Isolationism; could we go back to it or no?

[Guest LieutenantDan67]

I think there might be way too much history under the bridge on this one, but what IF we could as a country go back to it? What would be the plusses and minuses for us, and for the rest of the world? And would it doom us or save us?

I started this off after reading the interesting 'Roman Empire' thread here.

[E4 No More]

It cannot happen because our businesses are tied up in the world economy. I would just be happy if we were to no longer be the world's police department.

[Guest LieutenantDan67]

It cannot happen because our businesses are tied up in the world economy. I would just be happy if we were to no longer be the world's police department.

Duh on me... We are entirely too economically entrenched in the rest of the world (and economically dependent) for isolationism as it was. Great point that totally got past me on this Monday, Jewell!

So yeah, if we stopped being 'world cops', some might applaud that we finally stop sticking our noses in other's business...until they are infringed upon by an aggressive country.

I think if we took that stance, the world would be pounding at our doors in short order for assistance as the 'bullies' go unchecked.

[9teeneleven]

It would need to start with American consumers.

[Guest TurboniumOxide]

It HAS started with at least one family; mine. You can buy televisions made in America again!

[Guest mustangdave]

We couldn't even stop being the WORLD'S POLICE...who they gonna call? When Russia/China...or whoever decides they wanna get a little froggy? The U frickin' N?...Nope the US of A. Isolationist policies ended pretty much with WWI...

[Guest bkelm18]

It HAS started with at least one family; mine. You can buy televisions made in America again!

What company?

[Guest bkelm18]

We couldn't even stop being the WORLD'S POLICE...who they gonna call? When Russia/China...or whoever decides they wanna get a little froggy? The U frickin' N?...Nope the US of A. Isolationist policies ended pretty much with WWI...

A point I brought up in the other thread. Who else in this world has the might or the resources to mount a good defense against the bad people? It's basically become our lot in life, to be the defenders of freedom, we are the only ones who are capable of it. For the time being at least. The UN would bow down to a threat, NATO would really be nothing without us. Lose/Lose situation.

[Guest mustangdave]

Whats NATO really? The North Atlantic TREATY Organization...it only has teeth as a group...some of the other countries military forces are a JOKE...and only WE get the call if SHTF

[USMCJG]

I'm not necessarily in favor of a complete isolationist policy, but I still think we should drop out of the UN, OAS, and NATO. They call us to do all of the work and blame us if anything goes wrong(or even if it doesn't). Want our help? Ask us, forget the UN. Want us to keep the bad guys out of your country? Pay us and we'll help. We've been fighting other peoples battles, largely on our dime, for too long. Let our humanitarian organizations and charities take over for our government(taxpayer) funded "aid". They can do a better job, improve our relations with other countries, save us money(even with our tax deductible contributions), and keep the politics out of it, all at the same time. I'm tired of the US being the UN's whipping boy/policeman. Screw the UN.

Cliff

PS- Okay, rant off. I'm just not a fan of the UN. Does it show?

[Guest ScottD]

Were Team America World Police!

AMERICA! F YA!

[Smith]

we've never been isolated. Since the before the Revolution we have been intermingled with Europe and to a lesser extent the far east. Some of the products and exchanges have changed but the relationships have been pretty much the same.

That being said there was a time when Americans lived more simply and were mostly self sufficient. As our greed and desire for more comfort/service industry has grown, so has our "dependency" on those exchanges. I say "dependency" because if we decided to live a little less service oriented and didn't mind getting dirty we could change the exchange direction back like it was before.

When I hear people talk about how both parents have to work to survive and then talk about the 4 cars in the garage, the 3-4 large flat screens, the exotic vacations, the clothes they "need", and the house for 8 when only 4 live in it - It makes me skeptical that we would ever be able to live limiting those "needs".

[Chucktshoes]

Though we have engaged in semi-isolationist policies at some points in the past, I don't believe that is a wise or even attainable goal. An open but strong non-interventionist foreign policy is the the wisest course for us as a nation. We engage other nations through trade and diplomacy while strictly refraining from intervening in the internal affairs of any nation. We should withdraw from any alliance or treaty that would compel military action on our part for the benefit of another and bring all military personnel back to US soil. Our policy should be that we only take military action against another nation only after an attack has been made upon US soil/ installations (and if/when that happens we bring it like only we can) . A preemptive war is a war of aggression and IMO beneath morals and character of our great nation. Fuzzy political ends are not worth the blood spilled by our men and women.

Edited June 30, 2009 by Chucktshoes