2007-06-30 16:36:01 · 14 answers · asked by barry c 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Sometimes i wish! It seems like our presense is being taken for granted and increasingly not welcomed. I'd like to see how well the rest of the world fairs without the USA's troops around them. When you think of the idea though, you can't abandon the people who want us to be in their countries, even if some don't want us there. If we left, we'd let down the people who want us there. I would say we should stay in the rest of the world. And i think we are codependant on the world, but we need to keep the bond between the rest of the world and the US or we could have some big troubles.
2007-06-30 18:24:09 · answer #1 · answered by Logan 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We have some duties in the world. The 1st duty is to be honest citizens of the world rather than the policeman that writes his own laws. The 2nd duty is to HELP countries that can not make it on their own. I do agree that we should close bases in other countries and especially in countries that are strong enough to care for themselves. England, Germany, Italy, Japan. We should push the UN to stand on it's own. Personnally I think that the UN should move to Jerusalem and that should become a UN city free from all countries.
2007-07-02 11:41:22 · answer #2 · answered by ustoev 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not a bad idea! It might also help to repair our reputation in the global community if we did butt out for awhile. It was the US after all that supported Saddam when it suited our agenda at the time and look where that ultimately led. I don't mean for that to be flippant, but to point out that our tendency to "leap before we look" based upon short-term political agendas has had negative effects in the Middle East and in South America. This doesn't mean that I'm against free trade or coming to the aid of a country to stop genocide. It does mean that we quit manipulating political unrest in regions to serve our own economic self- interests. I'd like to see our country regain it's reputation as a fair country to be respected, not just a powerful one to be feared and resented.
2007-07-01 12:29:58 · answer #3 · answered by sagacious_ness 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we did that for say 4 years the term of the president who had the nuts do do it. I think it would force Europe to spend some of its bloated euros on an actually fighting force that could fend for it self.Israel would be in bad shape though and i doubt we should leave them to be devoured by their racist enemies, It sounds like an interesting and healthy solution for the short term. kind of a regrouping
2007-07-01 01:47:44 · answer #4 · answered by xsesivelyso2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As good as that sounds, it's almost physically impossible. The world is smaller and the economy is global. Without influence out there we would be driven under.
Besides, we were isolationist from 1911-1940 and you saw what happened.
WWI and WWII. It doesn't matter if we stay in our borders or not, the world will do what the world will do and it will have a direct impact on us. Despite what Americans may think, we are codependant on the rest of the world.
2007-06-30 23:47:21 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, unless another country threatens the U.S. or its interests. This includes ALL nation building, so when Tutsis slaughter Hutus in a country that does not threaten the U.S. the U.S. sits it out. Many hypocrites on this, they're all for staying out until the see some "good" nation building to be done.
Edit: I was talking militarily only, of course we should continute to trade with anybody who wants to trade with us. The saying "either the goods come in or the troops do" is very valid.
2007-06-30 23:51:21 · answer #6 · answered by RP McMurphy 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
My idea is a foreign policy backed up by hellfire and destruction from above. No more putting boots on the ground, we let nations know that we will use superior air power and missiles to destroy their infrastructure and military and then we will leave and not rebuild it. Kick a$$ take names and move on. Mess with us again and we will be back to do it again. No more slugging it out with rebels and ingrates who don't realize or appreciate that we are rebuilding their country.
2007-07-02 11:25:41 · answer #7 · answered by Seano 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mostly, yes. As most countries do. Let the children settle it between themselves. They have to learn. Being part of the UN and deferring to the UN would be a big start.
2007-06-30 23:46:42 · answer #8 · answered by Jen 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Pretty much what we tried to do before World War I.
Then we were sucked into it to protect ourselves.
Then we tried it again before World War II.
Then we were sucked into it because of Perl Harbor.
No ... isolationism is bad.
Constructive diplomacy and understanding sovereignty
is good. Unilateral action is bad. Leading by
example is good.
2007-06-30 23:45:00 · answer #9 · answered by Elana 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Hell yes!
But we should bolster our own economy to continue trading with them.
We can do business with our countries without sending troops to them.
2007-06-30 23:39:49 · answer #10 · answered by Mr. Samsa 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋