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.

 

We should return to isolationism

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 10:48 PM
link   
I'm going to start this thread by stating my views on the current world situation and the situation of our own country and how a return to the traditional american philosophy of isolationism can remedy these problems.

The world is in a pretty sorry state which is not entirely our fault. We have however bungled the Iraqi occupation which has tarnished the image of the US and left us virtually unable to handle other world hotspots such as Korea, Iran and the Syrian-Lebanese conflict. The war in Afghanistan has stalled and the Taliban are rising again. Due to an incredible lack of vision of our government we did not provide security to the Afghani people so they are once again turning back to the Taliban. These are just the most glaring examples however I would like to keep this post as short as possible.

If the US returned to isolationism I believe would remedy some of these problems First Iraq. A withdrawal of american troops would I believe not end the insurgency over night however it would remove the main cause of the insurgents. And more importantly it would mean that the Iraqi's would believe they were fighting for their country instead of an american puppet regime. The American operations in afghanistan could be handled by the UN and/or the EU. And the withdrawal of american troops from regions all around the world would greatly reduce tensions rather than as commonly stated increase them.

The state the US is in is frankly embarrasing the response to hurricane Katrina is the most glaring example of my point. Our infrastructure hasn't been replaced in decades. Our educational system is under funded and our health care system is just plain pathetic. Social Security is going down the tubes while our military budget is skyrocketing.

A return to isolationism will remedy all of these problems we could divert hundreds of billions of dollars to the under funded schools, hospitals and to the social securiity system and we could still have the biggest defense budget on earth.




posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Returning to isolationism may alleviate/'remedy' some current international problems, but it will also create new ones.

Isolationism not a choice that the US needs to consider.
What the US does need to do is be a bit more methodical is how it handles international situations and or possible crisis and have a less aggressive foreign policy, in that, perhaps allowing or 'pushing' other global organization to act and/or do more.

Isolationism is not a viable option, IMHO.





seekerof



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Great Thread Danwild6. I agree with you in many respects. I feel the much of U.S. Foreign policy should stop its expansionist ways. The US shouldn't be the world's police force, nor its bully. I do however feel that American should become much more expansionist in terms of cultural and social interaction.

America is a dangerously secluded nation, most Americans have little idea of other nations besides the US. Quick example being our exportation of pop culutre, but refusal to import other nation's pop culture. For instance we remake endless foreign films and TV shows as a dumbed down American version while at the same time other nations except our films and television in their original form. This form of isolationism is seriously danfgerous for any culutre. How can we have such a heavy hand around the world when our citizens know so ittle about the world outside the US?

As for other aspects, nation building, etc. O totally agree.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 04:22 AM
link   
Glad to see that you agree bandar. I to think that while we should draw back militarily I think that it would be a good thing to get to know the outside world a little better.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 05:36 AM
link   
I suppose 'isolationism' has it's roots in conservative ideology, but isn't it interesting how that seems to be the exact of opposite of the modern conservative agenda? And I don't just mean foreign wars of aggression for their war profiteer contributors.

$200 billion (so far) for a little nation building is nothing compared to the devastation to the US working class from government encouraged outsourcing and "competition" with developing nations.

NAFTA is one thing, but CAFTA and soon the FTAA?

Talk about class warfare. Neo-cons consider the middle class an unneccessary luxury to be sacrificed to free trade.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Isolationism, at least from the economic standpoint, would create a huge vacuum in the flow of money.

The US is very dependent on this flow, and interrupting it would cause ripples that would reverberate for years and we are not any longer of ability to fill the voids created.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 05:52 AM
link   
Bottle Minus Genie

Isolationism is no longer possible because there is no longer such as thing as isolation.

With each passing day, geography becomes less meaningful -- and long ago ceased being a significant defensive element with the advent of strategic bombers, ICBMs and nuclear weapons.

There's no turning back.

It's a brave new world, and one where the penalty for flinching first is no longer domination, but annihilation.

Enjoy the ride.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by smirkley
Isolationism, at least from the economic standpoint, would create a huge vacuum in the flow of money.


To Wal-Mart. Most US manufacturing employees however rather enjoyed their former jobs.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 05:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
With each passing day, geography becomes less meaningful --


Corporate hippie.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Potayto/Potahto


Originally posted by RANT
Corporate hippie.

I prefer the term "Communist Yuppie".



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Why woudl isolationism remedy any problems? THe problems most often cited aren't that the US continues to interfere, its that the US has historically interfered. Isolationism would mean leaving the arabian penninsula, which is one charge leveled against the US. There'd still be the palestinian issue. And NK would clearly invade South Korea. How's the US going to pull out of Nato and the UN?

Even if the governmental problems could be resolved, there's still the private sector. A lot of hostility against the US is that US products are in other countries, that these products, music, television, etc, are vulgar and debauched. Isolationism won't stop that, and clearly the US can't make it illegal for private person's to do business in the rest of the world, simply because the 'world' is going to get ticked and start attacking the US.

The US is hated. Changing from interventionist to isolationist only means that the reasons given for the hatred will change.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by smirkley
Isolationism, at least from the economic standpoint, would create a huge vacuum in the flow of money.

The US is very dependent on this flow, and interrupting it would cause ripples that would reverberate for years and we are not any longer of ability to fill the voids created.


I'm not talking about economic isolation just a non-interventionist foreign policy. Thats what traditional american isolationism was it was economically expansionist but didn't meddle in the internal affairs of other nations.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join