Jordan causing extensive unrest. Syria launches attacks to protect themselves & Isreal just decides to nuke them. They don't really have nukes do they?? By now oil flow through the Middle east basically stops. Europe, Asia & US oil reserves run to critical levels. Extensive drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska & Artic Circle. Environments ruined in the rush to provide basic power. India says screw it & launches into Pakistan. Like they have not been squabling for generations. China invades Taiwan. They never wanted to do that! All US companies depending on exports to foriegn companies nose dive. All Foriegn companies that depend on exports to US nose dive. This scenario is unlikely? Any example here is not based on the past 1,000 yrs of history? Sticking our head in the sand will cause abt 6 months of peace before we really would see hell on earth. And I have not even given any thought to the whole religion side of this.....
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 5:25:56 AM EST
Not to mention this is a country of immigrants. US citizens trace their heritage all ovee the globe. Many still talk about "the old country" and the relatives "left behind". How do we collectively isolate ourselves from our roots?
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 10:53:51 AM EST
Originally Posted By mattja: I fail to see how "Peace and free trade with all nations, and entangling alliances with none." was ever possible. Nations form alliances to foster trade and hopefully, goodwill.
View Quote
It is unfortunate that you don't read real (not revised) history. You would see that it was possible and did happen. Trade is not dependant on some "alliance" between two countries. All it needs is the voluntary contract for goods/services between individuals, nothing more. If it crosses the borders of the country then it is subject to the tariff, a constitutional tax, which was never meant to be disproportionately applied. Back then it was equal, what came in received a flat rate tariff period.
To think one can trade at will with whomever he chooses is ridiculous. Trade forms relationships and results in expectations on both sides.
View Quote
What? Are you saying I can't engage in commerce with any adult I care too? Who is going to stop me, you? The only rational expectations both sides have is fulfillment of the contract, nothing else.
This is the real world -- not the theoretical fantasyland I see proposed by the Libs. At one time I kind of considered myself to be somewhat of a Lib, but as I studied their policies in more detail I realized they are so out of touch with human nature as to be nothing more than a political farce.
View Quote
Yes I realized this a while ago. To hear yourself referred to as a libertarian would be as shocking as if I heard Bill Mahrer say he was too. Thank you for never referring to yourself as such. Although who knows maybe you could start reading the works and essays of Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Vin Suprynowicz, Joe Sobran, and many others and have it sink in. Go to lewrockwell.com and get an education. It only costs you time.
You obviously have no knowledge of the "Ferengi", but that's okay. Their motto is trade with everyone, seek profit above all else, yada, yada, yada, and as a result they are disliked by all. Again, common sense dictates that we cannot trade with whomever we choose and not expect there to be repercussions. Think about it. If you sell rocks to both bullies on the block, most likely the majority will end up coming through your window.
View Quote
to be cont...
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 10:55:31 AM EST
...cont from previous post. You will have to forgive my lack of TV knowledge, I guess it shows my lack of culture. So these "Ferengi" cats provide goods and services keeping their end of the bargain, but are universally despised? Are you sure they are fulfilling their obligations in the contract? Fraud is to be condemned but trade is not, except to Marxists that is. Yes I can trade with whomever I desire and have zero expectations of repercussions. Well in a free country I can, maybe not in your Amerika. I fail to see the logic in your situation, just because I sell rocks to the BATF and the IRS why should I expect them to be used on me? That would be like a gunstore owner selling guns to any free adult who pays him for them and expecting it to be eventually used on him! Well anyway any rock or gun provider should be willing and able to return fire as needed.
And perhaps you should take GW's thoughts in context. Those were different times. That kind of thinking – that level of political isolationism -- is an anachronism today. In fact, it led to WWII.
View Quote
His thoughts were never meant to be taken in some chronological context, that sounds like relativism indoctrination from publik skoolz. You are flatly incorrect about isolationism, we have never been that way. We have traded worldwide since day one, that in itself nulls your assertion. If you want isolationism look at feudal Japan and Korea, they were known to execute any foreigner touching their soil. When we began to practice such acts as embargo (against the Japanese) and discriminate tariffs we started the animosity ball rolling. It really hasn't stopped yet. BTW we had Japans "Purple" code broke before Pearl Harbor, the President knew it was coming but withheld the info from Pac Fleet. The result, countless lives lost, just to be able to have a war. Hmm sounds familiar...
Tell you what, put your money where your mouth is. Give me an example of one nation that lived by that motto that was not ultimately destroyed or withered into nothingness (i.e. Venice).
View Quote
This is way too easy; Switzerland.
I'm all ears smart guy.
View Quote
"Peace and free trade with all nations, and entangling alliances with none." That pretty much sums up the Swiss. Something else too, they also have the same "Militia" organization as our founding fathers had in mind. It kept them the only mainland European country not attacked by the Axis powers. A well armed, well trained militia, talk about supposed anachronisms! Too bad we can't say the same for ourselves as the militia system is constitutionally designed. The gun owner would not be the target of persecution, but part of the system of National Defense. rDAm
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 11:06:40 AM EST
Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:Exactly we shouldn't care about anything outside this country. In fact it's all citizens duty to stay inside your houses. Only through individaul policies of isolationism can we be isolationist as a nation. In fact if yo live with other people you should stay in the house in seperate rooms. Your theory of isolationism works until we need to buy gas, oil, or any other raw materials from any other country. Or we are trying to sell or buy finished products, cars, computers, ships, etc to/from any other country. Like it or not we are the worlds banker. Its impossible to ignore every other country if we want to trade with them.
View Quote
You missed the part where I explicitly highlighted the politically side. I am for open trade, and limited imigration. I just believe we should not get involved in others affairs. We don't need to close our borders, we don't need to stop trade, that is a separate affair. And that is what GW was talking about. BTW, EricTheHun, the Founders were opposed to helping out others like France helped us. I'll see if I can find some proof.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 11:54:24 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2001 3:27:24 PM EST by RikWriter]
Originally Posted By Invictus: Fine let someone else be the target of terrorist activities at their own peril! If someone else wants to see the blood of their own civillian population flow so be it their problem! Fantasy? Damn you are delusional.
View Quote
If one of us be delusional, methinks that would be you. You seem to be as ignorant of history as you are of world politics. That nation that would take our place as a superpower would not be running things the way we would like, and eventually we would wind up isolated, cut off, balkanized and powerless. YOU are the one having the delusional fantasies if you think you can retreat into some sort of 19th Century isolationism. George Washington wasn't a frigging oracle, and he could have no way of predicting the sort of world in which we now live, with nuclear weapons, spy satellites, etc... Just give it up Invictus, with every post you just dig a deeper hole for yourself and prove your ignorance.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 12:23:31 PM EST
However, a foreign policy that limits our intervention in the affairs and quarrels of other nations is a foreign policy that will reduce the chance that terrorists will want to strike at America. Peace and free trade with all nations, and entangling alliances with none, is a time-honored prescription for an America that is at peace with the world, and for a nation that has little to fear from the savage and bloodthirsty actions of terrorists.
View Quote
Did this Brown guy lift that Neville Chamberlain? It is a well known fact that appeasement and cowardice are a very effective foreign policy combination.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 12:28:49 PM EST
A foreign policy that limits our intervention... IS, US's no assisination policy. Talk about not killing the innocents! it's only a few among the many that once removed- zipedee do dah-zippedee ay.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 12:50:04 PM EST
Post from libertyof76 -
BTW, EricTheHun, the Founders were opposed to helping out others like France helped us.
View Quote
Ugh, if that's true that's pretty uncouth of them, don't you think? I know that the Federalists were pretty upset about the French Revolution and passed the Alien and Sedition Acts in response to what they thought were attempts by French agents and Francophiles to stir up support for the French revolution! Eric The(Interested)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 12:51:25 PM EST
Originally Posted By RikWriter: Of course you conveniently ignore the very pertinent truth that if WE were not acting as the world's policeman, SOMEONE ELSE would be, and we would most likely not like how that someone else did that job. But why confuse your fantasy politics with facts, huh?
View Quote
Frankly, if someone else wants to act as the world's policeman, that's fine with me as long as they leave [i]us[/i] alone.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:00:51 PM EST
Originally Posted By DonS: Frankly, if someone else wants to act as the world's policeman, that's fine with me as long as they leave [i]us[/i] alone.
View Quote
Which, of course, they would not.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:01:21 PM EST
Originally Posted By MagiKid: Here's some reality... Done some more reading, and apparently.. [b]Terrorists were attacking DEMOCRACY ITSELF, not US policies![/b]
View Quote
Frankly, I doubt that they care what our system is. They certainly do hate us for our international policies. They hate us for suproting Israel, for our 'managment' of Iran under the Shaw, for our attack on Iraq, and for our 'influence' with the Suadi government. They are quick to ignore that we defended Kuwait and Moslims in the Baltics, and for our aid to Afganistan during the Soviet invasion. They ignore what we have done for them, and only consider what we have done against them.
Originally Posted By MagiKid: Democracy goes against the fundamental beliefs of the terrorists themselves. This argument goes to support the democratic international allies the US gained so quickly. Hmmm. Maybe we should just be socialist instead as to avoid terrorism and be at peace. Hmm. Maybe if we WERE REALLY peaceful, we should give up our guns.
View Quote
You mean the support we got from democracies like Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and almost every other nation? The fact is, we got support because we are the big kid on the block, and because the attack on us was so clearly evil. Democracy has nothing to do with it.
Originally Posted By MagiKid: Argue THAT ONE!!
View Quote
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:08:33 PM EST
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: And if ANY ally of ours does something stupid or in absolute defiance of the interests of the United States, then we can 'disentangle' ourselves rather quickly from such an ally!
View Quote
You mean like attacking one of our ships?
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:14:32 PM EST
Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Originally Posted By DonS: Frankly, if someone else wants to act as the world's policeman, that's fine with me as long as they leave [i]us[/i] alone.
View Quote
Which, of course, they would not.
View Quote
In which case, we defend ourselves.
Link Posted: 9/13/2001 1:26:47 PM EST
Originally Posted By RikWriter: If one of be delusional, methinks that would be you. You seem to be as ignorant of history as you are of world politics.
View Quote
And you have amply supplied your evidence where? As I suspected you failed to provide any factual basis for your assumption of my ignorance. You are off to a piss-poor start.
That nation that would take our place as a superpower would not be running things the way we would like,
View Quote
And just what nation would step up to the plate? Since you used "superpower" in the singular what country pray tell would it be? Why do you see this as a zero sum game? What will keep every country from being a superpower?
and eventually we would wind up isolated, cut off, balkanized and powerless.
View Quote
Clue time Rik, freed from the oppressive yolk of insane taxation and menacing threats from pissed off locals from all across the earth this country would see growth, trade and wealth like we haven't seen since the early 1800's. Isolated? Cutoff? blah, blah...If we are the only superpower now as you have suggested, do we have it within our power to "Isolate, cutoff, balkanize,and make powerless" every country in the world? If not how would the next superpower do that to us? Besides anyone else who attempts to homogenize the world will have to put up with the incessant guerrilla warfare/terrorists of any empire, and it will implode before conquering the world, just like every empire has and will do. We will to if we don't cool it. to be cont...
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top