• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

America Needs No More Neo-Imperial Nonsense

America needs no more neo-imperial nonsense - FT.com

We cannot afford any more neo-imperial nonsense. With trillion-dollar deficits, a soaring national debt, and 10,000 baby boomers reaching eligibility for Social Security and Medicare every day, the US is beginning to break under the strain of its commitments.

[...]

America needs a new foreign policy rooted in today’s reality, not in yesterday’s cold war or in tomorrow’s dream of global democracy. For as Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan reminds us, in his region democracy is a bus you get off when it reaches your stop.

We must roll up the empire and put America first again. We should swiftly complete Barack Obama’s work, end the war in Afghanistan and close US bases in central Asia. We should tell Ukraine and Georgia that Nato membership is closed. No US interest there justifies risking a clash with Russia. Let us tell Vladimir Putin that if he stays out of our yard, we will stay out of his.

I know a lot of people on this forum might disagree with Patrick Buchanan, but I think he is right on foreign policy. America needs to stop being the world's police, and put its own citizens first once more.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
I absolutely agree. America really needs to stop proving that terrorist propaganda is correct in calling our government and military imperialist.
 
Also agree.

Someone might want to tell Romney that while he's in Israel condoning strikes on Iran.

Politicians will say anything to get elected. Actually, Obama is more dangerous given that fewer people criticize him, even if they criticized Bush for the same things. No Republican wants to be associated with Bush, so they might hesitate to go to war with Iran. Obama on the other hand is still viewed as a "peace president" (a joke), and if he goes to war, he will have people thinking that it was a last resort and not only that, get support from other countries.

Take a look at this:

In Israel-Iran Conflict, Don

Barack Obama is the one who’s more likely to confront Iran militarily, should sanctions and negotiations fail. He has committed himself to stopping Iran by any means necessary, and he has a three-year record as president to back his rhetoric. Romney has only rhetoric, and he would be hamstrung in many ways if he chose military confrontation.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Good thing Romney is going to move our embassy to Jerusalem and green light the bombing of Iran. That way, we won't be creating any more problems for ourselves.
 

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
We are not the world police. We are bullies plain and simple.

If we were world police no one would bat an eye at our behavior. They'd join us. If we actually protected and served this world, our critics would become our allies again.

Put our citizens first? What do you think led to all this imperialism to begin with? Our citizens are no better than any other human beings. A pack of lucky apes who happen to be born in a free nation. Not so with many other places. Its ridiculous to suggest we should simply ignore the strife in this world. We SHOULD stop acting like a pack of thugs roaming the globe looking for opportunity. But we should never stop using our military to promote freedom and human rights.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I agree in principle, Sir Doom, but can the US be trusted to to restrain it's predatory predilections; its oportunism? Can we afford to demilitarize? Will the military-industrial-political complex allow it? -- it's insinuated itself into the economics of every state. No politician dare oppose it and expect to be re-elected.

What we need is an extra-national superpower, with allegiance only to humanity; an actual, functional UN.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The Big Two always want to play policeman to a world full of Malice Greens.
The only solution is to vote for....eh...you guys already know which party I'm hawking.
 

tytlyf

Not Religious
The Big Two always want to play policeman to a world full of Malice Greens.
The only solution is to vote for....eh...you guys already know which party I'm hawking.
No, Libertarians are the problem. I would agree that Romney would start a war with Iran quicker than Obama will.
 

Shuddhasattva

Well-Known Member
What we need is an extra-national superpower, with allegiance only to humanity; an actual, functional UN.

Do you really think we could trust such a thing?

This is why I support nationalism; I'm an internationalist at heart, but I think any international political organization will be hopelessly corrupt, and lead towards a greater enslavement.
 

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
I agree in principle, Sir Doom, but can the US be trusted to to restrain it's predatory predilections; its oportunism?

We are not trusted now. It's insane to think that literally doing the right thing would do anything but improve the situation. Trust is born through righteous action faster than anything else. Everything we do is opportunistic capitalism and everyone looks at us and says, "When are we next?" The worst part is some of our buddies across the globe love it. No nation is innocent in this, we just happen to be the ones with the big stick.

Can we afford to demilitarize?

No, and we SHOULD NOT.

Will the military-industrial-political complex allow it?

They aren't in charge. We are. They just need to be pointed at the literal enemies of this planet and not just the enemies of our wallets.

-- it's insinuated itself into the economics of every state.

And they are just as culpable for this as we are.

No politician dare oppose it and expect to be re-elected.

Don't oppose it. Guide it. Make it a tool of freedom, not a tool of wealth. We've got all the wealth already. It's not important anymore.

What we need is an extra-national superpower, with allegiance only to humanity; an actual, functional UN.

There is a reason the UN fails. Because every single member of it is just like the US. They don't give a rat's butt about peace or freedom. They just want to slice off the biggest piece of pie they can possible get for themselves. The US just happens to be holding the pie and the slicer at the moment.

It isn't important what we call the organization in charge. It isn't important which nations agree or disagree with what we do. What is important is that we act righteously for justice and freedom AND NOTHING ELSE. Then everyone who disputes us will only be painting themselves a villain.

It isn't likely to happen though. We hide behind the subjectivity of it. We can't 'really' know what righteousness is, right? So why try? Might as well just get ours while we can. Horse crap. Its shameful and sickening. Not just for the USA but for every free nation with power and influence that does nothing with it but promote their own self-interest.
 

TheKnight

Guardian of Life
I agree in principle, Sir Doom, but can the US be trusted to to restrain it's predatory predilections; its oportunism? Can we afford to demilitarize? Will the military-industrial-political complex allow it? -- it's insinuated itself into the economics of every state. No politician dare oppose it and expect to be re-elected.

What we need is an extra-national superpower, with allegiance only to humanity; an actual, functional UN.

I think a fundamental part of the problem is that so many are quick to judge the actions of groups or organizations or companies without pointing out and seeking to deal with the real problem: human nature.

Human beings are selfish creatures and feature an immense ability to be corrupted. The answer is not to give power here and there hoping that along the way we will elect good enough politicians to represent us. There are some who believe that we restrain government through elections. A smart politician, seeing that, will then remove the peoples' ability to affect his status by ensuring that his being in or out of office is dependent on the powerful and the corporate.

Some others believe that the way to restrain government is with violence. The same clever politician will then seek to remove all ability for a people to rise up violently against its government.

The result is a government that is run by the ambitions of its members and unchecked by those things that were put in place to keep it under control. In fear, our nation has given power to the government that is nearly unstoppable. In fear we forsake ideas for temporary safety. After all, a government that can be overthrown by its people can surely be overthrown by its enemies, right?

The solution is two-fold. On the one hand, Americans must demonstrate that they are willing to act as a powerful enough force to stop the government from corruption. On the other they must accept that defense is a national obligation. Not something that can b relegated to some far off military force of volunteers who fight to keep the whole safe.

Why do we have enemies? Because we have allowed ourselves to become like a wild dog, out of control, causing damage and destruction wherever we go. The more we continue to blame the Democrats, the Republicans, the government, or whatever name for something that isn't ourselves, the more we propagate the problem.

To see why we are where we are all one must do is look into the mirror.

There is a reason the UN fails. Because every single member of it is just like the US. They don't give a rat's butt about peace or freedom. They just want to slice off the biggest piece of pie they can possible get for themselves. The US just happens to be holding the pie and the slicer at the moment.

It isn't important what we call the organization in charge. It isn't important which nations agree or disagree with what we do. What is important is that we act righteously for justice and freedom AND NOTHING ELSE. Then everyone who disputes us will only be painting themselves a villain.

It isn't likely to happen though. We hide behind the subjectivity of it. We can't 'really' know what righteousness is, right? So why try? Might as well just get ours while we can. Horse crap. Its shameful and sickening. Not just for the USA but for every free nation with power and influence that does nothing with it but promote their own self-interest.

:clap2:
 
Top