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.

 

Should the US get out of other countries?

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth Lumina
 



Interesting that you bring up Rome. When Rome fell, and all outl posts of Rome left, those individual societies collapsed.Sure, in 2-300 years they recovered, but they still got hurt.

Just sayin'




posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Not even relevant. Back then there were few societal structures. America is hardly the glue binding the world together. Many other countries enforce stability around them now, plus, there are many mutual treaties, and countries have much greater ability to defend themselves.

One thing i was thinking lately that i would like to point out. Many of our own politicians and congressmen, as well as ex cabinet members readily admit now that the motivation for our war in iraq was oil. What does it mean about the world that we live in when america, supposedly the forefront of freedom and democracy, feels that it can at will invade any other country in order to steal their natural resources? What is to keep us from doing this anytime now? We did it in iraq, we are doing it in afghanistan. Soon im sure we will be in venezuela as well. Its amazing to me that most americans accept this with a shrug. A country that readily invades others to steal resources, that murders over 1 million people just to secure profits for our oil industry, gives up ANY and ALL claim to moral high ground or humanistic goals.

To invade iraq for its oil, and then turn around and say how helpful we are to the world is the darkest sort of comedy and cynicism, and that americans can accept this with a shrug, condoning it in their lack of outcry, shows that most americans care for no one that is not american, and nothing that doesnt support america. Its nationalism and egocentrism on a massive scale, and one that is completely unrecognized by those under its influence. I laugh when i hear any moralizing that comes from a people who support the large scale destruction of people for their resources, who support embargos that claim the lives of hundreds of thousands of children due to malnutrition and lack of medicine, and who support spending massive amounts of money going to war on other countries, but get fired up and angry about using money to give people national healthcare. Such people have no legitimacy to make moral judgements about anything.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikerussellus
reply to post by Darth Lumina
 



Interesting that you bring up Rome. When Rome fell, and all outl posts of Rome left, those individual societies collapsed.Sure, in 2-300 years they recovered, but they still got hurt.

Just sayin'


When Rome 'fell' it took several years for that to actually impact the entire empire. Only the leadership left those outposts, the rest, the legionnaires, many of whom were intergrated into the wider community (as in any garrison town), if not born, bred and recruited from the local populations, stayed. They had wives, families, friends in those communities, they were not 'Romans', they were professional soldiers employed by the Romans. When the empire fell they stopped getting paid and moved onto other things. As you do. Besides, in most cases, there was no collapse of society, a void of leadership was created and was quickly filled.

The US by comparison uses aggressive foreign and trade policy to undermine the independence of other countries economies and trade rights, then it uses counter aggression on those countries part to justify military action and occupation. During occupation, it seems to me, attempts are made to create a void of leadership so that 'it', the US, can fill that void with a suitable 'yes' man and therefore win trade compliance.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Yes they should.And that goes for other countries aswell.America and the UK are probably the two most dangerous countries in the world.Of course there are others but the anglo-american relationship has caused so much death,destruction and economic ruin around the world it's unfathomable...yet by some absolute miracle through indoctrination via the media.Everyone still thinks we are the good guys that sometimes make bad decisions...Stalin,Mao or khmer rouge couldn't hold a candle to the atrocities the uk and America have commited and still are to this very day.

[edit on 11-9-2009 by Solomons]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Yes.... pull back...... fortify the borders....and do nation building at home.


Any country wants help, they can make their case.....with an open wallet.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Of course we should not be in other countries without a Congressional declaration of war. However, If you wanna dupe the people into becoming an invisible empire, you keep them in fear, grow thier military, house the military elsewhere ( otherwise imagine the size and amount of our bases here), out of sight out of mind. Remember these countries collect a lease fee for the bases and it aint cheap at all. the goal has always been to grow the government and the military and tax the people to do it.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
I think the U.S. should just be focused on the U.S. for now and stop trying to be the World Police. I personally blame the UK because they are our closest ally, I feel the only reason we are stationed overseas is to be closer to them (and of course closer to certain enemies). We really shouldn't be placing bases all over the globe, that's only increasing the hate for our country more. If the U.S. pulled out of everywhere, I'm sure there would be a lot more conflicts. The world can talk all they want about the U.S. but without the U.S. this world would be in chaos. The world needs the U.S. like it or not- the U.S. doesn't need the world.

We would do just fine by ourselves. The first and best step would be pull out of the U.N. so we're not forced to listen to other countries. Imagine how much better our country would be if we just focused on us first and not the world....



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by AceOfAces
 


lol...what a big pile of steamy BS.America doesn't need the world? the world would be in chaos if it were not for America? absolute nonsense....



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
lol...what a big pile of steamy BS.America doesn't need the world? the world would be in chaos if it were not for America? absolute nonsense....


self edit to remove post...didn't catch the sarcasm first time out. I agree with Solomons.



[edit on 12-9-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 05:05 AM
link   
I have been absolutely convinced that the U.S. is in other countries to ultimately get Israel out of the U.S.



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
I think the U.S. should pull out of most countries, but not all. We have agreed to help with the defense of Japan, South Korea, and the NATO countries and we should live up to those agreements. We also play a major role in the defense of Israel, but until they straighten up their act and start deserving protection I think we should leave them to the dogs. They've been around for over half a century, they should be able to pull their own weight by now.

I'm going to go ahead and guess that at least half - if not more - of the countries on the list on Page 1 are just countries where we have our own troops guarding our embassies. Stating we have a "military presence" in countries just because we have our own guys guarding our embassies is at least partially spin to make the U.S. look bad.

And no, I wouldn't have a problem it all if those countries had their own soldiers guarding their embassies here. In fact, I wish we'd require it so that the job wouldn't fall on us.

At any rate... the rest: The countries where we actually have military bases in place but aren't major defensive allies with. Yeah, we should pull the hell out of those countries and start worrying about our borders. I'm tired of reading about Mexican military and paramilitary shooting at U.S. border guards. Let's bring our boys home and shoot back.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 
i starred your post. i concur. that list made me sick. w/all our military in other countries who is going to protect us on our soil from attacks from other countries? foreign troops? i wonder just how many foreign troops we have on our soil?

i also wonder how many soilders we have on our soil to protect us?

as far as nationals from other countries commenting on US threads.....they seem to know much more about what is really happening in the united states. i am a US citizen and i don't believe the majority of US citizens know anything of what truly happening.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   
The framers of the constitution would not have envisioned a government supported military. That is contrary to the principals of freedom in the constitution.

I find it revolting that we as American have been conditioned to think that the US military represents our freedom. Those fighting in foreign lands are tyrants.

I have no sympathy for the ignorant dolts abroad. They die...They get memorials but they don't get the job done.

Nobody from Iraq or Afghanistan is trying to kill me. If they are I will take care of it myself.

It's disgusting that hard line conservatives want less government yet demand the most spending for military operations. Yes the US military should get the hell out of all foreign lands.

The citizens of the United States have been duped about military people. The US military is nothing more than a security surveillance corporation. The military makes sure we as sheep continue to consume goods at unsustainable or self sufficient way of life.

In other words...Yes bring back all the troops back...Try them for treason and hang them. We are responsible as individuals for defending our liberty...Not some brainwashed idiot in uniform.

Oh sorry to sound harsh to those who serve the corporation of death and famine...If push comes to shove...Leave me to die. I'd rather die than be saved by the military.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
Hmmm...isn't that like ALL of the countries?

Yeah, Americans should get the hell out of any other country except their own.

To heck with the rest of the world.


actually, I think you'd find the rest of the world would be very grateful if the US got the hell out.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   
As one would expect, a thread like this attracts some awe-inspiringly foolish comments...


Originally posted by AceOfAces
I think the U.S. should just be focused on the U.S. for now and stop trying to be the World Police. I personally blame the UK because they are our closest ally, I feel the only reason we are stationed overseas is to be closer to them (and of course closer to certain enemies).


The UK is not uour ally. The UK is your puppet, your fig leaf for wars of aggression, and the US has us sufficiently by the balls that no matter what the populace think, the government will always toady to the US.

Blaming the UK for the reasons given when there's a massive list in the OP that shoots down those reasons... how very ATS (at its worst).


We really shouldn't be placing bases all over the globe, that's only increasing the hate for our country more.


True.


If the U.S. pulled out of everywhere, I'm sure there would be a lot more conflicts. The world can talk all they want about the U.S. but without the U.S. this world would be in chaos. The world needs the U.S. like it or not- the U.S. doesn't need the world.


Now you've gone and spoiled it. You were doing ok for a while and then you had to just fall back on that "America is a great and selfless nation" nonsense. WAKE UP. Read some proper history, not whatever fascist rubbish you've been looking at so far.

The US causes conflicts around the world. If you can find a single instance where the US has actually stopped a conflict, I'll take my hat off to you.

But the fact of the matter is that the US subverts democracy pretty much everywhere it goes. And it does this fror commercial advantage every time. Menwith Hill in the UK is a secret base that monitors all electronic comms in Europe. They regularly pass information to US companies to give them comptetitive advantage. It's just criminal stuff, but the US gets away with it, partly because gullible oafs accept the myth that the US does good in the world.

We would do just fine by ourselves. The first and best step would be pull out of the U.N. so we're not forced to listen to other countries. Imagine how much better our country would be if we just focused on us first and not the world....




posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
it may be completely ignorant or nieve of me, but i have always felt that the entire world would be a lot better off if each country stayed the hell out of the business of other countries.. especially so when said country continues to invade and destroy at their own whim..america is a bully so to say and should remove all troops from the innumerable other countries it has taken upon its egocentric self to just move right into..(i speak of government and military, not of the people of the nation in general)




top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join