I think we would because all of our leaders thus far are really religious helping them to feel a moral obligation to help out the less fortunate around the world, despite whether or not it was to our advantage. We probably also might think that since we were self-sufficient, we'd adopt this ethnocentric idealogy and try to take over the world!
muahahahaha...
2006-08-06 08:34:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by WiseWisher 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If America was completely self-sufficient that would mean that we would have perfected alternative energy solutions. We wouldn't be the only country using this technology. We probably wouldn't have invented the technology either. In any case, the middle east would become a basket case of corruption and an economic collapse would occur in the old rich nations.
So to answer your question, the answer is it is highly unlikely that America would not get involved in a hell-hole that has no economic interests to itself.
2006-08-06 12:28:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dr. D 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you study the history of this nation you would find that the framers of the Constitution wanted to, as much as they could, avoid foreign entanglements unless they promoted American interests in trade and commerce. As a people, they had seen all the back and forth in wars between the European states and did not want to be just another warring party in similar contacts in the future. You will notice from the early wars that America got involved in, that they had to do specifically with American interests, or to rectify wrongs done American citizens and merchants.
One example, the Barbary Pirates scourged the Mediterranean. The European countries basically paid the Pirates tribute not to rob their merchant ships, which amounted to a form of robbery in itself. The US, on the other hand, when its merchant ships were accosted by these same Barbary Pirates, sent in a force of naval ships and marines and cleaned out the nest of pirates and stopped both the piracy and the collection of tribute, which not only benefitted the USA, but also all the other countries involved in trade in the region.
This one example is how the US government used to operate. We also did not supply foreign aid to countries, nor charity to our citizens. Please see this story about an issue of charity by Congressman Davey Crockett for a better understanding of how the government should not become a charity http://www.house.gov/paul/nytg.htm
Few know it, but 25% or more of the current US Foreign Aid budget goes currently to Israel. Think about that. Of the billions spent on foreign aid, a whole 25% goes just to that one little country in the Middle East? You can only ask yourself why that is, particularly in light of the Jonathan Pollard spy case which did this country no small amount of damage because of our supposed Israeli 'ally' spying on us and selling our government secrets to the Russians. And while Israel receives all this money, hurricane victims in New Orleans and elswhere do without aid from their own government so Israel can continue to go to war with all its Arab neighbors - paid for by US money and supplied with US armaments. Do you see anything worng with this picture?
2006-08-06 12:43:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by amartouk 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
America is completely self sufficient, we're fighting wars that have went on for years maybe since time began, I learned about a year ago to turn off the news and open your bible, the government tells you PART of the story, we're taking over the rest of the world and no one wants to tell this story. Separation of church and state has always been a problem, it helped crucify Jesus Christ, it helped burn Joan of Arc at the stake, now we just sit back and see who wins this one. PS the answer is in the Bible. SHHH...
2006-08-06 12:25:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by marquita 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, we would be involved in other disputes and affairs because we would get drug into them.
America had an isolationist policy in 1940 and you know what happened from that. Just because we don't want to get involved in world affairs will not dis sway the world from trying to get involved in ours. When our interest start getting effected we will have to get involved.
2006-08-06 12:59:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by JFra472449 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, but if the country was self-sufficient Americans would all be a bunch of poor farmers.
2006-08-06 12:33:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by bumpocooper 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
we where so much more independent 100 years ago then today .ITS the conservative mentality that drives us to take the resources of others while conserving our own .
INSTEAD of becoming self sufficent and the worlds largest producer of advanced technology and equipment to the world .WE became war mongers no one respects any-more and this is all about our handeling of the state of ISRAEL .
THIS has dragged america down the wrong path for 50 years .LETS cut our losses and abandon this middle east thing all together.
2006-08-06 12:58:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by playtoofast 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes...We mostly are any way but other countries are looking for free handouts and if the U.S. does cough up cash other countries would hate us..........OH THEY ALREADY DO! We just need to cut them off.
2006-08-06 12:22:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by chuck 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, we help our Allies, like every good Country does
2006-08-06 12:20:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by DC D 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
no. we'd be involved. probably more since nothing we need is at stake. america's a bossy country.
2006-08-06 12:20:41
·
answer #10
·
answered by nikkiy likes you 8D 2
·
0⤊
0⤋