If as some suggest,we "mind our own business" and enact an isolationist foreign policy,close the borders,limit imports,etc..
When,not if,we are attacked would those "isolationist policies" have caused or been a factor in the attacks?
Remember,there have been NO isolationist countries that have NOT ,at some point in thier history,been attacked or invaded.
2007-12-18 08:38:59 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
isolationism doesn't protect you. But I'm not "pro-isolationist" any way.... so it's easy for me to say that... I'm pro "take care of our own business first" Which can appear the same initially... but is very different in the end.
Isolationism won't help us.. but neither will pestering every nation on Earth.
2007-12-18 08:45:01 · answer #1 · answered by pip 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
There have not been any Non-isolationist countries that have not been attacked at some point in their history as well.
Isolationist theory works independently of expecting attacks and it's purpose is self-serving. Is it right for the U.S. now? Why not... we've stuck our nose into the world's business long enough. Maybe an inward look at our country could do some good!
2007-12-18 08:45:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Really - who attacked Sweden? We were attacked on 9/11 with wide open borders - quite the opposite of isolationist then. And how rude of us to be isolationist during the depression when our soul purpose on earth is to provide jobs and military for the world.
Your government brainwashing frightens me.
2007-12-18 08:49:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Attack is inevitable. It does not matter now what path we take as many in the middle east will hate us forever. Someone will always hate us as they did before this. The question is which policy is more benificial to America first,then the world. Isolationism is no more a solution than attacking Iran would be. As every good Rep says in defence of the patriot act and other more dubious legislation "we have to get it right every time, them only once." That is true regardless of policy.
2007-12-18 08:48:05 · answer #4 · answered by Steam 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If we turn isolationist in this time of global economy we would be writing our own ticket into a catastrophic meltdown. We are so dependant on other nations for our economic and social well being that it would be a horrid idea for us just to turn the other cheek around the globe.
2007-12-18 08:45:09 · answer #5 · answered by Tommy G 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
How about a policy of a strong defense, tolerance, understanding, sharing resources, creating common international goals, worldwide education, sanitation, etc., etc.
Why not abandon war and concentrate of peace and prosperity globally?
2007-12-18 08:52:01 · answer #6 · answered by Perplexed Bob 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Our economy is so globalized that isolationism would negatively impact our wallets. Plus, think about it like this, if we don't trade with other nations our food choices are limited. No more watermelons in January or year round bananas.
2007-12-18 08:42:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I am so sad that you live in fear of an attack.
The world is not a place full of hate and threats like you imagine.
But there are a lot of problems we need to solve. And we need to try solving them because a lot of them are indeed quite easy to solve.
2007-12-18 08:43:34 · answer #8 · answered by NLBNLB 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
post-revolution China
2007-12-18 08:42:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
This is not 1930. Isolationism is now and was then a bad idea.
2007-12-18 08:43:12 · answer #10 · answered by mrlebowski99 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋