|
| Title: The Long History of Isolationism | |
| TAEmove > General > General Discussion | Go to subcategory： |
| Author | Content |
|
Nickel
|
|
|
Date Posted：09/23/2020 8:53 PMCopy HTML The Long History of Isolationism in the United StatesIn his Farewell Address, President George Washington had advocated non-involvement in European wars and politics. For much of the nineteenth century, the expanse of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans had made it possible for the United States to enjoy a kind of “free security” and remain largely detached from Old World conflicts. During World War I, however, President Woodrow Wilson made a case for U.S. intervention in the conflict and a U.S. interest in maintaining a peaceful world order. Nevertheless, the American experience in that war served to bolster the arguments of isolationists; they argued that marginal U.S. interests in that conflict did not justify the number of U.S. casualties. .......................... Had we left Europe alone, would World War II never have happened ? Without us, who would be ruining Europe today? What goes around, comes around.
|
|
WRS10
|
Share to:
#1
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：09/24/2020 4:23 PMCopy HTML ........Without us, who would be ruining Europe today?............ Surely that is the whole point of isolationism - it does not matter who is ruining Europe, all that matters is that the ruins are kept visitor friendly! |
alaskaone
|
Share to:
#2
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：09/25/2020 1:10 PMCopy HTML I have heard it said that WWII was a continuation of WWI. There have also been compelling arguments suggesting what the victors of WWI did made WWII inevitable. Maybe. Or, maybe it's a mistake to second guess the actions of history. Learn what you can, try not to repeat mistakes. That sounds good but it's becoming increasingly difficult to figure out what the truth is. The 1619 project is just the latest example of nefarious groups re-writing history to support their narratives. Come to the Dark Side.
We have cookies.
The advantage of insinuations over hard arguments is that they bypass critical thought. No one can respond precisely to a charge that is utterly vague or to accusers who will envelope any reply in a poisonous fog of further insinuations. ~ David Warren, The Guardian
There was a time when there was enough freedom that it hardly mattered which brand of crooks ran government. That has not been true for a long time and that captures an important point. The more powerful the government becomes, the more people are willing to do in order to seize the prize, and the more afraid they become when someone else has control. ~ Glenn Harlan Reynolds
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve.”
― H.L. Mencken
|
|
Nickel
|
Share to:
#3
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：09/27/2020 3:55 AMCopy HTML “ all that matters is that the ruins are kept visitor friendly!”
Thank you! ........still laughing.
After Versailles, WWII was inevitable.
Why we went to war in Vietnam
BY MICHAEL LIND
DEC 20, 2012
In the decades after the departure of the last U.S. combat troops from Vietnam in March 1973 and the fall of Saigon to communist North Vietnamese forces in April 1975, Americans have been unable to agree on how to characterize the long, costly and ultimately unsuccessful U.S. military involvement in Indochina. To some, the Vietnam War was a crime – an attempt by the United States to suppress a heroic Vietnamese national liberation movement that had driven French colonialism out of its country. To others, the Vietnam War was a forfeit, a just war needlessly lost by timid policymakers and a biased media. For many who study foreign affairs, the Vietnam War was a tragic mistake brought about by U.S. leaders who exaggerated the influence of communism and underestimated the power of nationalism.
Another interpretation, a fourth one, has recently emerged, now that the Vietnam War is history and can be studied dispassionately by scholars with greater, though not unlimited, access to records on all sides.
The emerging scholarly synthesis interprets the war in the global context of the Cold War that lasted from the aftermath of World War II to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. In this view, Vietnam was neither a crime, a forfeit nor a tragic mistake. It was a proxy conflict in the Cold War.
The Cold War was the third world war of the 20th century – itself part of what some have called the Long War or the Seventy-Five Years’ War of 1914-1989. Unlike the first two world wars, the Cold War began and ended without direct military conflict between the opposing sides, thanks to the deterrent provided by conventional forces as well as nuclear weapons. Instead, it was fought indirectly through economic embargoes, arms races, propaganda and proxy wars in peripheral nations like Vietnam.
The greatest prizes in the Cold War were the industrial economies of the advanced European and East Asian nations, most of all Germany and Japan. With the industrial might of demilitarized Japan and the prosperous western half of a divided Germany, the United States could hope to carry out its patient policy of containment of a communist bloc that was highly militarized but economically outmatched, until the Soviets sued for peace or underwent internal reform. The Soviet Union could prevail in the Cold War only if it divided the United States from its industrialized allies – not by sponsoring communist takeovers within their borders but by intimidating them into appeasement after convincing them that the United States lacked the resolve or the ability to defend its interests.
For this reason, most crises of the Cold War, from the Berlin Airlift and the Cuban Missile Crisis to the Korean and Vietnam wars, occurred when the United States responded to aggressive probing by communist bloc nations with dramatic displays of American resolve. The majority of these tests of American credibility took place in four countries divided between communist and non-communist regimes after World War II: Germany, China, Korea and Vietnam.
....
.......................
That fourth explanation makes sense to me. Still remember fire drills and sheltering in the school basement for the inevitable attack in grade school. The Cold War and Containment
Afrocentrism is being hyjacked by some ignorant Black Americans who are getting themselves banned by serious history groups on Facebook.
“We wuz kangs” claiming all the Pharoahs of Egypt as Black, Nubians.
Are you HOTEP? Had to look that up before answering.....
It’s one of the questions asked before you’re allowed to join a group.
Still, some slip through and browbeat members supporting the DNA evidence that its only true for the 25th dynasty.
|
|
alaskaone
|
Share to:
#4
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：09/27/2020 6:07 PMCopy HTML What role, do you believe, the military/industrial complex played in the whole shabby 'conflict'?
Come to the Dark Side.
We have cookies.
The advantage of insinuations over hard arguments is that they bypass critical thought. No one can respond precisely to a charge that is utterly vague or to accusers who will envelope any reply in a poisonous fog of further insinuations. ~ David Warren, The Guardian
There was a time when there was enough freedom that it hardly mattered which brand of crooks ran government. That has not been true for a long time and that captures an important point. The more powerful the government becomes, the more people are willing to do in order to seize the prize, and the more afraid they become when someone else has control. ~ Glenn Harlan Reynolds
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve.”
― H.L. Mencken
|
|
Nickel
|
Share to:
#5
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：10/01/2020 7:25 PMCopy HTML Resting on whatever few laurels came out of Korea, officers didn’t call the right moves in Vietnam. Politics were good: no one wanted a communist country in Vietnam and Cuba was still fresh......we were under attack. Containment isn’t just our idea. The public opposition to Vietnam removed us from the battlefield at a point where the North, following the TET offensive was on the verge of capitulating, and more importantly, public opposition ended the Draft as an option for fighting our wars in other countries. Politicians switched to private military and hugely expanded the military industrial complex Eisenhower warned against. Public opinion always matters. People rule and are sometimes their own worst enemy. Short term gains, long term punishment. Politicians are slippery. Saving a country from communism is a good deed. We tried and the South Vietnamese have no hard feelings in what the North calls the American War. Communism in Vietnam is just a label with all the capitalist ingredients. Russia experienced their Vietnam in Afghanistan. China has its own version of capitalism under it’s communist label. So, our concern should be what we’ve done to educate them that their dark hearts are going to hit us with.....what would we do if we were aspiring to greatness instead of isolation. Best lifestyle overall is always under attack. What goes around, comes around.
|
|
alaskaone
|
Share to:
#6
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：10/02/2020 3:10 AMCopy HTML Okay, fair enough. It's my understanding the ho chi minh begged the league of nations to push France to let Vietnam govern themselves. The good fellows at the league told him to bugger off, is the gist of it. The US didn't entertain his request either and that's odd to me. As a former colony ourselves, you would think we would be sympathetic to such a request. A lot of people were infected with the marxist mind virus in France, including ho chi minh but I have got to wonder how things would have played out if the league and the US would have heard the guy out and stood up for his cause. It wasn't an unreasonable request. I'm disinclined to meddle in the domestic affairs of others. I'm law enforcement, of a sort, and that is a hard earned lesson; I'm not wise enough. And if I, face to face with individuals, am not wise enough to interfere with their domestic squabbles, how is it that governments are wise enough to meddle in the affairs of other nations? In my opinion, they're not wise enough and the results are pretty conclusive; 20+ years in Afghanistan, the migrant invasion due to the destruction of Libya, the absolute catastrophy that is Iraq, and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. Come to the Dark Side.
We have cookies.
The advantage of insinuations over hard arguments is that they bypass critical thought. No one can respond precisely to a charge that is utterly vague or to accusers who will envelope any reply in a poisonous fog of further insinuations. ~ David Warren, The Guardian
There was a time when there was enough freedom that it hardly mattered which brand of crooks ran government. That has not been true for a long time and that captures an important point. The more powerful the government becomes, the more people are willing to do in order to seize the prize, and the more afraid they become when someone else has control. ~ Glenn Harlan Reynolds
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve.”
― H.L. Mencken
|
|
Nickel
|
Share to:
#7
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：10/03/2020 11:04 PMCopy HTML Whatever wrongs got us into Iraq we’re there considering Iran’s rising influence: Thousands of lives and trillions of dollars later it does appear, ... that Iran has been the only real winner, and will continue to consolidate power unless the United States implements a clearly defined policy to retain presence and influence. It’s not so much a question of what the United States can hope to gain by continued involvement, as it is about what it stands to lose by a precipitous withdrawal. And to that, recent history bears sobering testament. https://www.militarytimes.com/opinion/commentary/2020/03/18/the-iraq-war-is-not-yet-over/ ............... The fight against ISIS was good, but apparently we didn’t have a good exit strategy or good strategy for staying as part of Containment of Russia. Russia is who Iran runs to when needed to control the Kurds, the Iraqis. Small states require protection from oppression and they are rejected by us, but just go to our enemies until one of them sees an advantage. What goes around, comes around.
|
|
WRS10
|
Share to:
#8
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：10/04/2020 9:05 AMCopy HTML Okay, fair enough. It's my understanding the ho chi minh begged the league of nations to push France to let Vietnam govern themselves. The good fellows at the league told him to bugger off, is the gist of it. The US didn't entertain his request either and that's odd to me. As a former colony ourselves, you would think we would be sympathetic to such a request. A lot of people were infected with the marxist mind virus in France, including ho chi minh but I have got to wonder how things would have played out if the league and the US would have heard the guy out and stood up for his cause. It wasn't an unreasonable request. I'm disinclined to meddle in the domestic affairs of others. I'm law enforcement, of a sort, and that is a hard earned lesson; I'm not wise enough. And if I, face to face with individuals, am not wise enough to interfere with their domestic squabbles, how is it that governments are wise enough to meddle in the affairs of other nations? In my opinion, they're not wise enough and the results are pretty conclusive; 20+ years in Afghanistan, the migrant invasion due to the destruction of Libya, the absolute catastrophy that is Iraq, and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. I suppose the US could have "done a Tito" on Ho Chi Minh - but that would have taken some forethought. Up until January 1945 too many Commie traitors were influencing US foreign policy so replacing European controlled colonies with Stalin controlled colonies was thought to be a good idea until Truman took over but he had other things on his plate so the opportunity was lost. |
|
alaskaone
|
Share to:
#9
|
|
Re：The Long History of Isolationism Date Posted：10/30/2020 3:24 AMCopy HTML Well that's a good point, WRS. Joe McCarthy, regardless of his methodology, was correct. Come to the Dark Side.
We have cookies.
The advantage of insinuations over hard arguments is that they bypass critical thought. No one can respond precisely to a charge that is utterly vague or to accusers who will envelope any reply in a poisonous fog of further insinuations. ~ David Warren, The Guardian
There was a time when there was enough freedom that it hardly mattered which brand of crooks ran government. That has not been true for a long time and that captures an important point. The more powerful the government becomes, the more people are willing to do in order to seize the prize, and the more afraid they become when someone else has control. ~ Glenn Harlan Reynolds
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve.”
― H.L. Mencken
|
