main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Should the United States revert back to isolationism?

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Darth Mischievous, Feb 15, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Darth Mischievous

    Darth Mischievous Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 12, 1999
    In the early 20th century, the United States took on an isolationist stance.

    Although we are living in a global economy with global issues, could the United States in theory revert back to isolationist politics and still maintain our economic prowess?

    Would the United States benefit from isolationism?

    Should we make immigration to this country much more difficult?

    Should we try to take on other nations' problems (Bosnia, etc.)?

    How do American citizens of the JC feel about this? How do non-Americans feel about this issue?

    In the Iraq thread, DARTHPIGFEET gave us some food for thought. I thought to give him credit for this debate topic idea. It got me thinking.
     
  2. Darth Guy

    Darth Guy Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Aug 16, 2002
    Would the United States benefit from isolationism?

    No, it didn't before.

    Should we make immigration to this country much more difficult?

    Yes, but not in the extreme way DARTHPIGFEET proposed.

    Should we try to take on other nations' problems (Bosnia, etc.)?

    Yes, but on a case-by-case basis.

    How do American citizens of the JC feel about this?

    I think that the United States should be open and ready to help allies and other people of the world. Unfortunately, that isn't what the government is heading for...
     
  3. Darth Mischievous

    Darth Mischievous Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 12, 1999
    I'm beginning to think that isolationism (in politics) is not a bad idea. Quite a few of my friends are beginning to think in this very same way, even liberals.

    Economically, I think we still need a global approach.



     
  4. Darth Guy

    Darth Guy Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Aug 16, 2002
    I'm beginning to think that isolationism (in politics) is not a bad idea.

    The United States helped contribute to the outbreak of WW2 by being isolationist. I'm not saying that it will turn-out that way, but just stating the results of the US's last experiment with this concept.
     
  5. DARTHPIGFEET

    DARTHPIGFEET Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 24, 2001
    Go back and read my last post in the Iraq thread. What I posted about isolationism was a worst case extreme form of it. However I do believe it's time that the U.S. withdraw from places which the people of those countries don't appreciate us anymore. South Korea is a prime example.

    I think it's time we stop policing the world because people moan and groan about it to the point that I throw the papers I have in my hand in the air.

    Anyway I think we need to let some of these countries solve their own problems. However like WWI and WWII we have seen the Europe especially can't do anything right until the U.S. gets involved.
     
  6. Darth Mischievous

    Darth Mischievous Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 12, 1999
    Hitler was a problem in Europe due to European appeasement policy.

    The United States thought it to be a European problem at the time, and only got involved when Japan attacked us and Hitler declared war on us.

    Isolationism didn't cause WW II, IMHO. We only got involved when we needed to. This was especially the case in WW I (which my grandfather actually fought in).

    The fact is, the world bears much animosity towards the United States. Whether that is class envy or a misconception that we are an imperialist power is open to discussion, but I'm beginning to think that reverting to isolationism politically and militarily is a good idea.

    Let us take care of ourselves.

    I wonder how the world would react to us reverting back to isolationism.
     
  7. Darth Guy

    Darth Guy Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Aug 16, 2002
    However like WWI and WWII we have seen the Europe especially can't do anything right until the U.S. gets involved.

    I beg to differ. The United States helped Europe a great deal, and ultimately helped contribute to victory. However, I wouldn't say that the European countries and their allies "weren't doing anything right".

    Isolationism didn't cause WW II, IMHO.

    No, it wasn't the sole cause. However, if the US hadn't refused to join the League of Nations and to try and reform The Treaty of Versailles(like Wilson wanted to), WW2 could have been averted.

    EDIT: I grammar bad.
     
  8. ImperialFC

    ImperialFC Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Nov 29, 2001
    Perhaps the best idea is to adopt a position of armed neutrality, but continue on the path towards more free trade and open markets and keep up (or increase) current levels of immigration. I think this article has an interesting idea for pulling back our forces, but at the same time offering our protection to other countries that desire statehood :
    For those that would protest, a simple quid pro quo can be stated. If they wish to remain directly in the US defense sphere, than they must present and pass, through their legislative body or head of government, a proposal to Petition for Territorial Status with Intent to Seek Statehood in the United States. The Petition for Territorial Status must present the complete plan for submission to Organization for Statehood and a specific timetable. Continuity of US presence in that country will be directly aligned with the submitted plan.

    The statehood option needs to be discussed in much greater detail and the implications to comprehensive defense structures and postures better understood. There has been a tendency to assume, for several decades, that we are no longer adding states to the United States. The final addition of Hawaii and Alaska was based on WWII and cold war thinking. Based on what criteria has the United States adopted this posture as permanent policy? Why are we not promoting the entrance of additional states into the Union wherever freedom-loving people wish to join? That would seem to greatly simplify our current baseless global adventurism and foreign policy. It even has a much more legitimate ring to it. This writer does not believe that most of the founder's (and those responsible for subsequent maintenance of the Republic) vision was truncated in that fashion. If the basic creed of "all men are created equal...." carries objective substance, than free people everywhere should be able to join our system voluntarily and on an ongoing basis. That is, once the same criteria are met as that required of all existing states in organization and with the recognition of the supremacy of Constitutional law


    Of course, we'd have to find some extra room for all the new stars on the banner ;) (although, I think Taiwan and Israel would be the only two countries to seriously consider something like this).

    EDIT: Changed a sentence or two so it would make some sense ;)
     
  9. DARTHPIGFEET

    DARTHPIGFEET Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 24, 2001
    The League of Nations was doomed from the start when the U.S. proposes it or Wilson I mean and we don't join. That takes the legitimacy out of the whole thing.

    The Treaty of Versailles is the real reason behind WWII. Instead of posting equal blame among the Axis powers we blamed Germany because of a number of reasons. WWI was nothing more than a European soap opera/family feud which had been brewing for years.

    The U.S. has unfortunately gotten itself in the situation of dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. For better or for worse. No matter what we do some country will always be screaming bloody murder. That is the current situation the U.S. got itself into after WWII. It's our curse for being the most powerful nation in the world. Those below us will either try to attack us and take power or keep us from using the power we have to keep others in check. That is why I still think we need to take out Iraq on our own and tell the U.N. to go to hell. For if we pull out our troops. We are doing more good than harm in Iraq. The problem is SH. It's not the Iraqi people. Get rid of SH and the U.S. can create a new democracy for those people. That democracy will not come over night and it will not be easy and people will be trampled over. That happens in all democracies.

    Basically I break it down like this.

    I would rather see a few Iraqi civilians killed during a war to rid them of SH, rather than see a hell of a lot more be killed because SH stays in power. Maybe Madonna should put that in her video. She cares sooooooo much about the Iraqi people. Well if you care so much for the Iraqi people then let them have freedom. Duh!!!! Madonna.

     
  10. TripleB

    TripleB Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2000
    No, I think this is a valid question....


    Although we are living in a global economy with global issues, could the United States in theory revert back to isolationist politics and still maintain our economic prowess?

    Difficult to say. We could revert to a more isolationist stand, sure, but with worldwide communications and transport, it is now virtually impossible to really "take a step away" from the world. I suppose it COULD be done, though, albeit with lots of draconian, clinton/reno like tactics.

    Would the United States benefit from isolationism?

    In a lot of way, we already are. Compared to other society's, the United States is in many ways the only country out there in which we have our individual freedoms intact. There is not another country in the world with the extent of individual liberty that we enjoy as United States citizens. We go to where we are because Americans throughout the years have had an extraordinary commitment to personal freedom, and I think in that manner, it isolates us from the rest of the world on a many levels.

    Should we make immigration to this country much more difficult?

    I think it is possible to both encourage immigration for those who want to live the American dream AND protect the homeland if we try hard enough.

    Should we try to take on other nations' problems (Bosnia, etc.)?

    I will try to deal with this question in a post-Cold War era, where simiply put, we had to take on other nations problems in order to stop Communism. Since then, the United States has had to take on commitments that should have been done by other powers, simply because no one else could or would do it. Nationbuilding and such are nice sounding things, and when you look at what has happened in Afghanistan in the course of the last year, from Taliban rule to a more free rule, yes, sometimes we do have to take the torch of freedom to other area's.

    How do American citizens of the JC feel about this? How do non-Americans feel about this issue?

    I guess my feelings are that no, I don't think we can afford to resort to isolationist policies. I think the rest of the world needs to see the United States as the greatest nation in the history of this world; they need to see what can be done in diversity and faith in 200 years what they have not been able to do in 2000 years.
     
  11. Cool-Monkey

    Cool-Monkey Jedi Youngling

    Registered:
    Jun 19, 2002

    Although we are living in a global economy with global issues, could the United States in theory revert back to isolationist politics and still maintain our economic prowess?


    Economic prowess? We are a nation of consumers, isolation would create millions of jobs because we would no longer be importing forgien goods that we could easily make here, such as steel. Unfortunetly prices would no doubt rise, because it costs far more to pay someone in America to do something than it does in Taiwan, China, Malaysia etc.

    Would the United States benefit from isolationism?

    Undoubtably, the question you may want to ask yourself is whether the benefits would outweigh the problems this might create, such as more expensive goods.

    Should we make immigration to this country much more difficult?

    Our migration laws are damn near perfect. Believe me I have no problem with forgieners comming in whom are required to speak good English, know the laws of this country better than most natural born citizens, and have job skills far superior to most natural born citizens. The problem comes from illegal immigants that realize that they can live much better on welfare than working a minimum wage job.

    Should we try to take on other nations' problems (Bosnia, etc.)?

    Depends on the cost to ourselves.

    How do American citizens of the JC feel about this? How do non-Americans feel about this issue?


    In its current state America would fall apart if we tried to become the isolationist state that we were in the 1900's. We have become far to dependent and intergrated into the world economy.

    Do I wish we could become more dependent? Absolutely. I feel the affects of our total integration everytime I pay for gasoline.
     
  12. rsterling78

    rsterling78 Jedi Knight star 5

    Registered:
    May 26, 2002
    The United States already tried isolationism twice. We tried to stay out of the First World War and then discovered a plot by the Germans to try to incite the Mexicans to attack us. Also, the Germans started attacking American ships at sea.

    After World War I, America went back to its isolationism. As trouble brewed in East Asia and Europe, America minded its own business...until Pearl Harbor.

    The reality is that the United States is unique in history. Not even the empires of Egypt, Rome, or China dominated the world the way we do. Thus, our actions -- and inactions -- cannot help but have profound consequences.

    I can see the appeal of isolationism. The world seems to view us with a perverse combination of fear, envy, hatred, admiration, and fascination.

    Our allies cannot abide the crass, upstart nation so much younger than their ancient cultures that in the span of just over three human lifetimes has risen to a loftier position -- in both relative and absolute terms -- than any polity in history.

    Our enemies hate us with a passion we cannot conceive. The Islamic Radicals loathe the fact that their fanatical devotion to religion has only caused their societies to fall farther behind the West, while decadent, secular America has grown all the more powerful. The Communists have discovered themselves to have been on the wrong side of history after all and have responded with attempts at free market reforms that will probably fail without commensurate movements toward consensual government and individual liberty (China); or have reacted with a psychopathic obsession with the acquisition of military power in a desperate endeavor to become a relevant force in world affairs (North Korea).

    Perhaps independence is a more practical solution than isolation. Would the world be worse off if the members of NATO acknowledged that if they cannot agree on so simple an issue as the common defense of a member -- the raison d'être for the organization -- then perhaps the time to disband has come?

    Should the United States ask the United Nations to relocate their headquarters to some other part of the world and withdraw her own membership with the understanding that when tyrranical nations no longer chair committees on human rights and rogue states no longer chair committees on disarmament, the U.S. will give all due consideration to re-joining?

    Why are legions of American troops "defending" an unthreatened but hostile Germany and an ungrateful and feckless South Korea? Could these bases be shut down and the funds for their support re-allocated to construct a few more aircraft carriers? Wouldn't such a move actually enhance America's ability to project its power to any point on the globe?

    Perhaps this model for America -- independence, but not isolation; ad hoc coalitions of the willing rather than dysfunctional permanent alliances; and an acknowledgement that we are the Great Hegemon of the World and will no longer try to pretend otherwise to soothe the sensibilities of juvenile allies -- is the most practical course for our nation in the early 21st century.
     
  13. Darth Mischievous

    Darth Mischievous Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 12, 1999
    Interesting post and good points, rsterling78.
     
  14. Jansons_Funny_Twin

    Jansons_Funny_Twin Jedi Knight star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 31, 2002
    rsterling

    Interesting points. I mean, it sounds half-way feasible, but how many people would accept it?
     
  15. rsterling78

    rsterling78 Jedi Knight star 5

    Registered:
    May 26, 2002
    JFT,

    I think that at the very least a significant minority of Americans would accept such proposals, given recent events.

    I am certainly not suggesting that we should transform the American Republic into the American Empire. Nor do I suggest that we should not seek the advice of other nations. When nations like France or Germany criticize or question our actions and intentions, we would do well to listen.

    But to go so far as to have our Secretary of State repeatedly go before a body of nations, many if not most dictatorships, and essentially seek approval and consent to act in our own self-interest and defend our national security is to surrender too much sovereignty to internationalist bureaucrats.

    I don't think America should become a fortress. I'm all for free trade and for immigrants coming to this country to claim their birthright of liberty.

    My recommendation is for an America that is involved and independent, not isolated.
     
  16. Darth Mischievous

    Darth Mischievous Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 12, 1999
    I disagree concerning doing well to listen to France and Germany.

    But I agree wholehearedly with this:

    But to go so far as to have our Secretary of State repeatedly go before a body of nations, many if not most dictatorships, and essentially seek approval and consent to act in our own self-interest and defend our national security is to surrender too much sovereignty to internationalist bureaucrats.
     
  17. rsterling78

    rsterling78 Jedi Knight star 5

    Registered:
    May 26, 2002
    DM,

    I believe that America should at least listen to the advice and recommendations of our nominal allies. We need not heed that advice if we find it to be without merit.

    I think that if America were unshackled from outmoded alliances like NATO and the United Nations, we might even enjoy better relations with those friendly countries with whom we now find ourselves at odds.

    Would a France whose Security Council veto was nullified by the absence of the United States from the U.N. perhaps be more willing to dispense with pretenses to power and engage us in a frank discussion of their self-interest and how our two nations might forward both of our respective agendas together?

    Would a Germany devoid of American troops and bases and fully aware of its inability to check the American hyperpower perhaps have gone to the recent polls and voted for a candidate who is more concerned with helping Germans than with hindering Americans?

    Many of the institutions in which America and other nations find themselves ensnared predispose to grandstanding and duplicity rather than enlightened self-interest and coalition-building.

    Organizations like NATO and the U.N. are somewhat analogous to bad marriages. And, like in many bad marriages, once divorced, the partners are surprised to find out that only then can they really be friends.
     
  18. Darth Mischievous

    Darth Mischievous Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 12, 1999
    I agree, r78.

    I meant to say listening in the action sense.

    You make some more good points in your last post, as well. I think it may be a good idea to bring our troops home from some of these countries, such as South Korea and Germany.
     
  19. GrandAdmiralPelleaon

    GrandAdmiralPelleaon Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2000
    So why do you think Europe would start another WW if the Americans pull out? We have something called the EU now which is supposed to prevent that. Right now European governments are more prone to talk then to shoot.
     
  20. SnorreSturluson

    SnorreSturluson Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 14, 2003
    The USA is one of two or three countries who do not use le Système international (sorry my French has suffered a lot). Is that isolationism too? :D
    (One question: how much is the price of 1 liter (not 1 gallon!!) fuel in the US?)
    I´d say (I´m not American :D) US ground troops aren´t necessary everywhere. South Korea has about 1 million soldiers and I don´t think the strength of US troops there won´t make a difference in a full scale war between North and South Korea.
    The strength of the US military lies in the Air Force and Special Forces.
    I don´t see why there should be US troops in Germany. It´s surrounded by NATO or neutral countries.
     
  21. p_atch

    p_atch Jedi Youngling star 2

    Registered:
    Feb 21, 2002
    i think you all just need to chill

    the world doesnt hate you, it just disagrees with you on an issue, your not the first or only nation to ever have world opinion against it

    i dont know about any other countries but no-one i have ever known in Australia has looked upon the US with anything resembling fear, envy, hatred, admiration or fascination

    your just another country like us only bigger and with slightly different socio-political values that lean more towards the right

    your our military ally and one of the major reasons we survived world war 2 with our soverignity intact, there is alot of goodwill especially among the older generation towards America here still because of that

    maybe if your sit-coms werent so bad.....


    -patch
     
  22. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2001
    In short? No.

    How can you? The US has forces in some, what, 40 countries? The world needs the USA, that's for sure. It just doesn't like the current administration's position on the world and the USA! :)

    E_S

    EDIT: Note, this does not make Americans cooler than Australians though. Sorry, you'll still never be as awesome as we are! :D :cool: ;)
     
  23. Emilie

    Emilie Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    Apr 5, 2002
    As far as I am concerned, this is a very childish thread.
    D_M, you posted it because you can't stand being said "no", so you wish your country would just go away and sulk.
    Isolationnism would be a disaster for the USA (as for other countries : we are all exchanging businesses and money. Stopping that would just be an economical disaster). Just because you can't get it to go YOUR way doesn't mean you have to go back to isolationnism.
    This is very puerile.
     
  24. Red-Seven

    Red-Seven Manager Emeritus star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 21, 1999
    No.

    America needs to stay engaged with the world.
     
  25. Mort

    Mort Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Aug 25, 2000

    And who or what would fill the vaccumn left by the United States withdrawal?

     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.