Sit down, Shut up, and Stay OUT of it!

Originally posted by Skewed
I do agree to extents. However, when unarmed people start getting gunned down, and if we are going to be a super power we need to act like one and go to those peoples aid. I do not fault the US in helping when the unarmed and the innocents are being murdered, but unfortunately we somehow find an ulterior motive to tack on to it. It is a shame we cannot just help someone because it is the right thing to do.

I think your heart's in the right place; but; AND THIS IS A BIG "BUT":

Who are the "innocents"

ESPECIALLY in the middle east and the Baltics: factions have been at each other throats since tribe "a"stole a camel from tribe "b "and they inturn killed somebodies uncle.
To get involved WE have to necessarily choose sides.
we need to pull back and stay the hell out. and get govt out of the citizens lives again.
by the way we are not a "democracy" the founders abhored "democracy": we are a "constitutional republic" the rights of the common man are protected from the mob by law.

reply to post by tothetenthpower
The ballot box? you must be joking! it's a pointless exercise when both parties have been bought and paid for.The old axiom about if you don't vote then you have no right to complain is total bull this little cliche is used to make anyone who questions the two-party scam look like they are apathetic when in reality the best way to weaken a fixed game is not to take part.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


The US government HAS stayed out of the uprising. All they have done was put there opinion out there and that's it. And please stop trying to speak for those in other countries who are rising up. they have a voice and it's not yours.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776

Originally posted by Skewed
However, when unarmed people start getting gunned down,

How does that make it our business? People die every day. If they die trying to bring about regime change, then at least they died for a cause. IT IS NOT OUR PLACE TO BE THE WORLD"S POLICE FORCE!!!

and if we are going to be a super power we need to act like one and go to those peoples aid.

Says who? Our military SHOULD be used for defense only.

I do not fault the US in helping when the unarmed and the innocents are being murdered, but unfortunately we somehow find an ulterior motive to tack on to it.

I do. We need to fix our own problems. How can we complain about the grain of sand in our neighbor's eye while a beam is firmly wedged in our own?

It is a shame we cannot just help someone because it is the right thing to do.

The real shame is that we cannot just mind our own business.

So does that mean we should have let Hilter kill millions of more jews and other victims?

Chinese businesses are established throughout the world, with a big incursion into Africa especially. The number of Chinese military bases outside of China? Zero. I don't know that we need a military presence to prop up our overseas businesses. Combatting genocide or acting like the world police is one thing, but we seem to have also established ourselves as the leading manipulator of foreign politics, with a "no expense is spared" attitude courtesy the US taxpayer. Within the past month we've seen two revolution against long-standing regimes without any military intervention by the US, and those actually turned out well - for those peoples at least. The vested interests of the US may be another matter.

I see a lot of rancor about why the US isn't intervening or "doing something" about Libya. Personally I think the US needs to stay out of it, unless we see genocide happening. The sixth fleet is right there, and believe me, it can make short work of Gadhafi's forces. He knows that, it's why he keeps name-dropping the threat of Al-Queda. A Libyan revolution would be meaningless if the US or it's allies storm in there and establish an overriding order.

Pat Buchanan has the right idea on this topic, Misoir linked to his comments about Bush's policies of "Interventionism" (ATS topic here)

For eight years, Bush pursued interventionism, free trade and open borders. Result: two wars that have bled his country and reaped a harvest of hate, the deindustrialization of America and a republic on its way to becoming the new world order’s Tower of Babel.

Add to that: how many billions (perhaps trillions) we spent to achieve that level of intervention. And what did we get for that money? Security? Increased markets? I don't see any of that, only the corporations with the right connections in high places got rich off it, the rest of us (and the world) got SCREWED.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


The United States government needs to learn how to just let other countries and their people govern themselves. Period.

For too long we've spent trillions of dollars interfering at every level of government's all over the world, many times with disastrous effects on the peoples of these nations. South America is a prime example. Arabic nations another. We've poured money into these regimes for support, we've allowed our corporations to get in bed with them, all for the mighty dollar.

I personally would love to see this a reality. However, if you, like I am now, watching CNN Anderson Cooper listening to "A Cry in the Night," Plea to the world: Help us in Tripoli, a woman's voice begging for our attention and help, how do we ignore their cries? I guess we should but we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. We were in there from the start so do we finish it? Where is the answer? We started it, so now we should finish it and support the people after we supported their regimes? I'm so at a loss here, I don't have the answer.

So does that mean we should have let Hilter kill millions of more jews and other victims?

Obviously not. The US was still largely committed to isolationists at the time the second world-war broke out. Like I said, war and genocide are exceptions, but even then the US should work with a coalition of nations and/or the UN, rather than trying to be the world police.

The Shah of Iran as someone earlier mentioned, is a great example of interference that blew up in our face. Mubarak reaped million (hell, billions) that he must have been skimming off of US aid, there's probably not a single entrenched dictator that hasn't made a fortune off the US. Like Buchanan said, look where interventionism has gotten us today.

Originally posted by Ancient Champion

So does that mean we should have let Hilter kill millions of more jews and other victims?

No, intervening when we did was ok, BUT we should not have rebuilt Europe or Japan. Perhaps we could have made loans, and I do not mean the taxpayer, but those companies so doing should have been repaid at interest. I also believe that we should have dealt with the Soviets right after we finished Germany and Japan. Evil is evil. We should never have allied with or supplied the Soviets in WWII. As soon as WWII(including the communists) was over, we should have come back home.

Originally posted by JayTaylor
I hear that the government is about to cut back funding on a lot of things, education included, which is absurd considering that the most intelligent (at least in my opinion) course of action would be to simply cut back funding for our worldwide presence.

star 4 u

if we were to eliminate the US Black Budget, the CIA
and our overseas bases. We could balance
the budget.

that is what I would do if I had a say so.
But I do not.

Originally posted by chocise
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

Totally agree, but I don't believe the US actually cares for democracy based on the comments of many inside top bods. It's all about controlling resources at the end of the day: they aren't bothered who's in the Chair as long as the US gets a sweet deal... Pinochet was a prime example.

Yep, and so is the Russian govt and so is the Chinese govt. Our problem is now we've got a bunch of commie traitors giving away our secrets and assets to foreign powers, inclusive of the UN One World govt. Pipelineistan? That was about fighting Russia for pipeline in Afghanistan. Want Russia to have it? Or maybe that's not the reason the WH occupant sent more troops to Afghanistan? Maybe his reason was the Opium and the pot industry. After all he did inhale...

Originally posted by mike dangerously
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

The ballot box? you must be joking!

it's a pointless exercise when both parties have been bought and paid for.The old axiom about if you don't vote then you have no right to complain is total bull this little cliche is used to make anyone who questions the two-party scam look like they are apathetic when in reality the best way to weaken a fixed game is not to take part.

I think that's partially true and partially not. Our vote does count, as we saw in the last election. People did vote Obama the Community Organizer in...
Do you realize how many in Congress are members of the Democratic Socialists of America? Do you realize how those people were voted in under the radar? Most likely by people who didn't know what their real agenda is. Redistribution of wealth might sound great, till you realize it's your paycheck that went to pay for that Union guy's pension and hc benefits...

reply to post by tothetenthpower

All of your problems can be solved at the ballot box. If any industrialized nation at the moment had any decent politicians in power, they would be doing excellent. The world would be far better off. That can't happen unless some people in that country elect them though...

The ballot box is useless without something to vote FOR. Right now ALL our politicians are bought and paid for and have been since 1934!

On May 23, 1933, Congressman, Louis T. McFadden, brought formal charges against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system, The Comptroller of the Currency and the Secretary of United States Treasury for numerous criminal acts, including but not limited to, CONSPIRACY, FRAUD, UNLAWFUL CONVERSION, AND TREASON.... www.the7thfire.com...

McFadden lost his seat and when he would not shut up he was shot at twice and then poisoned in 1936.

Until we find and vote for people like McFadden the Banksters will continue to rape the USA and every other country on this earth.

See World Bank/IMF Structural Adjustment Programs

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776

Originally posted by Ancient Champion

So does that mean we should have let Hilter kill millions of more jews and other victims?

No, intervening when we did was ok, BUT we should not have rebuilt Europe or Japan. Perhaps we could have made loans, and I do not mean the taxpayer, but those companies so doing should have been repaid at interest. I also believe that we should have dealt with the Soviets right after we finished Germany and Japan. Evil is evil. We should never have allied with or supplied the Soviets in WWII. As soon as WWII(including the communists) was over, we should have come back home.

edit on 25-2-2011 by sonofliberty1776 because: (no reason given)

You stated in one of your earlier post that our armies should only be used for defense. Hitler never attacked us so if we followed your logic we wouldn't joined the war

reply to post by Ancient Champion

Perhaps you forget the attack on Pearl harbor? Followed by Germany and Italy declaring war upon us? Try a little history.

The number of Chinese military bases outside of China? Zero

China doesn't need visual military bases when it instead can cloak its military might in indoctorinated Chinese communities, that are versed in Shaolin Monk technique, WORLDWIDE.

Sun Tzu: the Art of Warfare. Read it, it's considered a Chinese National Literary Treasure, a MUST READ for every potent military entity on the planet, and in practice by the Chinese for more than a century... WORLDWIDE.

Go visit your local Chinatown at 2:30 A.M. Pacific Time. My oh my, those restaraunts sure are packed, they must be living in Chinese time, not local time - ya think? Triad works wonders....

Originally posted by Skewed We are not being a police force when people are being murdered for resisting their government and speaking out, and at times they ask for our help. But, using your mindset, you are saying that it would be ok for me to walk right on by some person that is being violently attacked and to do nothing to help them?

Those are entirely different situations. If someone in front of you is being mugged, you are acting for the protection of your own society by doing something about it. If someone is being mugged in Tokyo and you are sitting at your computer in the US with the ability to call the Keishichō, then go for it. However, you would have no business sending a predator missile down upon the mugger, now would you?

I say, that's who. In the Libya situation if we did step in, we would be using our military for defense, we would be defending innocent people. The downside to that is we would also have another motive.

I wonder what the multiple countries that had revolutions against their governments would be like if someone else stepped in to work the revolution instead. Could you imagine the American Revolutionary War being fought by the Persians? Sometimes it takes ones own people to get what they want in their government.

We can spare some time to help people from being murdered.

We can start at home. Take a look at this page and then tell me we should be going to other countries to stop murders there. We have more than enough here to be focused on.

It appears to me, we are trying to stay out of it, to certain extents, and I know this comment will be nit-picked apart.

As we should be and alas, you were correct.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by Ancient Champion

 

Perhaps you forget the attack on Pearl harbor? Followed by Germany and Italy declaring war upon us? Try a little history.

If we followed your logic we wouldn't have put pressure on Japan by staying out of there business and they wouldn't have felt the need to attack us. because thats what guys like you always say is that the US needs to mind its own business and stop policing the world. So if we followed your logic Japan wouldn't attacked us and Germany and Itay would never have declared war on us. Try thinking about what you say

reply to post by Ancient Champion

We can play shoulda woulda coulda all night. Let's just deal in what actually happened with regards to the past. In the future, we need to mind our own business unless attacked. However, if we are attacked by a nation or by a terrorist group we should respond with overwhelming power and obliterate the attacker and any nations actively assisting the attacker. Then we definitely should not rebuild them or do anything to make their lot easier after we destroy them.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by mike dangerously
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

The ballot box? you must be joking!

it's a pointless exercise when both parties have been bought and paid for.The old axiom about if you don't vote then you have no right to complain is total bull this little cliche is used to make anyone who questions the two-party scam look like they are apathetic when in reality the best way to weaken a fixed game is not to take part.

I think that's partially true and partially not. Our vote does count, as we saw in the last election. People did vote Obama the Community Organizer in...
Do you realize how many in Congress are members of the Democratic Socialists of America? Do you realize how those people were voted in under the radar? Most likely by people who didn't know what their real agenda is. Redistribution of wealth might sound great, till you realize it's your paycheck that went to pay for that Union guy's pension and hc benefits...

I think our vote does not count at all and anyone who thinks it does is only fooling themselves.Ever notice how the same agenda is followed regardless of who controls the White House and both houses?