Is it time for the US to revert to isolationism?

Question

Many on the left gripe constantly about everything to do with US foreign policy. They accuse the US of being autocratic and claim that we do not "respect" other nations.

Perhaps they're right. Perhaps we should refrain from bailing out every nation in the world which experiences a natural disaster or is invaded by a neighbor. The next time an earthquake hits Towelheadistan, we should simply send a telegram expressing our condolences.

Perdendosi: You, like many other leftists, do not seem to grasp that words have actual definitions. Islam is a religion, not a race. I absolutely detest Muslims. That does not render me a racist. It means I have common sense.

Answer 1

No, that's not the answer. It would be too easy, it's amazing they didn't complain when Clinton did the same things that Bush is doing. Does anyone remember Clinton's 1998 state of the union address talking about how great of a threat Saddam Hussein was?? How many military interventions did Clinton order? The answer is more than any other president in U.S. history.

Answer 2

Your arugment, for what it is, is significantly underminded by your use of the very racist "Towelheadistan." Human life is no less valuable merely because it exists on a different continent or is dressed in different clothing.

No, of cousre the US should not revert to isolationism, but it's the U.S.'s imperialist policies (military, foreign relations, and economic) that have caused much of the strife with the "Towelheadistan" world. Rather than thinking about the consequences of our actions, what effects it will have in the world, and how those effects could end up to harm us negatively, we merely exert our will on the world, based upon whatever current best interest we have (Support Saddam, fight Saddam, patterns all over the world).

There's a difference between coming to the aid of a struggling society, or a society at war that requests military help, or a society facing genocide after one repressed faction suddenly gets power and plowing into and over any country that doesn't suit our fancy that day; ignoring other parties' self-interest in a "do it or die" foreign policy that leaves the world resenting America.

Answer 3

Even if the United States wanted to revert to isolationism, it has now become an impossibility. We've spent the last 70 or so years being globally involved, if we tried to reverse course now, the result would be traumatic to our society, our economy, and our way of life.

Answer 4

It would be nice for us if that WAS possible, but in the world today I don't think it IS possible. We are the most generous country in the world, but all we seem, many times, to get in return is resentment and downright hatred. I realize it's jealousy on the part of the recipients, but it's real old. For example, where would France be today if we hadn't bailed them out in WW II. Or, Germany, if we contribute so much toward rebuilding after WW II. Etc., etc.

Answer 5

In the end, there's only one truth.

We are the world power. We need to act like it.

It doesn't matter what other countries think, or what fearful people say about it. We have a responsibility to the well-being of this planet and its inhabitants, since we are the best equipped to do this.

We can't be ruled by our fears. We should or should not make actions because they're right or wrong, not because they're comfortable or uncomfortable.

Answer 6

I don't see isolationism as a probable outcome. There is certainly some impetus towards it among the American people - they don't want immigration, they're losing jobs to offshoring, they want out of foriegn wars, they fear foreign terrorists - but, America's /leaders/ want to continue to project influence abroad. The Reps might prefer to do it with pre-emtpive war and free trade, and the Dems with Kyoto and foriegn aid, but the chances of the US pulling the isolationist covers over it's collective head again are slight.

Answer 7

OH! how i wish that was all we had done to foreign people.
We loan at high interest and plant our polluting industries on their soil, use their cheap labor to make high profits, then repossess their land.
We import our economic models of excess consumerism and create wider gaps between the world's rich and poor.
And now we have left millions of bomblets and mines for future generations to suffer in their own destroyed countries.
Yes let's get out of other places and clean our own. We' ll send them a harmless telegram asking for a good rate on their oil.

Answer 8

So what happened the last two times we were isolationist,
"Those who dont learn from their history are condemmed to relive it." (Might have misquoted a bit but the same idea.)
But by no means should we be hyper agressive we could do a bit more diplomacy and such. But there are only a few countries that that would work with.

Answer 9

We can't be isolationists anymore because we are entrenched and invested in the global economy. We need to make sure our interests are protected and supported around the world, just like EVERY OTHER NATION does. (yes liberals, other nations besides the US look out only for themselves)

Answer 10

yeah then the world will hate us for not helping them, it's a lose lose situation! but i'm all for it, lets seal the borders and tell the rest of the world to go to pound sand.