It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Has Trump just announced he's ending ALL international military involvement?

page: 4
48
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: highvein
That is great news. Let the countries work it out for themselves.


Does that mean that US defense spending will now be cut down by 70%, most of the carriers retired and hundreds of thousands of personnel cut from the Navy, Army and Air Force?

No? Then pipe down.




posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada

originally posted by: highvein
That is great news. Let the countries work it out for themselves.


Does that mean that US defense spending will now be cut down by 70%, most of the carriers retired and hundreds of thousands of personnel cut from the Navy, Army and Air Force?

No? Then pipe down.


Weilding your own imagination to ask a pseudo-rhetorical question that is used as a cudgel in conversation seems kind of weak. Almost Rumsfeld-esque, to be honest.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


Read the link, Kennedy had Diem overthrown three weeks before his own assassination, he was neck deep in Vietnam and fully supported the Domino Theory.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: harold223

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: harold223

I'm not sure it will be China. China built the great war to keep the rest of the World out. I think the Chinese have a culture of isolationism. They can be very racists to the "gwailou"'s.



Maybe, hopefully... But they are hungry for resources. Point is, there could be unpredictable consequences to the power vacuum.


How is the US dialing back Middle Eastern conflict creating a power vacuum in regards to China's posture in the Pacific?

If anything, it leaves us in a better position to respond to increased aggression by freeing up our assets.


I'm more addressing the isolationists sentiment in general that some have mentioned here and I have seen mentioned many times before. The US can go full isolationist, leaving the world to its own devices, but it would leave a power vacuum that might have some unintended consequences. A question I guess... To those that want America to stay out of world affairs, how far does that go for you? Would you still defend Europe from Russia or Asia/Pacific from China?



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: thedigirati
this is Great news, another cost savings for the USA

the bad thing is

the moment a Democrat gets in the whitehouse

everything goes back to the way it is now.

Keep that in Mind when you vote folks.


Guess you're part of the "let's cut defense spending down to $70bn" brigade?



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada

originally posted by: highvein
That is great news. Let the countries work it out for themselves.


Does that mean that US defense spending will now be cut down by 70%, most of the carriers retired and hundreds of thousands of personnel cut from the Navy, Army and Air Force?

No? Then pipe down.


Pulling back from endless conflict and limiting the hemorrhaging of money external to our country is indeed a good thing.

That doesn't mean we have to cut our testicles off in the process.

I'm all for dialing back foreign policy, but I'd still like to have a robust military that can respond to our times shaky geopolitical climate.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Stop being hyperbolic with what I am saying.


The fact that you think me asking you your own question is hyperbolic demonstrates your question is hyperbolic.







edit on 7-10-2019 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: harold223

Storming a beach head with 25mil armed citizens sitting in snipers nests is a good way to lose a war, no matter how many billions you have.

I'd suspect that if China actually invaded the whole world would defend you. So this tangent is pure hyperbole regardless. The point is...to rely so heavily on the US (especially while meddling in our elections with Downer) is ridiculous and somewhat 2 faced.

I love the Aussies. But we need to be more realistic.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: harold223

Storming a beach head with 25mil armed citizens sitting in snipers nests is a good way to lose a war, no matter how many billions you have.

I'd suspect that if China actually invaded the whole world would defend you. So this tangent is pure hyperbole regardless. The point is...to rely so heavily on the US (especially while meddling in our elections with Downer) is ridiculous and somewhat 2 faced.

I love the Aussies. But we need to be more realistic.


Armed civilians are not going to fare well against trained soldiers and they will just blow us up with missiles anyway. But this is a hypothetical on how far the isolationist sentiment goes. Does America abandon its allies in isolationism?
edit on 7-10-2019 by harold223 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


Storming a beach head with 25mil armed citizens sitting in snipers nests is a good way to lose a war, no matter how many billions you have.


Not to mention they still inflate their naval capacity with civilian ships.

China has numbers and a few hundred nukes... Aside from that, they are a ways off from being able to project outside their immediate sphere of influence.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Simply put -

America First..... Another campaign promise on it's way.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: harold223
Abandoning all international military involvement hey? As an Australian, I'd better start learning Mandarin.


You didn't lose a battle with China you sold your ass to China.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: harold223
Abandoning all international military involvement hey? As an Australian, I'd better start learning Mandarin.


You didn't lose a battle with China you sold your ass to China.


I don't disagree with you actually. Australia's economy has boomed for over 20 years, hasn't had a recession since the 90's, all due to China's insatiable hunger for our resources. Australia may pay the price for that prosperity one day.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


Storming a beach head with 25mil armed citizens sitting in snipers nests is a good way to lose a war, no matter how many billions you have.


Not to mention they still inflate their naval capacity with civilian ships.

China has numbers and a few hundred nukes... Aside from that, they are a ways off from being able to project outside their immediate sphere of influence.


That is until the partnerships with other similarly thinking nations call us out for real.

Trump is trying to show the world that it's time for the powers that was ways of doing things no longer exist and should never have.

Nobel peace prize heading his way.
edit on 7-10-2019 by CthruU because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: harold223

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: harold223

Storming a beach head with 25mil armed citizens sitting in snipers nests is a good way to lose a war, no matter how many billions you have.

I'd suspect that if China actually invaded the whole world would defend you. So this tangent is pure hyperbole regardless. The point is...to rely so heavily on the US (especially while meddling in our elections with Downer) is ridiculous and somewhat 2 faced.

I love the Aussies. But we need to be more realistic.


Armed civilians are not going to fare well against trained soldiers and they will just blow us up with missiles anyway. But this is a hypothetical on how far the isolationist sentiment goes. Does America abandon its allies in isolationism?


The Viet Cong would disagree with you whole heartedly.

America is currently a dumpster fire. One which Australia has done more than enough to add fuel to, thanks to Downer. Right now we have to worry about our own house burning down. Unless Australia wants to help with that, by sacrificing its own to help us drench the fire, im not sure its reasonable to even ask for help.

Stop your government from meddling in our affairs and causing huge messes for us to clean up domestically, and we might project more beyond our borders. Right now...its just not smart for us and ours.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Wasn't Kennedy assassinated because he tried to end the war in Vietnam?


No, he increased our participation.




Not according to Oliver Stone.


Come on, that's a movie. I've studied this subject in depth, took a course on it, been to Dealey Plaza, looked out the 6th floor sniper nest and am a former Marine. It is true, JFK had a lot of enemies but it's still totally believable Oswald could have acted alone. A lot of the general public hated the guy. Some of the newspapers back then in Dallas were more vicious than anything Trump is getting today and that was 50 years ago. It was a toxic situation.

One thing I recently learned, there was a bullet proof bubble they had for the car. JFK refused. Thought it was the wrong message. Think about that for a minute. How could it be an inside job if it was him who did not want the bullet proof bubble. They told him it was a bad idea and still.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: harold223

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: harold223

Storming a beach head with 25mil armed citizens sitting in snipers nests is a good way to lose a war, no matter how many billions you have.

I'd suspect that if China actually invaded the whole world would defend you. So this tangent is pure hyperbole regardless. The point is...to rely so heavily on the US (especially while meddling in our elections with Downer) is ridiculous and somewhat 2 faced.

I love the Aussies. But we need to be more realistic.


Armed civilians are not going to fare well against trained soldiers and they will just blow us up with missiles anyway. But this is a hypothetical on how far the isolationist sentiment goes. Does America abandon its allies in isolationism?


The Viet Cong would disagree with you whole heartedly.

America is currently a dumpster fire. One which Australia has done more than enough to add fuel to, thanks to Downer. Right now we have to worry about our own house burning down. Unless Australia wants to help with that, by sacrificing its own to help us drench the fire, im not sure its reasonable to even ask for help.

Stop your government from meddling in our affairs and causing huge messes for us to clean up domestically, and we might project more beyond our borders. Right now...its just not smart for us and ours.


Downer is a Rabbit hole, really deep rabbit hole. He is a staunch conservative and personal friend of Rupert Murdoch, make of that what you will. He was also balls deep in the Bush Administrations middle eastern ventures. For the record, I strongly dislike the man, but I think there is a lot more complexity to that story than what is being presented.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: musicismagic

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
wow, thats a statement alright!


Turkey, Europe, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Russia and the Kurds will now have to figure the situation out


amazing... is he literally going to pull all troops out of the entire region/s? where is our focus being redirected to now?

In saying that, abandoning the Kurds is cruel and heartless, no one will trust us as a temporary battlefield ally again


I think you are missing the picture, we have supplied them with the hardware to fight their wars.


And also what is temporary?
Any place we we supposed to be temporary ,we are still there.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I wouldn't hold my breath.

The military industrial complex will not stand for this. They will put more money in politicians pocket so they can stay in those wars and keep making the billions they are used to making. And if they have to they will put more money in Trumps pocket as well.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Sublimecraft


It's just continuing the trend that the United States cannot be completely trusted as an ally.

As Crayons said, 'Fool me once, shame, shame, fool we twice, wont get fooled again'. The Kurds weren't paying attention.


That's not the quote. Here's the real quote:

“There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”




top topics



 
48
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join