• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Poll: Isolationism soars among Americans

It's entirely likely that the events of 9/11 wouldn't have lapped up to our shores if we hadn't meddled so much in the middle east.

And if you had a clue as to why Islamics are waging a jihad against the West you wouldn't say that sort of thing. It is not because we meddled in their affairs. It is due to their strict interpretation of the Koran. We are the complete opposite of what they preach and represent an agent of corruption for young Islamic youths.

The strictest interpretations of Koranic laws and commandments is a complete submission to God. While there is nothing with that, it becomes a problem when this strict interpretation leads people to think that they must destroy anything which drifts one away from God.
 
And if you had a clue as to why Islamics are waging a jihad against the West you wouldn't say that sort of thing. It is not because we meddled in their affairs. It is due to their strict interpretation of the Koran. We are the complete opposite of what they preach and represent an agent of corruption for young Islamic youths.

The strictest interpretations of Koranic laws and commandments is a complete submission to God. While there is nothing with that, it becomes a problem when this strict interpretation leads people to think that they must destroy anything which drifts one away from God.

No, actually it's because we meddle in Middle Eastern politics. You really should read what Osama has been saying.
 
And if you had a clue as to why Islamics are waging a jihad against the West you wouldn't say that sort of thing. It is not because we meddled in their affairs. It is due to their strict interpretation of the Koran. We are the complete opposite of what they preach and represent an agent of corruption for young Islamic youths.

The strictest interpretations of Koranic laws and commandments is a complete submission to God. While there is nothing with that, it becomes a problem when this strict interpretation leads people to think that they must destroy anything which drifts one away from God.

Why don't they target the rest of the world? If you wanna play Uncle Sam to the rest of the world then you have to face the consequences.
 
A greater degree of isolationalism would do us and the world some good. Let Europe guard the walls for a change while we nurse our internal issues. Let us take a seat in the back for a while. Let somebody else take all the blame in the world for everything that goes wrong.

Even our allies like to pretend that the whole world hates us? Well **** 'em.
 
No, actually it's because we meddle in Middle Eastern politics. You really should read what Osama has been saying.

Horribly exaggerated for the those who need human monsters to define reality for them.

* Muslims are to blame for the plight of other Muslims. History 101.

* It was the Soviets that immediately sold weapons to Israel (despite America's objections) that saved Israel and later started selling to the Arabs to fight Israel leaving America to have to defend the British and UN created Israel.

* It was the Soviets that oppressed hundreds of millions of Muslims in the Caucusus and invaded Afghanistan for the sake of oppressing tens of millions more.

* It was the British and the French that have colonial roots in Syria, Iraq, and Egypt that lasted until the 1950s.


In fact, the very ironic thing here is that there are two Middle Eastern nations that were never colonized. They are Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. One wonders if a European colony would have left a legacy for "success" for them as it did in the others. They hold the most radical and extremist populations in the region. What exactly are we blamed for? Doing business with Saudi Arabia as we do with China and many others? The Shah of Iran? You think any Arab gives a damn about a bunch of Shia in Iran? And what did Iranians do for themselves after kicking the western world out? Khomeini taught them that the fear of change can lead to very bad things. Was it not for America winning influence in the region over the Soviets it is guaranteed that the whole region would have shared the fate of the Caucusus. Weren't we there for Muslims in Afghanistan against those who would have oppressed them? Wasn't America there to save Muslims in Kuwait from Muslims from Iraq? How much Muslim slaughter did America vanquish in Bosnia? And when people seek to blame America for the senseless slaughter in Iraq, they seem to gloss over who was conducting the slaughter and that it happened because they no longer had the dictator Muslims probably deserve in order for them to behave.

Another excuse frequently given is how we spare Israel even after its "slaughter" of Palestinians. But the fact here is that Muslim Jordanians and Syrians slaughtered far more Palestinians in Black September and the Lebanese Civil War than Israel has managed to kill in over 60 years of combat maneuvers. They don't seem to care about that though.

"Meddling" in their affairs only allows them to escape the reality that they have largely been their own worst enemies and without the outside (which they hate) they would be nothing. The freeset and most prosperous Muslims in the world live in the West and most of them live in America. For this we are the "Great Satan."

Qutb has been the most powerful man in shaping modern Islam. Not since Muhammed has so many rushed towards such radical solidarity. When your religious culture is failing before the eyes of the entire world....find a foriegn devil to blame.
 
I can't believe people still follow that ideology. This line of thinking right here has caused the biggest problems in the world for most of the last 60 years. This was the reasoning for our intervention in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Cuba, and many other places. Intervention that in almost every case resulted in total disaster. Meanwhile, Communism doesn't work and the Soviet Union would have collapsed on its own.


They follow that ideology because it was very real. Oil determined the victor. The lessening-to-eventual-blocking of the importation of oil into Germany at the end of the World War was one of the factors why Germany lost. And the Cold War race of influence had a lot to do with controlling the very resource that makes powerful militaries. Why else do you think the Soviet Union began dabbling in the Middle East immediately after World War II? Why else do you think we cared to play the game against them?

A Soviet Union with the influence in the Middle East that America won would not have simply "collapsed on its own."


...and by the way...the oppression in the Soviet occupied Caucusus was very real. This same sort of oppression would have flowed right into a Soviet occupied Afghanistan. And so on until all the oiul producing nations were oppressed and occupied by Soviet armies ever growing in strength because the oil would have "belonged" to them.


You are subscribing to today's attitude that fate had it all planned out and nothing anybody else did altered the course of history. What it boils down to is denying the "corrupt and evil" U.S. any credit for it's sweat and blood over the last half century.
 
Qutb has been the most powerful man in shaping modern Islam. Not since Muhammed has so many rushed towards such radical solidarity. When your religious culture is failing before the eyes of the entire world....find a foriegn devil to blame.

Absolutely true.

We keep on trying to put Qutbism on a "liberal" and "conservative" line, like we do with other western political philosophy, but it supersedes liberalism and conservatism. This is not to say that Qutbism is a mystical and foreign paradigm, ohhhh no, Qutb read Western political philosophy, and you can only believe that it affected him.

There is a term in the Western lexicon that does describe Qutbism, and it's called Post Structural Anarchism. I just finished a paper on Qa'ida al-Jihad as a Post Structural anarchist movement, if you or anyone is interested.
 
Absolutely true.

We keep on trying to put Qutbism on a "liberal" and "conservative" line, like we do with other western political philosophy, but it supersedes liberalism and conservatism. This is not to say that Qutbism is a mystical and foreign paradigm, ohhhh no, Qutb read Western political philosophy, and you can only believe that it affected him.

There is a term in the Western lexicon that does describe Qutbism, and it's called Post Structural Anarchism. I just finished a paper on Qa'ida al-Jihad as a Post Structural anarchist movement, if you or anyone is interested.

I am. Send it my way. I'll give you my email through PM.
 
Qutb has been the most powerful man in shaping modern Islam. Not since Muhammed has so many rushed towards such radical solidarity. When your religious culture is failing before the eyes of the entire world....find a foriegn devil to blame.

All true, as far as I know. And yet, we ARE the foreign devil they blame. Part of it is our support for Israel and the governments of Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

Another big (bigger?) part of it is the cultural threat we represent. The muslim world is in danger of losing its traditions to western culture. We are the great exporter of western culture. This is a conservative movement against us.
 
Absolutely true.

We keep on trying to put Qutbism on a "liberal" and "conservative" line, like we do with other western political philosophy, but it supersedes liberalism and conservatism. This is not to say that Qutbism is a mystical and foreign paradigm, ohhhh no, Qutb read Western political philosophy, and you can only believe that it affected him.

There is a term in the Western lexicon that does describe Qutbism, and it's called Post Structural Anarchism. I just finished a paper on Qa'ida al-Jihad as a Post Structural anarchist movement, if you or anyone is interested.

I'd like it as well. I sent you my email addy.
 
Why don't they target the rest of the world? If you wanna play Uncle Sam to the rest of the world then you have to face the consequences.

Why don't they target the rest of the world? Madrid? London? Paris? Beirut? Mogadishu? Tanzania? Singapore? Manila? What do all these places have in common?
 
Last edited:
Why don't they target the rest of the world? Madrid? London? Paris? Beirut? Mogadishu? Tanzania? Singapore? Manila? What do all these places have in common?

they all hate Americans :)

I'll add to the list. Glasgow, Bali, Jakarta, Istanbul, Casablanca, and Seattle.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I like debating with you, lizzie!! No flailing about trying to change each others minds. Just a matter of fact exchange about what we believe, and then a shrug since we aren't seeing eye to eye on this. I love it!

No sense in flailing about when philosophical beliefs and ideology are firmly rooted.;)
 
No sense in flailing about when philosophical beliefs and ideology are firmly rooted.;)

And that surely applies to the both of us! ;)
 
I wonder how much of it is simply the fact that America has some serious problems of its own it needs to deal with at the moment.

This is undoubtedly a part of what is going on in this poll. American's are gravely concerned about our level of debt, the economic changes that have drawn jobs out of our country and are, in my view, just tired of playing policeman in a world where eve the majority of our friends stay on the sideline in times of trouble. I believe that we are becoming concerned that our own government does not represent our interests but that of the governing class (read those elected to office) itself.

Cue the villagers with torches storming the castle. ;)
 
No doubt.:)

Well, since we are here...

Do you feel that we don't have the resources to promote democracy through military means?
 
Well, since we are here...

Do you feel that we don't have the resources to promote democracy through military means?

I don't think it's our place to protmote democracy. I think that we should do business with other nations, but I don't think we should try to influence their governmental structures. Be friends, not family.;)
 
I don't think it's our place to protmote democracy. I think that we should do business with other nations, but I don't think we should try to influence their governmental structures. Be friends, not family.;)

I see. I think it is up to us whether we want it to be our place. We decide.
 
Why don't they target the rest of the world? Madrid? London? Paris? Beirut? Mogadishu? Tanzania? Singapore? Manila? What do all these places have in common?

Sure but nothing happened like 9/11 and we don't fight wars and kill innocent civillians. Are you going to tell me that 9/11 is some conspiracy theory?
 
That seems to be the irreconcilable philosophical divide. I believe that populations have the leadership they need based on their own strengths and weaknesses. As those populations evolve or change, government structures change. Until a majority of a population desires change to the point that they are willing to exert the will forcing that change, then the status quo will remain. I see signs even in our own population of weakening wills and minds, which will lead us to accept increasing government control over our lives. Weak-willed and weak-minded poeple can't handle freedom. They need control.
 
That seems to be the irreconcilable philosophical divide. I believe that populations have the leadership they need based on their own strengths and weaknesses. As those populations evolve or change, government structures change. Until a majority of a population desires change to the point that they are willing to exert the will forcing that change, then the status quo will remain. I see signs even in our own population of weakening wills and minds, which will lead us to accept increasing government control over our lives. Weak-willed and weak-minded poeple can't handle freedom. They need control.

I believe that there's very little evidence to suggest, especially in modernity, that people on the inside of Capitol Hill better at knowing what is good for the people than those outside of Capitol Hill.

The function of government should not be to rule, to expand authority, or to control. The function of government should be to casually phase itself out, it should be a crutch to keep order long enough for the peoples of a nation to be so intertwined that the differences (within the people) are not just tolerated, but cherished.
 
The function of government should not be to rule, to expand authority, or to control.

That is the nature of government. The population of the US is getting increasingly dependent and in need of control. I'm not, you're not, many of us here are not, but the trend seems to be moving in that direction.
 
That is the nature of government. The population of the US is getting increasingly dependent and in need of control. I'm not, you're not, many of us here are not, but the trend seems to be moving in that direction.

The more the government clamps down on population in the name of control the more the population with retaliate. A true authoritarian regime requires the work of Science-Fiction; (I suggest Zamyatin's "We", where Orwell got the idea for 1984).

Your premise is that there is a "natural state of Government", but that requires the government to be from nature and not a construction of man.
 
That is the nature of government. The population of the US is getting increasingly dependent and in need of control. I'm not, you're not, many of us here are not, but the trend seems to be moving in that direction.

Why does this sound like a justification for an authoratarian regime? Hitler and Mussolini both used the same kind of argument, although you could argue that Mussolini was fairly benign in his regime.

Whatever happened to "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."?

Notice that this states that the government of the United States is formed BY THE PEOPLE. The government exists on our sufference, not the people existing on the government's sufference. Government is there to provide a unifying point for the people, insure that justice is maintained within our borders, promote peace among the people, defend our people against threats, allow us to live in peace and the ability to improve our situation, and allow us to do this without threat or violence overcoming our rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

Where, in any of this, did the government EVER achieve the right to "control" the population in any way, shape, or form? If the people have become "dependent" upon the government, then the government has failed the people by failure in their basic purpose. When this happens, then the government should be replaced wholesale, just as we did for the British crown.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom