DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Where Did All the Anti-War Protestors Go?

Look I am pretty conservative in my political leanings....BUT

Isolationism is NOT going to solve ANYTHING....It was not the answer in 1914...it was not an answer in 1938...It is not an answer now.

The Chinese were once the greatest most advanced nation on earth...perhaps close to a hundred years advanced than any other civilization. They built their wall...closed themselves off....and it has taken them close to 700 years to become relevant again.

Now yes we have technologies that rerach out into the world past our "wall", like the internet.....BUT...how will we be able to keep up technologically, politically, economically, if we cannot protect our interests abroad?

Do we need all of the 1000+ bases overseas that are currently open? No. we definitely can afford to shut many down. But we definitely cannot afford to shut down all or even most of those base down.

Your view to close these bases and "save" all this money...is as short sighted as most of the Congress' Budget Plans. It might help us in the short run...but in the long run..it would KILL us.

Quote:

---

It might help us in the short run...but in the long run..it would KILL us.

---

Care to elaborate as to how exactly it would kill us? Not necessarily doubting it, but would like to see why you think it would. In the world today, it'd be borderline impossible to be completely isolated. However, I don't think it would hurt at all to maybe pull ourselves back a tad. It's getting a little out of hand.

How do you intend to protect our interest abroad...technologically, economically, politcally from your little clam shell back home?????

Do you think harsh words will dissuade the Chinese, Russians, or Indians from completely overtaking all of the Oil available in those lands by any means at their disposal?

What of the vast Lithium deposits found in Afghanistan...do we now just abandon them and allow any dictator, Iran perhaps, or other large developing country take control of those deposits???

Information is NOT the only thing that spurns technology. RESOURCES are a major part of it as well. And resources cannot be controlled remotely.

What about Isreal??? We leave...you basically Invoke Mass genocide. I don't care if you are for or against the formation of Isreal as a Jewish State....Giving Isreal nothing but the Nuclear option to defend themselves is not exactly a pretty picture.

Now we have left all these areas...and now the local economies of those areas collapse.....You think we were hated before???? How is our political situation looking like now???

How about when we actually are in a situation where we DO need to get troops or maybe just supplies into an area....Now it takes us 5 to 10 times longer because we don't have the bases to either transfer people and supplies from or route people and supplies to.....That costs money as well.

Also we haven't been attacked by an invasion force on our main land in forever....PART of the reason is that by having bases outside our lands...we actually buffer ourselves. we bring all those people onto the mainland........Well where will people have to go to attack Americans??? That's right...Mainland America.....Not Cool.

Those are just a couple quick things. Like it or not...the US has interests that our economy and political situation hinges on that are outside of the borders of our Country. And those interests can only be protected militarily.

Quote:

---

Isolationism is NOT going to solve ANYTHING

---

I am not talking about isolationism. I did say we need to keep a few important bases overseas open, but at over 700 installations worldwide we can trim them down and I don't buy one whit of the cry that people make that it would hurt our presence overseas.

You talked about history, remember the Great White Fleet? We can still use our navy--our carrier groups--to still project power.

Curbing back our military is not isolationism. Isolationism is the withdrawal of a nations presence on the world stage, militarily is one aspect, but economic aspects like trade and economic assistance as well as diplomatic endeavors define isolationism.

We can still be involved, engaged, and armed to the teeth, we just need to redefine the manner in which we will do so, a manner which, I feel has been sorely lacking post cold war. It's been ad hoc, episodic, inconsistent.

Quote:

---

remember the Great White Fleet?

---

No...actually that was before my time... GM might remember them though......Seriously though...you need to investigate your history more...By the time the "Great Whit Fleet" was put together, the ships were already obsolete. The tue value of the Great White Fleet was a PR stunt...Not actually any true military might that they hoped. Not only that....Do you know how long it takes a Carrier Group to cross the Atlantic???? The reason our Navy can project Power is be cause we have Naval bases all over the World...but we we close them except for a few in the Atlantic and Pacific....then How do we adequately project Power in the Middle East and the Indian Ocean when needed in a timely manner???

Quote:

---

I did say we need to keep a few important bases overseas open

---

A few is 3 or 4 That doesn't cut it....And you VASTLY underestimate the importance of the 700 some bases we have. Do we need to close some down...absolutely. What is an acceptable number????...I can't tell you because I don't have the numbers on each and every one nor their mission statements. But I can tell you this minimalistic/isolationistic(call it what you want) approach is not going to cut it.

Instead of closing some of these places down we should be CHARGING to have their services in these places(if we are not already and if we are we should be charging MORE)

If we pull back, someone will fill in the hole that we leave. Who do you want that to be?

J/C

I haven't read all the responses in the thread, but I did have this thought: could it be that the lack of anti-war demonstrations has something to do with the last combat troops leaving Iraq nine months ago?

Iraq was always the more unpopular of the two wars. Now that it's become more of a policing situation and violence has calmed down greatly, doesn't it make sense there would be less fuss?

50000 troops are still in Iraq. Yes, the claim is that there are no 'combat' troops left. However, the concern is that if we completely leave that the Iraqi's will not be able to defend their border. How do we help that effort if we do not have 'combat' troops there?

Many of that number are helping rebuild and educate. That is a good thing.

I am actually pretty satisfied with how Obama has handled Iraq. The rhetoric has been garbage and CYA on his campaign stuff, but the actual actions have been more along what we should be doing. One of the best things he has handled IMO.