Replies

Patronizing Jerk Mode Galt wrote:

"That is okay if you forgot his name or are unfamiliar with his legacy but American patriots still hold him in high esteem and are constantly humbled by his wisdom, even 200 years on. I realize you are probably really busy, but a good place to start, and to answer your question is his Farewell Address."

You didn't answer even one of my questions. So much for "Responding to every poster."

Please explain the chain of events you expect to follow such a move (bringing *all* US troops stationed overseas home), and why they are desirable?

BTW, do you understand that in many of these countries, the "deployment" consists primarily of liason?

I'd be happy to ignore your typically RINO rude behavior, and offer my humble opinion on what would happen.

With reduced military commitments, the people would demand their money back rather than more socialism. But as the troops came home, focus would shift from the liberal theory of internationalism to protecting the borders at home. Perhaps folks would demand some heads from the gubmint paper shufflers who let the 9/11 perps in the front door or the FBI hacks who refused to follow up on leads, who knows?

With tighter borders and a greater emphasis on civil defense, there would be a very good chance of reviving an atmosphere conducive to a well-armed citizenry. No more would federal SWAT teams cower in the parking lot while skinny teenagers unleashed murder; society would find that unacceptable and punish the political leaders who allowed such things to happen.

No longer could soccer moms, whipped in to a frightened frenzy over non-existent dirty bombs and WMDs, support debt financed wars halfway around the world, (fought by teenage girls no less) and those posing as conservatives at home, shout down and dissent with cries of treason. The political costs of actually securing real financing for a war would make the act more rare.

With smaller government, debt financing would have greater political costs because of the impact it would have on free markets. With less debt financing, America would become not only more secure to the threat posed by a large economy like China could pose down the road, or the very likely possibility of the Arab oil republics switching from the dollar to the Euro, but perhaps a true investigation of the puppetmasters who unleashed 9/11 could take place without the fear of Saudi reprisals.

To your last question, so? The founders believed in minimal to zero political ties to foreign countries, however, Marxists and internationalists saw potential to manage the world through their political schemes and thus they reject the founder's wisdom.

What do you believe?