English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

say like saudi arabia, iraq, turkey, japan yada,yada,yada....would the world be better off and if so why or why not?

2006-10-12 08:36:26 · 15 answers · asked by BRYAN H 5 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

15 answers

Can't you hear the sucking sound....??
Most of the nations in this world would collapse into utter chaos.

2006-10-12 08:39:30 · answer #1 · answered by usaf.primebeef 6 · 1 0

The US is in those countries largely because it supports US interests. How else do you think the US gets to use the majority of the worlds resources?

Where do you think oil comes from? What about most of the steel the US uses? Fertilizer all comes form overseas. Consumer electronics? Cars? Most of the sophisticated goods sold in the US come from foreign manufacturers. If the US pulled out resources would simply get sold to others and the US economy die. And don't forget that Japan and China and India and numerous others increasingly own the US in the form of their massive investment ... which can be taken out.

As unpalatable as it may be the US has an abysmal work ethic and productivity next to China and Japan and others is pathetic. It is really only history and momentum that are maintaining the US on top right now, and as little as I look forward to it it is inevitable that the power in the world will shift East over coming decades.

Sure the US does a lot for other countries and contributes to stability around the world ... but it is also a huge parasite on the world so it can maintain a standard of living others can only dream about.

Pulling out would cause chaos in the world, inclusive of the US. In the short term (several years maybe) this might benefit the US, but in the longer term the US would more rapidly end up where it is going anyway ... an economic second rate country.

2006-10-12 15:59:21 · answer #2 · answered by agb90spruce 7 · 0 0

The price of "beans" would go up, and the "vacuum" would be filled by another taking away our "business" and money. America runs on money, and trade -- it takes many "roads of commerce" to supply our needs, and wants. Trade produces jobs , not only here in America,but elsewhere as well. Our standard of living would be lowered as well, if our trade was stopped with other nations."You always have to give up somthing,in order to get something". The trick is to get more than you give up -- and we are good at this. This may be part of the reason why some don"t especially care for us around the world. Somebody has to be on the bottom of the food chain -- so to speak. Have a nice day.

2006-10-12 16:02:08 · answer #3 · answered by Spock 5 · 0 0

In the USA we would have an influx of healthy, young, men without a lot of education pouring into the country at once. This would double the unemployment rate. The militaries would discharge as many as they could in order to cut costs. The illegal aliens coming across the border would decrease over time as the soldiers took up jobs in construction, food service, retail sales, automobile repair, and farming. The US would have an extra 170 billion dollars in the year following the return and closure of all bases. The 170 billion dollars is annual. Federal government could balance the budget in Congress.

2006-10-12 15:45:38 · answer #4 · answered by dnewman.ncsp 1 · 0 0

a gradual pull out or an instantaneous one? there would be mass confusion is we did an immediate withdrawl, our economy would suffer and we would find an increase in the crime rates of our communities, as almost half a million people would be back.

As of January 2005, there are some 250,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen deployed in support of combat, peacekeeping, and deterrence operations. This figure does not include those forces normally present in Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom or Japan unless bases at those locations are actively supporting a combat operation. Furthermore, tours of duty in these locations are routine and not considered hardship tours. If one were to include these forces the number of deployed troops worldwide would be around 350,000.

2006-10-12 15:40:44 · answer #5 · answered by ms.chic 3 · 0 0

There would be world wide panic . Too many countries depend on the US for food, medical, protection etc... Most likely China , being the 2nd world power , would try and take over with Russia at the helm and any country that could not protect its self would be conquered and settled . Russia would drop the facade of being a Democracy and join China ,of course later Cuba, into bring the rest of the world into a Communist Nation..Our allies would not be able to defend themselves , not when looking at at least three (Russia,China,N.Korea) countries with nuclear capabilities.. We'd All be doomed, well at least the idea of a free society would be...

2006-10-12 15:51:07 · answer #6 · answered by bereal1 6 · 0 0

I believe,,, after a little adjustment, the rest of the world would be just fine. It's the USA that only thinks it has to maintain the rest of the world and that's not true. Remember we are the kids ( bullies ) in this world. The other countries were around a lot longer.

2006-10-12 15:44:54 · answer #7 · answered by neil r 3 · 0 0

The USA would be better I amsure. If we also could stop food aid going to them and foreign aid, the majority of the world would be living in squalar worse than they do now.

2006-10-12 15:39:14 · answer #8 · answered by Have gun, will travel. 4 · 1 0

i don't know what would happen since it has never been done before, but i can't imagine it being any worse than it is now. i know both dems and reps will think i am archaic and unreasonable but i think we should try it. washington warned in his farewell address about getting involved in the affairs of other countries and if he was right about nothing else he damn sure hit THAT one on the head.

2006-10-12 15:47:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes! And we'd be better off. The world would be more likely to not hate us and we'd have much more money to concentrate on our own "homeland' security, eg, spruce up security on our ports and borders. Money to spend on training our intelligence personnel to speak foreign languages.

2006-10-12 15:41:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers