Political Crossfire Forums

[sLiPpY]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: It's appearing that the vast majority of posters in this thread are for Isolationism, is that correct?

Or do we only conduct business with those left standing ?

It depends on what you mean by Isolationism. There's only one example in all of the world's history, that demonstrates Isolationism, however the pundit pie holes sure do like to show off their ignorance in thinking that they understand what the concept means.

The example on my mind had to do with Japan and/or China...and some other country. Where one of those nations decided to limit their trade, and travel, to the other three. Basically cutting off contact with the rest of the globe.

I advocate Constitutionalism over Militarism. I advocate Fair Trade, over producing everything here at home...in that we do need external resources for this and that.

If Isolationism=being pro-Republic vs. Militarism...then you could inaccurately toss me into the Isolationist crowd.

Which would be akin to a Republican calling themself Conservative, or a Democrat Liberal when they don't know what the hell they're really talking about. :-D

n' that answer's not directed at Mr. Richard Owl...but ya did inspire a rant.

Early Egypt might also be an example of involuntary Isolationism

[Richard Owl Mirror]

sLiPpY wrote: Richard Owl Mirror wrote: It's appearing that the vast majority of posters in this thread are for Isolationism, is that correct?

Or do we only conduct business with those left standing ?

It depends on what you mean by Isolationism. There's only one example in all of the world's history, that demonstrates Isolationism, however the pundit pie holes sure do like to show off their ignorance in thinking that they understand what the concept means.

The example on my mind had to do with Japan and/or China...and some other country. Where one of those nations decided to limit their trade, and travel, to the other three. Basically cutting off contact with the rest of the globe.

I advocate Constitutionalism over Militarism. I advocate Fair Trade, over producing everything here at home...in that we do need external resources for this and that.

If Isolationism=being pro-Republic vs. Militarism...then you could inaccurately toss me into the Isolationist crowd.

Which would be akin to a Republican calling themself Conservative, or a Democrat Liberal when they don't know what the hell they're really talking about. :-D

n' that answer's not directed at Mr. Richard Owl...but ya did inspire a rant.

Early Egypt might also be an example of involuntary Isolationism

Isolationism in the sense of not answering a distress call from those we normally wouldn't associate ourselves with.
Those we might deem backwards, degenerates, offensive moral or social behavior, etc. ...
Intervention should not be misused or abused yet, when it is morally the right thing to do, we should and must act.
I am not advocating intervention each time a child scrapes their knee.
The power to force dramatic change should be wielded with judicious care, not used to benefit Kings and Noblemen.

n' that answer's not directed at Mr. sLiPpY...but ya did inspire a rant. :wink:

[von libertinism]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Has our military commitment in Iraq weakened our response to stop a Genocide elsewhere in the world?
In my opinion, the answer is YES
Perhaps. It's probably isn't about not having the military resources to needed to stop Darfur Genocide, but the current administration's PR is in a state that even if it's the right thing to stop DG I don't think the public at large would support an invasion of Sudan.

"Look at what you've done in Iraq!? There's no way you should go over to Darfur, clean up your mess before you create another." (etc.)

[sLiPpY]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: sLiPpY wrote: Richard Owl Mirror wrote: It's appearing that the vast majority of posters in this thread are for Isolationism, is that correct?

Or do we only conduct business with those left standing ?

It depends on what you mean by Isolationism. There's only one example in all of the world's history, that demonstrates Isolationism, however the pundit pie holes sure do like to show off their ignorance in thinking that they understand what the concept means.

The example on my mind had to do with Japan and/or China...and some other country. Where one of those nations decided to limit their trade, and travel, to the other three. Basically cutting off contact with the rest of the globe.

I advocate Constitutionalism over Militarism. I advocate Fair Trade, over producing everything here at home...in that we do need external resources for this and that.

If Isolationism=being pro-Republic vs. Militarism...then you could inaccurately toss me into the Isolationist crowd.

Which would be akin to a Republican calling themself Conservative, or a Democrat Liberal when they don't know what the hell they're really talking about. :-D

n' that answer's not directed at Mr. Richard Owl...but ya did inspire a rant.

Early Egypt might also be an example of involuntary Isolationism

Isolationism in the sense of not answering a distress call from those we normally wouldn't associate ourselves with.
Those we might deem backwards, degenerates, offensive moral or social behavior, etc. ...
Intervention should not be misused or abused yet, when it is morally the right thing to do, we should and must act.
I am not advocating intervention each time a child scrapes their knee.
The power to force dramatic change should be wielded with judicious care, not used to benefit Kings and Noblemen.

n' that answer's not directed at Mr. sLiPpY...but ya did inspire a rant. :wink:

I recall GHW Bush answering such a distress call, in Somalia?

I recall Bill Clinton getting beat up by the Republicans for carrying out the December suprise, GHWB left on our doorsteps at Christmas.

I see it like this. There are things in this life we have control over, and things we don't.

Somalia is still a damn mess, and the US is once again looking for regional "peace keepers" to go in and help.

I think that's the best plan. If you're friends and neighbors who speak your own language aren't willing to help? Then STFU. :?

We have violence and attrocities occur in America all day. The people of New Orleans still need help. But what's our solution!?

Send the military over to some chunk of land, half-way across the world, to help keep order? Where our soldiers don't even speak the language?

My that helps us, and there's plenty of proof that these peace keeping excursions have never been of benefit. I can think of just one that was successful, but we only stayed for around thirty some days.

[Ellron]

I think its sad people are scared or to proud to send troops to Darfur.

"American casualites"

"Not our bussiness"

Same crap they said before Rwada.

This is worse though since it is happening right now and not quickly like Rwanda.

I think its worse that people say "its not part of the war against terror!"

If fighting bands of men who are burning villages, killing children, and raping women is not fighting terror then what the hell is?

And before some one goes.. Thats what we are doing in Iraq...This goal is actually managable.

I cant believe a world leader is not stopping this crap either. As a human with power to stop killing with minimul force, i think they would do it.

[sLiPpY]

Ellron wrote: I think its sad people are scared or to proud to send troops to Darfur.

"American casualites"

"Not our bussiness"

Same crap they said before Rwada.

This is worse though since it is happening right now and not quickly like Rwanda.

I think its worse that people say "its not part of the war against terror!"

If fighting bands of men who are burning villages, killing children, and raping women is not fighting terror then what the hell is?

And before some one goes.. Thats what we are doing in Iraq...This goal is actually managable.

I cant believe a world leader is not stopping this crap either. As a human with power to stop killing with minimul force, i think they would do it.

I understand the sentiment. But I'm not willing to send my neighbor, or my nephews, or myself for that matter. So I'm sure as hell not going to advocate a policy, I myself am not willing to participate in. Last I'd heard, I'm eligable for enlistment for about two more years.

Maybe that region is simply going through it's Dark Ages, a few centuries late. I think it was the Vikings that swept through Europe, raping, pillaging, partying and killing...sure it sounded like a horrible time to be alive. But I probably would have wanted to have been a Viking.

Do you know what happened as a result of that Chaos? Well it laid the foundation for the Middle Ages and the Feudal System....and then on to the Renaissance. What the Vikings did for that region was a God send, in that it freed up economic capital that had been horded by a few. Redistributed the wealth, and trade began to emerge and flourish as a result.

I think that a culture and societies evolution should be allowed to evolve as it does. i.e. If America becomes a crap hole like Rwanda. I'm more than willing to go out and participate in shooting my neighbors should they choose to mis-behave.

America doesn't know what war is anymore. We don't know what the sacrifice is of say a WWI or WWII.

Ernest Hemingway is a good place to start.

Once a person understands what War is...you don't want for your fellow countrymen to go near it. Unless it's in your shared best interest.

You sure as hell don't want for your neighbors to come home with the psychological damages of experiencing it.

[Mr. Sunshine]

Be real. What is in it for us? Nothing. Maybe you guys can lodge a request with the Boyscouts of America. :lol:

[Revenant]

Mr. Sunshine wrote: Be real. What is in it for us? Nothing. Maybe you guys can lodge a request with the Boyscouts of America. :lol:

Now that would be a black humor spectacle :lol:

[CountryGuy]

I think its completely hypocritical of anyone complaining about unilateral action in Iraq, to suggest unilateral action elsewhere (and I use unilateral from a leadership role -- There are of course several allies helping us in Iraq).

Where's the outcry for the UN?

Where's the outcry for France? Germany? Spain?

[Kilo Tango]

CountryGuy wrote: I think its completely hypocritical of anyone complaining about unilateral action in Iraq, to suggest unilateral action elsewhere (and I use unilateral from a leadership role -- There are of course several allies helping us in Iraq).

Where's the outcry for the UN?

Where's the outcry for France? Germany? Spain?

:clap:

As for the U.N...they still don't think it's a "genocide"; neither does Amnesty International - they must be too worried about a few gitmo tools that got dunk tanked. :lol:

[Ellron]

CountryGuy wrote: I think its completely hypocritical of anyone complaining about unilateral action in Iraq, to suggest unilateral action elsewhere (and I use unilateral from a leadership role -- There are of course several allies helping us in Iraq).

Where's the outcry for the UN?

Where's the outcry for France? Germany? Spain?

O please...

Have a helping of reallity.

Why should we help them?

Economic, social, and power potential for the future. To have friends in an area with oil is always good.

Also to stop the killing because there human and we are human.

UN cant do anything because of China veto power.

I dont live in France, Germany, or Spain. France also has many humanitarian and international missions going on with their French Foreign legion.

The difference between this conflict and Iraq conflict is that it would only take a couple thousand troops and helicopters to kill many of the raiding bands.

If you have not noticed, American military is best suited for war in rural areas and the war that is going on in Sudan is rural.

[Richard Owl Mirror]

Mr. Sunshine wrote: Be real. What is in it for us? Nothing.
~snip~ :lol:

And that is what's most important, right?
Getting something in return for altruistic behavior ?

[Mr. Sunshine]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: Be real. What is in it for us? Nothing.
~snip~ :lol:

And that is what's most important, right?
Getting something in return for altruistic behavior ?

Go over there and do your part then, since obviously you can't express altruistic sympathies for our unilateral invasion in Iraq. :roll:

[Revenant]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: Be real. What is in it for us? Nothing.
~snip~ :lol:

And that is what's most important, right?
Getting something in return for altruistic behavior ?

We'll get our soldiers sent home in body bags and pour money into that wasteland with no return on the investment. That's what we'll get in return for our altrustic behavior.

[bigstick61]

Quote: Shouldn't it be Europe's problem? Their empires f#cked it up.

Personally, I think that Africa would be in a much better State if in most cases European countries had continued to maintain control over their territiories in Africa rather than grant them full independence.

[Ozzone]

Ellron wrote: CountryGuy wrote: I think its completely hypocritical of anyone complaining about unilateral action in Iraq, to suggest unilateral action elsewhere (and I use unilateral from a leadership role -- There are of course several allies helping us in Iraq).

Where's the outcry for the UN?

Where's the outcry for France? Germany? Spain?

O please...

Have a helping of reallity.

Why should we help them?

Economic, social, and power potential for the future. To have friends in an area with oil is always good.

Like Iraq?

Quote: Also to stop the killing because there human and we are human.

Like Iraq?

Quote: UN cant do anything because of China veto power.

Like Iraq?

Quote: The difference between this conflict and Iraq conflict is that it would only take a couple thousand troops and helicopters to kill many of the raiding bands.

Until they started using innocents as human shields like Iraq?

[CountryGuy]

Ellron wrote:
O please...

Have a helping of reallity.

Why should we help them?

Economic, social, and power potential for the future. To have friends in an area with oil is always good.
I don't believe oil is a reason to go to war. I don't believe putting Americans into harm's way other than to protect America and her allies is a proper response. I'm glad you think American troops are as worthless as pawns on a chessboard.

Ellron wrote: Also to stop the killing because there human and we are human.
Again, sounds like a job for the United Nations!

Ellron wrote: UN cant do anything because of China veto power.
Fine -- Then be mad at China. Where is the outrage at China for preventing help? Oh wait -- Its never gone to a vote yet, so you can't blame China.

Ellron wrote: I dont live in France, Germany, or Spain. France also has many humanitarian and international missions going on with their French Foreign legion.
And the US is in Iraq and Afghanistan. And in Bosnia. And in South Korea.

Ellron wrote: The difference between this conflict and Iraq conflict is that it would only take a couple thousand troops and helicopters to kill many of the raiding bands.
Rumsfeld, is that you?? :lol:

Based on this statement, even with the investments France has in international missions, surely they can support a few thousand troops and helicopters?

Ellron wrote: If you have not noticed, American military is best suited for war in rural areas and the war that is going on in Sudan is rural.
The America military is suited for many types of combat, urban and rural. Right now, our troops are acting as police, not soldiers -- So I don't consider Iraq a good example of US expertise in urban ops. I assure you -- A French tank can cover rural ground as well as an American one (maybe not as fast as an M1, but tracks are tracks).[/quote]

[Ellron]

Ozzone wrote: Ellron wrote: CountryGuy wrote: I think its completely hypocritical of anyone complaining about unilateral action in Iraq, to suggest unilateral action elsewhere (and I use unilateral from a leadership role -- There are of course several allies helping us in Iraq).

Where's the outcry for the UN?

Where's the outcry for France? Germany? Spain?

O please...

Have a helping of reallity.

Why should we help them?

Economic, social, and power potential for the future. To have friends in an area with oil is always good.

Like Iraq?

Quote: Also to stop the killing because there human and we are human.

Like Iraq?

Quote: UN cant do anything because of China veto power.

Like Iraq?

Quote: The difference between this conflict and Iraq conflict is that it would only take a couple thousand troops and helicopters to kill many of the raiding bands.

Until they started using innocents as human shields like Iraq?

Wow!!

I still dont beleive you dont get it.

Iraq was a foolish mistake which was horrible executed.

THe reps messed up.

This mission is feasible and can be done with much less for UNLIKE Iraq.

Ya liberating Iraq is a noble idea but its a stupid idea.

Sudan is noble and intelligent..Next.

[Ellron]

CountryGuy wrote: Ellron wrote:
O please...

Have a helping of reallity.

Why should we help them?

Economic, social, and power potential for the future. To have friends in an area with oil is always good.
I don't believe oil is a reason to go to war. I don't believe putting Americans into harm's way other than to protect America and her allies is a proper response. I'm glad you think American troops are as worthless as pawns on a chessboard.

Ellron wrote: Also to stop the killing because there human and we are human.
Again, sounds like a job for the United Nations!

Ellron wrote: UN cant do anything because of China veto power.
Fine -- Then be mad at China. Where is the outrage at China for preventing help? Oh wait -- Its never gone to a vote yet, so you can't blame China.

Ellron wrote: I dont live in France, Germany, or Spain. France also has many humanitarian and international missions going on with their French Foreign legion.
And the US is in Iraq and Afghanistan. And in Bosnia. And in South Korea.

Ellron wrote: The difference between this conflict and Iraq conflict is that it would only take a couple thousand troops and helicopters to kill many of the raiding bands.
Rumsfeld, is that you?? :lol:

Based on this statement, even with the investments France has in international missions, surely they can support a few thousand troops and helicopters?

Ellron wrote: If you have not noticed, American military is best suited for war in rural areas and the war that is going on in Sudan is rural.
The America military is suited for many types of combat, urban and rural. Right now, our troops are acting as police, not soldiers -- So I don't consider Iraq a good example of US expertise in urban ops. I assure you -- A French tank can cover rural ground as well as an American one (maybe not as fast as an M1, but tracks are tracks). [/quote]

I really dont care about the UN since there hands are tied.

And like I said before im talking about America and not other countries.

Also to say i would sacrifice troops for cheaper oil is ridicilious.

Send troops to save hundreds of thousands of people thats what im talking about.

Its ok that you have no soul and could care less about other human beings though.

[Numb]

Ellron wrote: CountryGuy wrote: I think its completely hypocritical of anyone complaining about unilateral action in Iraq, to suggest unilateral action elsewhere (and I use unilateral from a leadership role -- There are of course several allies helping us in Iraq).

Where's the outcry for the UN?

Where's the outcry for France? Germany? Spain?

O please...

Have a helping of reallity.

Why should we help them?

Economic, social, and power potential for the future. To have friends in an area with oil is always good.

Also to stop the killing because there human and we are human.

UN cant do anything because of China veto power.

I dont live in France, Germany, or Spain. France also has many humanitarian and international missions going on with their French Foreign legion.

The difference between this conflict and Iraq conflict is that it would only take a couple thousand troops and helicopters to kill many of the raiding bands.

If you have not noticed, American military is best suited for war in rural areas and the war that is going on in Sudan is rural.
Pretty sure that's what they thought in Somalia. That didn't work out too well. isn't this what the U.N. was made for? Why always the U.S.? Do you really think that the current administration could pull that off? Alot of African countries are having problems, what makes Darfur so special? Besides the government would likely outsource the job to contractors anyway.