What do ALL American warmongering windbags have in common?

[Rattrap]

First off, thanks for the reasoned and well-written reply. Second, I haven't much to say about the events in east Asia, as I simply haven't done much reading on them (all I know is the surface stuff regarding tensions in the US and Russia blooming in these places). Concerning the middle east, however, I have a big correction:

Yes, we are indeed in their "backyard" and have been for the last decade. The answer as to why should be obvious. The radicals in the region brought it upon themselves. We had no boots on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan BEFORE 9/11.
[...]
NOTHING we have done as a country prior to 9/11 has warranted, justified the bloodshed visited upon us. We didn't start invading Middle Eastern nations until AFTER we were attacked on our own soil. In the first Gulf War, we drove AWAY an invader.

We've been mucking around the middle east since the 50's. Maybe not specifically in one country or the other, but one must keep in mind that the countries' boundaries were arbitrary drawn up by Britain and France, with little or no input from the people that actually lived there. So even today, there might be a stronger sense of...'regionalism' than 'nationalism', so to speak. In '53, we've got the CIA overthrowing a democracy in Iran. In '63, we started a coup in Iraq - the list goes on. But here's the thing:

We, the U.S., spend OUR blood and treasure protecting the rest of the world that does not appreciate it. The U.S. appreciates and preserves, to the best of its ability and technology, innocent lives and foreign culture. Our enemies don't, period. So who are the true bad guys here?

I'm not saying we are the bad guys, or that our interventions haven't done good, or anything along those lines. But that doesn't matter if one's serious about stopping terrorism pointed toward the US. It doesn't matter why we have troops on the ground; as long as we do, Joe Shmoe Imam can use this foreign occupation - real or perceived - to motivate Larry, Mo and Curly Ahmed to blow themselves up on our troops. Right or wrong, good guys or not, continued presence will bring continued terrorism against us. Osama Bin Laden even spelled this out for us in one of his videos way back when.

Research has shown, pretty simply, that without foreign presence in the area, support, motivation and action against said foreign presence rapidly dries up to nothing. See Robert Pape's Dying to Win. Religion is a tool that might make generating support easier, but nationalism is the force that makes it possible. So we have to ask ourselves if it's worth it - being there. Because just as a pen inevitably drops because you let go of it due to gravity, our troops and even we at home will continue to be targets of terrorism.

Scenario: We close all of our military installations around the world and bring all of our troops home. We scale down our military only to protect the boarders of our land. No intervention in any political or human rights concerns. We build an infrastructure that is totally self reliant with our own resources.

Do you think that enemies will vanish and leave us alone?

Eventually, once the animosity from all our current actions fades.

Right or wrong, terrorism is the price we pay for having interests in a volatile area and continuously defending those interests with military action.

 

[bobjustbob]

"Eventually, once the animosity from all our current actions fades."

There is no eventually. If we pull everything out they will not flip the switch off and stop hating and trying to kill us. So we just sit back and wait till they cool their heals. Till then we don't travel for fear that there are people that don't like our politics? Keep ourselves locked up till we get the okay from others as to when we can come out?

 

[Rattrap]

There is no eventually. If we pull everything out they will not flip the switch off and stop hating and trying to kill us. So we just sit back and wait till they cool their heals. Till then we don't travel for fear that there are people that don't like our politics? Keep ourselves locked up till we get the okay from others as to when we can come out?

You're dehumanizing a great body of people and feeding into our military industrial complex, my friend. Most people everywhere just want to get on with their lives - peacefully. Given no good reason to do otherwise, that's what they'll do.

Flip it around - do we hate the Chinese, simply because of their difference in philosophy, government or religion? Now what if the Chinese were occupying US lands 'for our own protection', and overthrowing our corrupt government 'for our benefit'? In fact, I think there's a clip in a Ron Paul thread about this very scenario...not that we'd result to suicide attacks, but do we not also remark on the great honor bestowed on those in the military who die for their country?

Near the end of the book I mentioned in my last post, Pape concludes that US action in the middle east since the 80's and somewhat before made the events of 9/11 roughly twenty times more likely to happen than if we'd not been involved in middle eastern affairs during that time period. Twenty times. And honestly, this should make sense. Keep digging around the bee's nest for that delicious honey, you're going to get stung.

 

[abrogate]

:goodpost:

You're dehumanizing a great body of people and feeding into our military industrial complex, my friend. Most people everywhere just want to get on with their lives - peacefully. Given no good reason to do otherwise, that's what they'll do.

Flip it around - do we hate the Chinese, simply because of their difference in philosophy, government or religion? Now what if the Chinese were occupying US lands 'for our own protection', and overthrowing our corrupt government 'for our benefit'? In fact, I think there's a clip in a Ron Paul thread about this very scenario...not that we'd result to suicide attacks, but do we not also remark on the great honor bestowed on those in the military who die for their country?

Near the end of the book I mentioned in my last post, Pape concludes that US action in the middle east since the 80's and somewhat before made the events of 9/11 roughly twenty times more likely to happen than if we'd not been involved in middle eastern affairs during that time period. Twenty times. And honestly, this should make sense. Keep digging around the bee's nest for that delicious honey, you're going to get stung.

 

[bobjustbob]

It goes back before the 80's. WW2. Withdrawal from occupied regions from WW1 made them more autonomous. Nazi Germany would have controlled the middle east and Fascist Italy would have controlled the north and east of Africa. The UK sent troops during the Chinese civil war and the Japanese sent troops to support the warlords shortly after. Japan later invaded China. Would this be a better world had everyone sat on their hands and let the world go on without involvement?

 

[Rey C.]

FINE bro. So tell Michael Ledin and Brill Kristol why theyre wrong and stop calling them chicken hawks when they have sons in the military. Oh and by the way, we are spending even less on foreign policy than we spent during the Anti-Soviet buildup of the 80s, way less than we spent in Vietnam, and TONS less than we spent in WW2. So please dont mention money in your arguments. The number one priority investment of any country is national defense. It is the one thing the Constitution explicitly demands the Federal Government to spend money on.

Even the mighty Romans found that wars had to be paid for. So one has no choice but to mention money. There is a slight difference between our fiscal state before WWII and now. Until the 1980's, the United States was the biggest creditor nation on Earth. But now, the United States is the biggest debtor nation on Earth. Having to borrow money from the guy whose ass you desire to kick probably isn't the best strategy for effective ass kicking, me thinks.

I'm all for (actual) defense of this nation too. But any nation that thinks it can support roughly one half of the world's military spending, while having a growing deficit, a failing secondary educational system and a crumbling infrastructure, is delusional.

Make no mistake about it... it's all about money. It always has been all about money and it always will be.