Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Whether or not it would be best for both USA and the world is moot. The genie has been out of the bottle for a long time and it's not motivated or willing to be put back in.
.
Exactly. We may spend too much and I can agree to that, BUT we saw the world go to war in twenty years with World War I and World War II and we went isolationist on it. I'm not saying we have to buy someone does.
That and so many corporations including our president's are multinational. The world is global, like it or not.
Well, violence sure helped rid the World of the Nazis and the Japanese Empire. And it is certainly helping to get rid of ISIS.
That is pretty ironic since a major factor of why ISIS exists in the first place is the American military interventions (or violence as you call it) in the Middle East. I don't know if the world would be better or not if the US ceased all foreign activities, but it's never going to happen because they serve America's interests first. Just like they have in the past 80 or so years.
That is pretty ironic since a major factor of why ISIS exists in the first place is the American military interventions (or violence as you call it) in the Middle East. I don't know if the world would be better or not if the US ceased all foreign activities, but it's never going to happen because they serve America's interests first. Just like they have in the past 80 or so years.
Yet ISIS isn't attacking America. It's just taking credit for any Muslim attack regardless if it really was encouraging it and the person made an ISIS manifesto or not. FYI, the ISIS stuff goes as far back as Reagan with helping Bin Ladin in the Russian invasion of Afghanistan during the 1980's.
A. Close every foreign base it has.
B. Recall every American abroad home.
C. Have no spies/intelligence agencies in any foreign countries.
D. Drastically cut down it's military force and subsequent spending to merely coastal defense.
E. Fully and completely dismantling every nuke it has.
So, basically, the U.S would truly not be as others say an Empire and instead solely focus on itself not getting involved in any way shape or form with anything pas the U.S borders.
Do you think that it would be best for both the U.S and the world?
We're having to deal with the consequences after 8 yrs of that foolishness.
Now Iran and N Korea nutcakes have nukes.
China is testing the water for invading Taiwan.
Thank you liberals.
We're having to deal with the consequences after 8 yrs of that foolishness.
Now Iran and N Korea nutcakes have nukes.
China is testing the water for invading Taiwan.
Thank you liberals.
Your blind partisanship makes it hard to take anything you say seriously. North Korea tested its first nuke in 2006.
To the OP, I don't agree with the extreme measures you are suggesting. But I for the life of me don't get how military actions in **** poor countries like Yemen help the average american. Maybe they help a specific class of Americans fill their fat pockets.
Your blind partisanship makes it hard to take anything you say seriously. North Korea tested its first nuke in 2006.
To the OP, I don't agree with the extreme measures you are suggesting. But I for the life of me don't get how military actions in **** poor countries like Yemen help the average american. Maybe they help a specific class of Americans fill their fat pockets.
Liberals like Carter, Clinton, and Obama let this happen. Carter even got a Nobel Peace Prize for it.
Liberals like Carter, Clinton, and Obama let this happen. Carter even got a Nobel Peace Prize for it.
Funny how you forget to mention the Republican presidents during that same time frame -- Reagan, Bush I, and Bush 2...that's 20 years of failed Republican leadership, as well.
Funny how you forget to mention the Republican presidents during that same time frame -- Reagan, Bush I, and Bush 2...that's 20 years of failed Republican leadership, as well.
Don't even try explaining it to them. They've been brainwashed. There maybe some influencial people out there who use partisan politics to divide the masses. And some old fools buy into it hook, line and sinker as demonstrated by this thread.
A. Close every foreign base it has. B. Recall every American abroad home.
C. Have no spies/intelligence agencies in any foreign countries.
D. Drastically cut down it's military force and subsequent spending to merely coastal defense.
E. Fully and completely dismantling every nuke it has.
So, basically, the U.S would truly not be as others say an Empire and instead solely focus on itself not getting involved in any way shape or form with anything pas the U.S borders.
Do you think that it would be best for both the U.S and the world?
The U.S. has no business mandating where its citizens reside, unless they're wanted for a federal crime or a diplomat. If an American wants to live in another country, then it's entirely up to the country they intend to live in.
Funny how you forget to mention the Republican presidents during that same time frame -- Reagan, Bush I, and Bush 2...that's 20 years of failed Republican leadership, as well.
???????????
Weak Jimmy Carter allowed Iran to hold our embassy staff as hostages.
Iran released them on the day Ronald Reagan took office.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
