Reply
Thu 30 Nov, 2006 12:47 pm
Many Americans want our borders closed, our immigration laws upheld, many want us out of Iraq ( a few neanderthals even want, deserve to losethe US Military to lose in Iraq, according to one thread here) many say we should mind our own business. Between just these two groups, it seems to me that isolationism would work. What do you think? I am for it, we would save a ton of $$, crime would go down, we could be self sustaining, what's not to like about isolationism?
http:''www.schoolhistory.org.uk/america/isolationism.htm
It has to start somewhere...some brave, far-seeing individual who takes up the cause and demonstrates how isolation could work to everyone's benefit.
You are that very individual, I'm sure of it. I salute you.
If my kids can't get a Playstation to occupy their time, there is no way I would ever be for isolationism.
blatham wrote:It has to start somewhere...some brave, far-seeing individual who takes up the cause and demonstrates how isolation could work to everyone's benefit.
You are that very individual, I'm sure of it. I salute you.
No thoughts of your own? No ideas of how this could work or not?
FreeDuck wrote:blatham wrote:It has to start somewhere...some brave, far-seeing individual who takes up the cause and demonstrates how isolation could work to everyone's benefit.
You are that very individual, I'm sure of it. I salute you.
Thank you for your input, very intellectual.
McGentrix wrote:If my kids can't get a Playstation to occupy their time, there is no way I would ever be for isolationism.
Ok, there's one thoughtful answer. At least you gave an answer & a reason, good on you.
Would this new isolationism entail withdrawing all American corporate interests in other countries, an abandonment of international military bases, and a disbanding of agencies like the CIA?
Hey, it seems to be working for China.
candidone1 wrote:Would this new isolationism entail withdrawing all American corporate interests in other countries, an abandonment of international military bases, and a disbanding of agencies like the CIA?
As far as I'm concerned, yes, (to all) it would. The CIA was
hatched as an overseas operation, we wouldn't need it.
LoneStarMadam wrote:candidone1 wrote:Would this new isolationism entail withdrawing all American corporate interests in other countries, an abandonment of international military bases, and a disbanding of agencies like the CIA?
As far as I'm concerned, yes, it would. The CIA was
hatched as an overseas operation, we wouldn't need it.
The CIA would still be needed. They are there to keep a watch on forgein govt's and to make sure the US is safe from outside sources.
kickycan wrote:Hey, it seems to be working for China.
It wouldn't work too well for them when we stopped trading with them, but as I said,
we could be self sufficient
% in North Korea
They're starving, the US supplies 63% of the worlds food supply.
Baldimo wrote:LoneStarMadam wrote:candidone1 wrote:Would this new isolationism entail withdrawing all American corporate interests in other countries, an abandonment of international military bases, and a disbanding of agencies like the CIA?
As far as I'm concerned, yes, it would. The CIA was
hatched as an overseas operation, we wouldn't need it.
The CIA would still be needed. They are there to keep a watch on forgein govt's and to make sure the US is safe from outside sources.
They have done a pretty pi$$ poor job of it, & I say this as the sister-in-law of a former CIA employee. The concept of the CIA was good, but they got too PC, couldn't use people on the ground.
LoneStarMadam wrote:Baldimo wrote:LoneStarMadam wrote:candidone1 wrote:Would this new isolationism entail withdrawing all American corporate interests in other countries, an abandonment of international military bases, and a disbanding of agencies like the CIA?
As far as I'm concerned, yes, it would. The CIA was
hatched as an overseas operation, we wouldn't need it.
The CIA would still be needed. They are there to keep a watch on forgein govt's and to make sure the US is safe from outside sources.
They have done a pretty pi$$ poor job of it, & I say this as the sister-in-law of a former CIA employee. The concept of the CIA was good, but they got too PC, couldn't use people on the ground.
I won't point fingers but we had a president that didn't like the idea of our country dealing with dirty people to obtain information. It should be put like this, when dealing with bad people you aren't going to find Howdy Doody.
Baldimo wrote:LoneStarMadam wrote:Baldimo wrote:LoneStarMadam wrote:candidone1 wrote:Would this new isolationism entail withdrawing all American corporate interests in other countries, an abandonment of international military bases, and a disbanding of agencies like the CIA?
As far as I'm concerned, yes, it would. The CIA was
hatched as an overseas operation, we wouldn't need it.
The CIA would still be needed. They are there to keep a watch on forgein govt's and to make sure the US is safe from outside sources.
They have done a pretty pi$$ poor job of it, & I say this as the sister-in-law of a former CIA employee. The concept of the CIA was good, but they got too PC, couldn't use people on the ground.
I won't point fingers but we had a president that didn't like the idea of our country dealing with dirty people to obtain information. It should be put like this, when dealing with bad people you aren't going to find Howdy Doody.
I know what you're saying & I agree.
LoneStarMadam wrote: the US supplies 63% of the worlds food supply.
Do you have a source for this?
A link means providing something active that we can all click on to read the same information you have read.
The USDA site is rather large.
Narrow it for us.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace