- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 104,340
- Reaction score
- 67,431
- Location
- Uhland, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
get all of them out of there and bring them home.
Return to the pre-9/11 plan and hope for the best?
get all of them out of there and bring them home.
Return to the pre-9/11 plan and hope for the best?
No, we were heavily invested in the region before 9/11. I'm talking about quitting the global cop stuff and going back to being a country.
But we have to pay a steep ransom (bribe?) to keep many nations from wiping out Israel. We pay make nice money all over the place to keep "free" trade going as the corporate bosses command in exchange for campaign cash. We must also use our military, in some fashion, to prevent massive cuts in defense pork from happening. Things are complicated, because many depend on having a crisis, of some sort, to keep the gov't money flowing "correctly".
we would let it be known that an invasion of Israel would result in a large scale war. the rest of it is on SA as the regional hegemon.
we aren't the world's army. the world does not pay a tax for the service, and it also doesn't get a vote in our elections. global police missions are no more our responsibility than they are Switzerland's. it's way past time that we accept this and start scaling back and bringing people home. i think you'll be surprised at how much of a less appealing target we will become. then we can spend the money on more important things, like figuring out a way to replace gasoline with something domestic that we don't have to defend our access to militarily.
It seems that the two bolded statements above conflict. We are not the world's army but we are the Israeli army? Are there any other nations that we "must" both permanently aid and defend?
the relationship with Israel has to continue in some form. that situation is unique, because if we were to completely abandon all commitments, it's likely that somebody would make a move. Israel is a nuclear power, and would probably use those weapons as a last resort. we'd surely get sucked in if that happened, so we have to keep ties.
we should minimize the commitment, though. i'd be pretty satisfied with what i proposed in the previous post. basically, limit it to preventing an invasion. everything else should be handled by regional players.
Read more @: America Is 'Less Safe' Than 2 Years Ago, Intelligence Committee Chairs Say
So much for that Patriot Act, the NSA, and Homeland Security doing a lot of good.. Sounds like all this **** was a giant waste of money. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Because whupping all your neighbors at once in six days is a sure sign that a country is a weakling just waiting to be bullied?that situation is unique, because if we were to completely abandon all commitments, it's likely that somebody would make a move. Israel is a nuclear power, and would probably use those weapons as a last resort.
Because whupping all your neighbors at once in six days is a sure sign that a country is a weakling just waiting to be bullied?
You said it was likely that Israel would be attacked if the US wasn't backing it. I am asking if the outcome of the six-day war helped you reach your conclusion that Israel is suspended over a precarious precipice by the thread of US backing.i didn't make this claim.
You said it was likely that Israel would be attacked if the US wasn't backing it. I am asking if the outcome of the six-day war helped you reach your conclusion that Israel is suspended over a precarious precipice by the thread of US backing.
Because Israel's neighbor's think starting a war they would lose is a good idea? Or what exactly?yeah, i'd say without our backing, Israel is more likely to be attacked. i didn't say obliterated.
Because Israel's neighbor's think starting a war they would lose is a good idea? Or what exactly?
We're backing Israel because they are the big dog on the block and we want influence on that block.