Just an Observation. US Imperialistic or Isolationist?

[LeeTJ]

Does Europe and the Rest of the world really want to strengthen the Isolationist of America? Would Isolationism by the US really be in the best interest of the rest of the world??

These are just general observations mind you so take them for what they are.

Has the US historically been imperialistic?? Do we have a history of colonization??

the way I see it, once the 50 states were defined the US has not been imperialistic. you can argue that the aggressive expansion to the west was such but at a given point it stopped.

During the First 2 World Wars, Americans were Isolationist to a fault, even to the point where it could have been to the detriment of the US, but we had leaders who understood world politics enough to understand that we did need to get involved.

Since WWII, US has not been nearly as isolationist but that thought and faction still exists in America. A very high percentage of americans wouldn't mind if we totally pulled out of Nato, S. Korea, Phillipines and where ever else we are currently maintaining bases and centralize our defenses here in the US.

HOWEVER, it was WWII and the Inability by Europe and Asia to keep it's own houses in Order that the US got involved.

NOW the question is, Do Europeans and Asians really believe that it would be in THEIR best interest for the US to remove herself from world politics? to drift back to the Isolationism of the early 20th century??

 

[Czar]

I think bush said it best belive it or not

I don't think they ought to look at us with envy. It really depends upon how [the] Nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll...resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands...alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. So I don't...think they ought to look at us in any way other than what we are. We're a freedom-loving nation. And if we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're [a] humble nation, they'll respect us.

 

[exp]

Do Europeans and Asians really believe that it would be in THEIR best interest for the US to remove herself from world politics?

No. What they really want is for the U.S. to only be "imperialistic" when they need or want our help and to be "isolationist" the rest of the time, when they want us to stay out of their way. I do not say that as a knock on those countries (after all, they are only looking after their own interests...and rightly so), only as an observation.

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: Czar
I think bush said it best belive it or not

I don't think they ought to look at us with envy. It really depends upon how [the] Nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll...resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands...alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. So I don't...think they ought to look at us in any way other than what we are. We're a freedom-loving nation. And if we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're [a] humble nation, they'll respect us.

I don't think this has any relevance to what i posted.

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: exp

Do Europeans and Asians really believe that it would be in THEIR best interest for the US to remove herself from world politics?

No. What they really want is for the U.S. to only be "imperialistic" when they need or want our help and to be "isolationist" the rest of the time, when they want us to stay out of their way. I do not say that as a knock on those countries (after all, they are only looking after their own interests...and rightly so), only as an observation.

That's kind of the way it appears.

I used to not be as isolationist, but now i'm beginning to think, just pull out of NATO, pull out of S. Korea and let them take care of their own problems. we have enough problems to deal with here in the US as it is.

Bush's budget for the military?? well reduce it by pulling out.

Don't go to war w/ Iraq, let them blow someone else up first then when the Europeans and Middle Easterners come to us for help, do it but only under specific conditions that would benefit the US.

i'm tired of taking all the heat, about all these divergent opinions, particularly the Europeans, if they are not willing to contribute.

 

[yowolabi]

Originally posted by: exp

Do Europeans and Asians really believe that it would be in THEIR best interest for the US to remove herself from world politics?

No. What they really want is for the U.S. to only be "imperialistic" when they need or want our help and to be "isolationist" the rest of the time, when they want us to stay out of their way. I do not say that as a knock on those countries (after all, they are only looking after their own interests...and rightly so), only as an observation.

I have to agree with this.

 

[feralkid]

<<<<HOWEVER, it was WWII and the Inability by Europe and Asia to keep it's own houses in Order that the US got involved.>>>>




Europe and Asia are continents, not nations. To say there was even a 'house' to keep in order is erroneous.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: Czar
I think bush said it best belive it or not

I don't think they ought to look at us with envy. It really depends upon how [the] Nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll...resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands...alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. So I don't...think they ought to look at us in any way other than what we are. We're a freedom-loving nation. And if we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're [a] humble nation, they'll respect us.

I don't think this has any relevance to what i posted.

it does, it says what the world wants the US to behave in regard of international politics

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: feralkid
<<<<HOWEVER, it was WWII and the Inability by Europe and Asia to keep it's own houses in Order that the US got involved.>>>>




Europe and Asia are continents, not nations. To say there was even a 'house' to keep in order is erroneous.

WRONG.

The Brits and the French should have been able to keep Germany under control without our help.

China should have been able to keep Japan under their control w/o our help.

SHHEEEESHH, even the most Isolationist of people believe in keeping their neighbors in line. Europe was NOT ABLE to keep it's house in order and they were basically begging us to come and clean up their mess for them.

Same with Asia.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: feralkid
<<<<HOWEVER, it was WWII and the Inability by Europe and Asia to keep it's own houses in Order that the US got involved.>>>>




Europe and Asia are continents, not nations. To say there was even a 'house' to keep in order is erroneous.

You know what he meant.

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: Czar
I think bush said it best belive it or not

I don't think they ought to look at us with envy. It really depends upon how [the] Nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll...resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands...alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. So I don't...think they ought to look at us in any way other than what we are. We're a freedom-loving nation. And if we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're [a] humble nation, they'll respect us.

I don't think this has any relevance to what i posted.

it does, it says what the world wants the US to behave in regard of international politics

Behave based on who's rules??

 

[Jmman]

Where is Moonie or Hagbird? I can't wait for their rants about how we want to conquer the world........

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: feralkid
<<<<HOWEVER, it was WWII and the Inability by Europe and Asia to keep it's own houses in Order that the US got involved.>>>>




Europe and Asia are continents, not nations. To say there was even a 'house' to keep in order is erroneous.

WRONG.

The Brits and the French should have been able to keep Germany under control without our help.

China should have been able to keep Japan under their control w/o our help.

SHHEEEESHH, even the most Isolationist of people believe in keeping their neighbors in line. Europe was NOT ABLE to keep it's house in order and they were basically begging us to come and clean up their mess for them.

Same with Asia.

The brits and the French are not "europe".


China was occupied by Japan.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: Czar
I think bush said it best belive it or not

I don't think they ought to look at us with envy. It really depends upon how [the] Nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll...resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands...alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. So I don't...think they ought to look at us in any way other than what we are. We're a freedom-loving nation. And if we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're [a] humble nation, they'll respect us.

I don't think this has any relevance to what i posted.

it does, it says what the world wants the US to behave in regard of international politics

Behave based on who's rules??

their own rules

 

[rufruf44]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: exp

Do Europeans and Asians really believe that it would be in THEIR best interest for the US to remove herself from world politics?

No. What they really want is for the U.S. to only be "imperialistic" when they need or want our help and to be "isolationist" the rest of the time, when they want us to stay out of their way. I do not say that as a knock on those countries (after all, they are only looking after their own interests...and rightly so), only as an observation.

That's kind of the way it appears.

I used to not be as isolationist, but now i'm beginning to think, just pull out of NATO, pull out of S. Korea and let them take care of their own problems. we have enough problems to deal with here in the US as it is.

Bush's budget for the military?? well reduce it by pulling out.

Don't go to war w/ Iraq, let them blow someone else up first then when the Europeans and Middle Easterners come to us for help, do it but only under specific conditions that would benefit the US.

i'm tired of taking all the heat, about all these divergent opinions, particularly the Europeans, if they are not willing to contribute.

This could easily backfired. Without restraint, Saddam's can roll over most of the Arabian peninsulla and rule over most of the oil reserve in the world. China and NK can easily swallow the entire southeast part of asia and form their own empire. By the time US will intervene (which according to you, will greatly depend on the condition) these countries will probably already get a good chunck of territory.
You'll be face with huge state/countries/empire (whatever you call them) that will be considerable stronger, control a lot of resources with a strong distaste of the US. Not to mention the sleeping Russian bear could probably take the entire Europe if they choose to. You'll be faced with another cold war, just this time it'll have multiple nations vs 1 USA.

 

[drewshin]

the ww ii might have lasted longer and things might be slightly different without the u.s. help, but of course it was in our best interest to help them (who would we trade with?) our economy would have been in tatters as well.

umm...by the way, the 50 states weren't formed until 1959.

 

[Jmman]

Well, unfortunately there is no way we could really be an isolationist state. The Middle East would almost immediately be plunged into war and chaos, effectively cutting off a large part of our oil supply. Our economy would plunge if we had any form of oil shortage like we did in the early 70's. Trust me, that was not particularly fun......

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

First, Europe is in a completely different situation than it was 50 years ago. The formation of the EU effectively eliminates war within Europe. The US is not needed there. In several years a common army will become practical. Europeans will almost certainly want to be less dependent on the US especially the way things are going now. Bottom line is this. In 30 years, assuming we do not blow ourselves back to the stone age, there will be 3 superpowers. China, the US, and Europe. How things play out in that relationship depends on the world situation then. I think our military power benefits us more than them.

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: Czar
I think bush said it best belive it or not

I don't think they ought to look at us with envy. It really depends upon how [the] Nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll...resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands...alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. So I don't...think they ought to look at us in any way other than what we are. We're a freedom-loving nation. And if we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're [a] humble nation, they'll respect us.

Interesting. This coming from a man (Bush) who embodies the arrogance and unilaterallism of the US foreign policy.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: werk

Originally posted by: feralkid
<<<<HOWEVER, it was WWII and the Inability by Europe and Asia to keep it's own houses in Order that the US got involved.>>>>




Europe and Asia are continents, not nations. To say there was even a 'house' to keep in order is erroneous.

You know what he meant.

My point is that to imply a "house" E.G. central government is erroneous. These were separate nations under conflict.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: werk

Originally posted by: feralkid
<<<<HOWEVER, it was WWII and the Inability by Europe and Asia to keep it's own houses in Order that the US got involved.>>>>




Europe and Asia are continents, not nations. To say there was even a 'house' to keep in order is erroneous.

You know what he meant.

My point is that to imply a "house" E.G. central government is erroneous. These were separate nations under conflict.

I'm pretty sure any 3rd grader knows that. You know he just meant "nations in Europe in Asia." No need to split hairs.