Replies

The world needs a policeman?

Let me qualify that. The world needs a policeman when its interests coincide with our own. For example, I don't agree that the US should have been involved in Kosovo. Clearly, our interests were not at stake.

It is my honest opinion that if we aren't entangled in every other countries Bull sh*t, we wont have these damn problems of these murdering freaks and fanatics flying jet airliners into skyscrapers. The problems in the Mid East, Russia, China etc, are *NEVER* going to go away. Do we want to be part of their BS?

Wrong. If you have international trade, you have to have an international presence; otherwise, all of these so-called "freaks and fanatics" would attack us. Back in the 18th century, our commercial ships were being plundered by pirates from the north coast of Africa. That didn't stop until Jefferson ordered warships into the region to destroy the pirates. Trade naturally implies defense. You can't have one without the other. It's that simple.

I believe the cracks are showing in the global intervention foundation. I also believe that continuing this down this path of global interventionism will end in chaos for the United States, as we have everything to lose. Much of this global interventionism is based on nothing but greed and power. In my honest opinion, this will lead to nothing but MORE trouble for the United States.

I believe that we should intervene when our national interests are at stake. Sometimes, that means being willing to understand the longterm consequences of something. For example, if Saddam Hussein invades Kuwait again, it certainly wouldn't affect us immediately. We don't derive the vast majority of oil from Kuwait. However, because Hussein would pose a greater threat to Saudi Arabia -- which IS a major source of foreign oil -- we need to consider the ramifications of not intervening NOW, when we have a chance to prevent greater damage. That is what the Gulf War was all about. We didn't feel that Iraq posed an immediate threat to us. It was longterm.

We could be very independent and still trade with friendly nations, and still have the worlds biggest and meanist military for *defense purposes* or even offensive purposes if needed, while at the same time, be very independent. We don't need to be and shouldn't be the global cop!

And guess what? Afghanistan is not what we would have considered "friendly" ... and look where the attack on our soil came from? You can't hide. You can't run. Being a trading partner means being subject to attack from your enemies. I feel its about time for the United States to become more independent. We were warned, many years ago about foreign entanglements. We should take notice.