Int'l Issues US Interests

Direckshun · 03-27-2011, 06:42 PM

I have a question, inspired by a conversation in the Why I Am Not A Neoconservative thread.

A common sentiment among those of us here in this forum is that our participation in international affairs should strive for what's in our best for america.

That's fine. Uncontroversial. I think we all get behind that.

My question is... how far do we want to take that notion?

I ask because in the thread, I mentioned that while American interests should be first and foremost, they should not be the ONLY thing considered.

This drew gasps from some of my more conservative brethren.

So let me use an example to illustrate my point, one that I used in the thread with almost zero response from those who found my initial claim so blasphemous.

One of the countries with a popular revolt in the Middle East is Bahrain. We have a huge military base there that we use for various operations in the region.

If that sounds like nobody in the region likes that, it's because they don't. But the king of Bahrain let's us because we shower their government with arms and aid.

So when the people of the country revolt, they do so peacefully, in the vein of Egypt and Iran.

The king, of course, turns to violence. Live ammunition into crowds. Shooting from helicopters. Casualties mount, thanks in large part to American weaponry.

So that's my question. Is it worth it? Supporting a now-brutal dictator who kills peaceful, pro-democracy protesters from helicopters? All in the name of yet another base? (For the record, we already have bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Kyrgyzstan, and operate with impunity out of Israel.

Is it worth it?

**petegz28** · 03-27-2011, 06:49 PM

Personally we either need to level the ME and quit playing these games where we pretend the governments, current or future are wanting some sort of peace with us, or we need to bring our peeps and our money home and let the chips fall where they will. this crap of us picking and choosing where we will play world police is a crock of steamy bullshit.

ClevelandBronco · 03-27-2011, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

...Is it worth it?

I beg your forgiveness for reordering your thoughts, but this is what comes to your mind when you think of the U.S. acting in its best interests?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Live ammunition into crowds. Shooting from helicopters. Casualties mount, thanks in large part to American weaponry.

LiveSteam · 03-27-2011, 06:50 PM

When our military is being used like it is over in Libya. I think the USA should be paid.

Donger · 03-27-2011, 06:51 PM

I don't know anything about the protesters in Bahrain. Are they even more pro-US than the monarchy? If not, meh.

Direckshun · 03-27-2011, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

I beg your forgiveness for reordering your thoughts, but this is what comes to your mind when you think of the U.S. acting in its best interests?

You lost me.

ClevelandBronco · 03-27-2011, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

You lost me.

Yeah.

HonestChieffan · 03-27-2011, 07:07 PM

I think any country would welcome the US and want us to have a base if we help them understand its just a nonbase for waging nonwars instead of a nasty threat filled place where warmongering imperialists store guns, bombs, airplanes and jets, and all that stuff.

The nonPresident Obama could go sell that idea.

durtyrute · 03-28-2011, 11:12 AM

Who the hell are we to play mediator or big brother to the entire world. This is the same country that went to Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction when we are the only country that has used weapons of mass destruction. How in the hell does that make sense. There has been at least one war per decade since the 1800's, and people these days are okay with that.

"Give the people a person or nation to hate and you can do whatever you want to."

BucEyedPea · 03-28-2011, 11:26 AM

I think the term "interests" is too vague. Military intervention for "interests". Too general and vague. Also sounds too much like Olde World mercantilism aka neo-imperialism. We intervene military if it's related to our national defense or "valid" threats to be determined by the people's house. So enforcing the Monroe Doctrine is one I'd support. Some Cold War interventions, but only some as most was fought by proxy. None of this giving aid to both sides of a conflict though....ya' know like between the Palestinians and Israelis. I mean wtf is that all about?

Direckshun · 03-28-2011, 11:27 AM

A lot of people voting present on this issue....

**KC Dan** · 03-28-2011, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

A lot of people voting present on this issue....

Good enough for our President...

In my opinion, it may be worth it, but three wars are enough already. If we need to relocate forces - so be it.

**Saul Good** · 03-28-2011, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by durtyrute

Who the hell are we to play mediator or big brother to the entire world. This is the same country that went to Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction when we are the only country that has used weapons of mass destruction. How in the hell does that make sense. There has been at least one war per decade since the 1800's, and people these days are okay with that.

"Give the people a person or nation to hate and you can do whatever you want to."

The US is the only country that has used WMDs? Interesting...

BucEyedPea · 03-28-2011, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

The US is the only country that has used WMDs? Interesting...

Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Can you name someone else that has used them?

MGRS13 · 03-28-2011, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Can you name someone else that has used them?

You are forgetting that "WMD" was reframed in the early 2000's to include anything more deadly then a 50 cal. bullet.

03-27-2011, 06:42 PM
Direckshun Black for Palestine Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Springpatch Casino cash: $1166296	US Interests I have a question, inspired by a conversation in the Why I Am Not A Neoconservative thread. A common sentiment among those of us here in this forum is that our participation in international affairs should strive for what's in our best for america. That's fine. Uncontroversial. I think we all get behind that. My question is... how far do we want to take that notion? I ask because in the thread, I mentioned that while American interests should be first and foremost, they should not be the ONLY thing considered. This drew gasps from some of my more conservative brethren. So let me use an example to illustrate my point, one that I used in the thread with almost zero response from those who found my initial claim so blasphemous. One of the countries with a popular revolt in the Middle East is Bahrain. We have a huge military base there that we use for various operations in the region. If that sounds like nobody in the region likes that, it's because they don't. But the king of Bahrain let's us because we shower their government with arms and aid. So when the people of the country revolt, they do so peacefully, in the vein of Egypt and Iran. The king, of course, turns to violence. Live ammunition into crowds. Shooting from helicopters. Casualties mount, thanks in large part to American weaponry. So that's my question. Is it worth it? Supporting a now-brutal dictator who kills peaceful, pro-democracy protesters from helicopters? All in the name of yet another base? (For the record, we already have bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Kyrgyzstan, and operate with impunity out of Israel. Is it worth it?
Posts: 37,460

03-27-2011, 06:49 PM	#2
petegz28 Supporter Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Olathe, Ks Casino cash: $206779	Personally we either need to level the ME and quit playing these games where we pretend the governments, current or future are wanting some sort of peace with us, or we need to bring our peeps and our money home and let the chips fall where they will. this crap of us picking and choosing where we will play world police is a crock of steamy bullshit. __________________ "Finally, anyone who uses the terms, irregardless, a whole nother, or all of the sudden shall be sentenced to a work camp." Stewie Griffin
Posts: 56,447

03-27-2011, 06:50 PM	#4
LiveSteam All aboard the crazy train Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: homeof43conferencetitles Casino cash: $40679	When our military is being used like it is over in Libya. I think the USA should be paid.
Posts: 12,070

03-27-2011, 06:51 PM	#5
Donger "Think BOOM!" Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: 33.675° N 106.475° W Casino cash: $253	I don't know anything about the protesters in Bahrain. Are they even more pro-US than the monarchy? If not, meh. __________________ I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?
Posts: 68,173

03-27-2011, 07:07 PM	#8
HonestChieffan Hoffa called me an SOB Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the Country in MO Casino cash: $1220224	I think any country would welcome the US and want us to have a base if we help them understand its just a nonbase for waging nonwars instead of a nasty threat filled place where warmongering imperialists store guns, bombs, airplanes and jets, and all that stuff. The nonPresident Obama could go sell that idea. __________________ "The best time to sell peanuts is when the circus is in town."
Posts: 21,872

03-28-2011, 11:12 AM	#9
durtyrute Sho nuff Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Chieftown USA Casino cash: $990915	Who the hell are we to play mediator or big brother to the entire world. This is the same country that went to Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction when we are the only country that has used weapons of mass destruction. How in the hell does that make sense. There has been at least one war per decade since the 1800's, and people these days are okay with that. "Give the people a person or nation to hate and you can do whatever you want to."
Posts: 5,243

03-28-2011, 11:26 AM	#10
BucEyedPea Frazod Loves Hammy Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: None of your business Casino cash: $48238	I think the term "interests" is too vague. Military intervention for "interests". Too general and vague. Also sounds too much like Olde World mercantilism aka neo-imperialism. We intervene military if it's related to our national defense or "valid" threats to be determined by the people's house. So enforcing the Monroe Doctrine is one I'd support. Some Cold War interventions, but only some as most was fought by proxy. None of this giving aid to both sides of a conflict though....ya' know like between the Palestinians and Israelis. I mean wtf is that all about? __________________ "In government, the scum rises to the top."~ Hayek
Posts: 46,465

03-28-2011, 11:27 AM	#11
Direckshun Black for Palestine Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Springpatch Casino cash: $1166296	A lot of people voting present on this issue.... __________________
Posts: 37,460

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode