Every troop home, navy to guard US floating assets only and if an American gets (*)(*

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Archer0915, Jan 25, 2013.

  1. RiseAgainst

    RiseAgainst Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    19,122
    Likes Received:
    3,191
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If we were to close all foreign military bases, many folks in the military would be getting laid of...
     
  2. Stucky

    Stucky New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not necessarialy. Close our bases overseas, sell the property. Bring the troops home and billet them here. It's still cheaper than having them overseas. There is plenty for them to do here. The Mexican border comes to mind. Or is this all too simple?
     
  3. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know which is exactly why we shouldn't do it...

    - - - Updated - - -

    Good luck getting the government to put them on the border. You can't deploy troops on our own soil anyway. Only the Guard could go there.
     
  4. Albert Di Salvo

    Albert Di Salvo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    25,739
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Quasi-Isolationism from the Eastern Hemisphere was US foreign policy from 1789 until 1898.

    America developed an overseas empire starting in 1894 with the acquistion of Hawaii. Then came the Spanish/American War of 1898 and conquest of several overseas territories.

    In 1920 this expansionary period outside of the Western Hemisphere came to an end with rejection of the League of Nations Treaty. Quasi-Isolationism returned with respect to the Eastern Hemisphere.

    That ended in December of 1941 with the attack on Pearl Harbor. From 1941 until 2001 America had a foreign policy consensus between the Realist and Liberal Internationalist schools of thought.

    2001 must be seen as the end of the consensus. That's when the Neo-Con school of thought took control. It only became clear that consensus had ended after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. By 2008 Neoconservtivism had been discredited.

    Now the forces of Realism and Liberal Internationalism are in retreat. And the Quasi-Isolationist school of thought is reasserting itself in the minds of foreign policy intellectuals.
     
  5. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And if we see a ship flying under another countries flag we watch it get taken. Simple enough. We have no need to engage. Sooner or later those other nations will either go in debt themselves and face fiscal cliffs of their own or they will pay us to take care of it.

    The navy is well enough equipped to defend our assets abroad.
     
  6. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We have US shipping lanes everywhere. The Strait of Hormuz is one of them so we needed to be there to protect our commercial interests. And also to let Iran know to stop trying to act as if they can do anything about the US doing whatever it wants in "their waters".
     
  7. Albert Di Salvo

    Albert Di Salvo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    25,739
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    0
    America is sitting on an ocean of energy. It doesn't need to be involved in the Middle East or North Africa.
     
  8. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Our shipping and interests and nothing would change.
     
  9. Stucky

    Stucky New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ever heard of Congress passing laws? It's not difficult to authorize our military to deploy on our own territory. Watch Obama make that so (not border deployment, home soil deployment).
     
  10. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well luckily for us Obama isn't King. He has to get that through Congress and that will be a cold day in hell.
     
  11. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nightmare if there is any truth to this:
    [video=youtube;kzT6X3_Bg9o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kzT6X3_Bg9o[/video]

    We may see that very thing!
     
  12. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Iran threatened to block our shipping lane in the Strait of Hormuz. How would us not being there to make sure they didn't not change that?
     
  13. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I never said withdraw out navy. What I meant by "Our shipping and interests and nothing would change." is that nothing would change as it relates to protecting our assets.
     
  14. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm a bit confused. What exactly are you proposing?
     
  15. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am proposing bring home troops, and closing bases not on US soil unless paid to be there. We should at least break even for this crap.
     
  16. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We need those bases for strategic reasons. We need to be able to launch quickly to anywhere in the world.

    Plus don't worry about the troops brother. Overseas bases are some of the most requested. They are the most fun ;) so the troops don't really mind being over there too much.
     
  17. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    At what cost? What got me on this was McCain talking about us doing something about Syria or we could look bad. Screw him and Syria. There are plenty of other nations in the world.

    WE CAN NOT AFFORD THIS (*)(*)(*)(*)! We have the capacity to strike anywhere. Forget ground troops. Carpet bomb the entire region. Level it!
     
  18. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We can't do that man. In spite of what some far Left idiots think the US isn't some evil empire. Exterminating the Middle East would solve much of our problems but we can't just go kill everybody like that...

    I do agree about Syria though. That's their own problem, not ours.
     
  19. Stucky

    Stucky New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I disagree, we can actually get anywhere in the world in a rapid response. No, the troops dont mind being there and I love our troops but we cant afford to have them over there anymore and it's not necessary. Everyone was afraid of the US when they thought we would use our nukes, well, let them fear us again. You (*)(*)(*)(*) with the bull, you get the horn. I dont care if a bunch of Arabs, or Africans fight each other but dont mess with the USA or you'll get a boot up your ass. There is no reason we cant be self sufficient. We still have all the resources we need without begging other nations for them. We need a big national readjustment in attitude. No more tax and spend. No more living beyond your means. Cut back on our economy. Quit getting a new electronic devise every month. Quit envying the rich and live modestly. It's not gonna happen but, what the hell, we had a good 200 year run.

    - - - Updated - - -
     
  20. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well I've proposed this before but on a smaller scale. It just wouldn't work though not by our own morality. I said we pull out of Afghanistan tomorrow, completely. But if a single terrorist cell is discovered in America then we take our gloves off and destroy that place. Same with the rest of these nations that let terrorists run amok in their country.

    But we can't do that...

    Plus can we talk about this in a few years? I'm likely headed to Germany soon and I love that place. Fight to bring us home after I get done there ;)
     
  21. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Our morality? Perhaps mine and yours but not some of the politicians or some of the geeks thinking that killing children with drones is not the same as with a rifle. I personally don't have an issue with necessary collateral damage but some of this is just stupid.
     
  22. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Our morality as a nation. America isn't going to carpet bomb people.

    I had a solution to our IED problem in Afghanistan for years. The next time an IED goes off in a village we level the village. Same with the next and the next. The Afghans would start telling on the Taliban real fast. We win.

    But we can't do that and I would never advocate doing that. It's a solution yeah but its a "final solution" and I don't agree with that.
     
  23. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then leave it alone. This crap is not helping us one bit.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Then leave it alone. This crap is not helping us one bit.
     
  24. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    4,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree, we need to leave Afghanistan tomorrow. Whether we leave tomorrow or in 2096 nothing will change. The day after we leave the Taliban will run the place again. Its a lost cause, no more of our troops need to die for a cause that cannot be won.
     
  25. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Our government is our worst enemy. Strength is not making war; it is preparing for war, while securing peace.
     

Share This Page