Posted on 11/22/2007 1:54:32 PM PST by nsmart
"The global military projection of the United States as imperative to national security has become mainstream gospel. But as Bertrand Russell advised, "In all affairs, it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted."
At present, the United States possesses the weapons and defense systems to make credible a threat to reduce any aggressor nation into a nuclear grave site. Further, if the United States withdrew its troops from abroad, renounced any territorial or ideological designs on any country, and embraced strict neutrality, other nations would have little or no motivation to attack. In addition, the hundreds of billions in military spending at present squandered in foreign adventures could be redirected into making United States defenses invincible."
What the article doesn't state is the falling value of the dollar and the precarious financial footing we find ourselves on. One of my thanksgiving guests works with containers for (Werner Trucking) and he said things are really bad with the price of gas and the falling dollar.
Folks, we don't have the luxury of pretending we can impose our will on other nations. Bring our troops home.
What kind of traitorous crap is this? Don’t fall for such false counsel, my friends - this kind of nonsense, however it seeks to cloak itself in Americanism, gives aid and comfort to this nation’s enemies.
To many people in the world demand our government give them our money and dem’s are happy to help. That is why they are still way over there. Paying rent and giving money to local communities.
Pearl Harbor.
Those fools who do not know history are doomed to repeat it.
Any more time spent pointing out the futility of the author's approach would be time wasted.
It seems that Bruce has already drunk the Kool Aid.
A difference of opinion in foreign policy didn’t used to be labeled traitor. Our nation is built on the liberty of the individual to disagree without ending up on the rack. That was King George’s solution, not the founding fathers.
Classic losertarian thinking.
It sounds like Ron Paul instead of the Washington Times
Since when has Bruce Fein started parroting Ru Paul?
FDR, sadly, allowed Pearl Harbor to be attacked without warning. That is history.
Keeping tens of thousands of troops in Germany (where the Euro has far outpaced the dollar, in Japan, and in Korea, not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan. I know this is touchy for some conservatives to accept, but we are tapped out. Trillions in debt and growing and boomers about to retire.
George W is letting illegals flood in while turning control to the UN by endorsing treaties which supersede the constitution. Before the invasion of Iraq, most in here would have agreed. Nationalism (my country right or wrong) is not the same as Patriotism (individuals policing their govt, not the govt policing the individuals)
I’m an isolationist, but i’m not braindead either. We didn’t attack ourselves on 9-11.
The America First Committee is temporarilly disbandoned, war is on.
We elected Nixon to end the Viet Nam war.. we elected Ike to get out of Korea. Conservatives, like Goldwater, knew that a modest foreign policy works best. Call it what you will, its not conservatism that has changed — its a subset of neocons who are trying to change the label on conservative.
BS. Classic populist thinking. Like Pat Buchanan.
“Keeping tens of thousands of troops in Germany (where the Euro has far outpaced the dollar, in Japan, and in Korea, not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan. I know this is touchy for some conservatives to accept, but we are tapped out. Trillions in debt and growing and boomers about to retire.”
**************
Out of Germany, stay in Iraq.
Big government conservatives (aka neocons) are an oxymoron.
What does the "n" stand for, "not?"
Clearly, you want to fight Bush and make the world a safer place for those who are out to kill us.
By the way, were there no illegals coming to America before Bush was president? And if Bush wanted to secure the borders tomorrow with the same intensity as you, do you believe the Democrats would assist that effort? I'm sure you can just wish it to happen and it happens, but for presidents who actually have to do things there are constraints in politics. So try to understand that.
We need to learn that non-interventionism is not the same as isolation. An isolationist builds walls and huddles inside.
I caring enough to bring our troops home to protect us here. Seoul Korea was better defended on 9/11 than the pentagon. How can you accept that as adequate defense?
“Suppose a nonintervention policy eventuated in a planet in which the United States was the only democracy where the rule of law and individual liberty flourished; but, that nonintervention had saved the lives of millions of American soldiers who otherwise would have been vanquished on foreign shores in quixotic endeavors to defeat tyranny. Wouldn’t the trade-off have been be justified?”
We live in a world where catastrophic attack can reach out and touch us from the other side of the planet in a single day’s travel of one bio infected suicide traveler.
Our mass bleeding doesn’t even have to have a military component to it anymore. The only hope we have of long term survival is a presence and actionable assets in as many distributed points as we can possibly get them.
Isolationism is an idiots suicide pact. And, your comments about the former POTUS allowing an attack on Perl Harbor as “history” is absolute bullshit and calls you out for a kneejerk believer in whatever the idiots want to piss into your ear.
Germany and Russia have over run Belgium and Poland numerous times, all without provocation.
Saddam Hussein signed an armistice agreement with the U.S.A. and violated it within two hours, going on to violate that agreement hundreds of times over a period a little more than a decade.
We had every legal right to go into Iraq and clean that tyrant out. No one should be allowed to violate an armistice with us - like Adolph Hitler did - and get away with it. The number of deaths in WWII numbered in the tens of millions, and we are still living with the aftermath of that horrendous event. Toppling Saddam Hussein and helping the Iraqis develope into a functioning nation is a good and noble undertaking, and so far the death toll is far under one million. But this is not a practice one nation should do with greater frequency than say, once a century. We have done this at least four times in the last sixty years; Germany, Italy, Japan, and now Iraq.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.