Home | Community | Message Board

High Mountain Compost
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]
OfflineEchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 13 years, 8 months
Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right
    #1465848 - 04/17/03 01:17 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

by Arianna Huffington

The Bible tells us that pride goeth before the fall. In Iraq, it cameth right after it.

From the moment that statue of Saddam hit the ground, the mood around the Rumsfeld campfire has been all high-fives, I-told-you-sos, and endless smug prattling about how the speedy fall of Baghdad is proof positive that those who opposed the invasion of Iraq were dead wrong.

What utter nonsense. In fact, the speedy fall of Baghdad proves the anti-war movement was dead right.

The whole pretext for our unilateral charge into Iraq was that the American people were in imminent danger from Saddam and his mighty war machine. The threat was so clear and present that we couldn't even give inspectors searching for weapons of mass destruction -- hey, remember those? -- another 30 days, as France had wanted.

Well, it turns out that, far from being on the verge of destroying Western civilization, Saddam and his 21st century Gestapo couldn't even muster a half-hearted defense of their own capital. The hawks' cakewalk disproves their own dire warnings. They can't have it both ways. The invasion has proved wildly successful in one other regard: It has unified most of the world -- especially the Arab world -- against us.

Back in 1991, more than half-a-dozen Arab nations were part of our Desert Storm coalition. Operation Iraqi Freedom's "coalition of the willing" had zero. Not even the polygamous potentates of Kuwait -- whose butts we saved last time out and who were most threatened by whatever threat Iraq still presented -- would join us. And, I'm sorry, but substituting Bulgaria and the island of Tonga for Egypt and Oman is just not going to cut it when it comes to winning hearts and minds on the Arab street.

In fact, almost everything about the invasion -- from the go-it-alone build-up to the mayhem the fall of Saddam has unleashed -- has played right into the hands of those intent on demonizing our country. Islamic extremists must be having a field day signing up recruits for the holy war they're preparing to wage against us. Instead of Uncle Sam wants you, their recruiting posters feature a different kind of patriotic image: an American soldier ill-advisedly draping the American flag over Saddam's face.

The anti-war movement did not oppose the war out of fear that America was going to lose. It was the Bush administration's pathological and frantic obsession with an immediate, damn-the-consequences invasion that fueled the protests.

And please don't point to jubilant Iraqis dancing in the streets to validate the case for "pre-emptive liberation." You'd be doing the Baghdad Bugaloo too if the murderous tyrant who'd been eating off golden plates while your family starved finally got what was coming to him. It in no way proves that running roughshod over international law and pouring Iraqi oil -- now brought to you by the good folks at Halliburton -- onto the flames of anti-American hatred was a good idea. It wasn't before the war, and it still isn't now. The unintended consequences have barely begun to unfold.

And the idea that our slamdunk of Saddam actually proves the White House was right is particularly dangerous because it encourages the Wolfowitzes and the Perles and the Cheneys to argue that we should be invading Syria or Iran or North Korea or Cuba as soon as we catch our breath. They've tasted blood.

It's important to remember that the Arab world has seen a very different war than we have. They are seeing babies with limbs blown off, children wailing beside their dead mothers, Arab journalists killed by American tanks and bombers, holy men hacked to death and dragged through the streets. They are seeing American forces leaving behind a wake of destruction, looting, hunger, humiliation, and chaos.

Who's been handling our war PR, Osama bin Laden? The language and imagery are all wrong. Having Tom DeLay gush about our "army of virtue" at the same time we're blowing up mosques is definitely not sending the right message to a Muslim world already suspicious that we're waging a war on Islam.

Neither is Ari Fleischer's claim that the administration can't do anything to keep Christian missionaries -- including those who have described the Islamic prophet Muhammad as a "demon-possessed pedophile" and a "terrorist" -- from going on a holy crusade to Baghdad. You think the Arab world might take that the wrong way? If there is one thing that could bring Sunnis and Shiites together, it's the common hatred of evangelical zealots who denigrate their prophet.

And it doesn't help to have the American media referring to Jay Garner, the retired general Don Rumsfeld picked to oversee the rebuilding of Iraq, as "viceroy." It reeks of colonial imperialism. Why not just call him "Head Bwana?" Or "Garner of Arabia?" I didn't realize the Supreme Court had handed Bush a scepter to go along with the Florida recount.

The powerful role that shame and humiliation have played in shaping world history is considerable, but something the Bush team seems utterly clueless about. Which is why the anti-war movement must be stalwart in its refusal to be silenced or browbeaten by the gloating "I told you so" chorus on the right. On the contrary, it needs to make sure that the doctrine of preemptive invasion is forever buried in the sands of Iraq.

Especially as the administration, high on the heady fumes of Saddam's ouster, turns its covetous eyes on Syria. I give it less than a week before someone starts making the case that President Assad is the next, next Hitler.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1465898 - 04/17/03 01:33 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

yesssssssss


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1466144 - 04/17/03 03:40 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Time will tell, we'll have to wait and see. Liberal democracy might flourish in Iraq, or it might not. While we're waiting Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait will get "regime changed", one at a time.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezeronio
Stranger
Male

Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1466330 - 04/17/03 07:26 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Iran is acutally more democratic then other countires in the region.
Iran?s election


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OnlineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 33,163
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 3 minutes, 14 seconds
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1466381 - 04/17/03 08:11 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Good read.

And Arianna Huffington is hot by the way.



--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Monocles- Psychedelic (That's Where It's At)



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1466763 - 04/17/03 11:26 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Dats a cracker!  :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegrib
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/01/03
Posts: 550
Loc: Here and there
Last seen: 8 years, 12 days
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1466868 - 04/17/03 12:18 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

It's important to remember that the Arab world has seen a very different war than we have. They are seeing babies with limbs blown off, children wailing beside their dead mothers, Arab journalists killed by American tanks and bombers, holy men hacked to death and dragged through the streets. They are seeing American forces leaving behind a wake of destruction, looting, hunger, humiliation, and chaos.




very true... and I wonder if support here would be as high as the 'polls' indicate they are if American media had not censored the realities of the war.


--------------------
<~>Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake <~>


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/23/00
Posts: 532
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1467035 - 04/17/03 01:32 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

liberal democracy doesnt even flourish here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: zeronio]
    #1467105 - 04/17/03 01:53 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Irrelavent, Iran is an oppressive nation which activly sponsors terrorism. They will be "regime changed".


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 9 months, 13 days
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1467118 - 04/17/03 01:57 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

oppressive nation which activly sponsors terrorism


Bush's description of every middle east oil producing nation... :grin:


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1467358 - 04/17/03 03:23 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

didn't expect much better from her
Quote:

holy men hacked to death and dragged through the streets.



where is she pulling this from?

how does the quick fall of iraq prove anything? I think she missed the point of why saddam was a danger in the first place. of course the victory was going to be quick and relatively easy, didn't the entire administration say this in the first place? the real danger of saddam with WMD is not that he was going to attack the US with them, but he was going to sell them to terrorist who would attack the US. big difference. he didn't need a big military for the second option.
Quote:

Islamic extremists must be having a field day signing up recruits for the holy war they're preparing to wage against us.



probably, but is this happening in Iraq anymore? Nope. of course i can't say for certain, but i doubt it. And the countries that allow these sorts of things will be taken care of in a matter of time. We're going to see an end to state-sponsered terrorism in the middle east pretty quickly.
Quote:

Neither is Ari Fleischer's claim that the administration can't do anything to keep Christian missionaries -- including those who have described the Islamic prophet Muhammad as a "demon-possessed pedophile" and a "terrorist" -- from going on a holy crusade to Baghdad.



what the hell can the administration do?? what about free speech? was the administration able to stop the human sheilds from going to iraq? and who is planning a "holy crusade"? wtf is she talking about?
Quote:

And it doesn't help to have the American media referring to Jay Garner, the retired general Don Rumsfeld picked to oversee the rebuilding of Iraq, as "viceroy."



is it just me or is she really nit-picking here? what the hell does it matter what we call him?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: grib]
    #1467374 - 04/17/03 03:29 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

very true... and I wonder if support here would be as high as the 'polls' indicate they are if American media had not censored the realities of the war.



how did they censor the reality of the war? by not showing mangled bodies? do you think that americans need to see these things to know that people died? Al-jazeera and many other arab media sources concentrated on these things. there main argument against the war was these pictures, and they showed every single one that they could.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1467376 - 04/17/03 03:29 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

democracy might flourish in Iraq, or it might not.

even if it does, that doesn't mean that it won't involve islamic fundamentalism, with all its oppression and misogyny.

While we're waiting Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait will get "regime changed", one at a time.

doubtful. maaaaybe syria.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: flow]
    #1467380 - 04/17/03 03:30 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

Islamic extremists must be having a field day signing up recruits for the holy war they're preparing to wage against us.



probably, but is this happening in Iraq anymore? Nope. of course i can't say for certain, but i doubt it. And the countries that allow these sorts of things will be taken care of in a matter of time. We're going to see an end to state-sponsered terrorism in the middle east pretty quickly.



Even if every government stopped sponsoring terrorism(which is almost impossible without us conquering the world), there are certain countries where the government doesn't have a very firm control over the populace except in certain areas. Terrorism will thrive as long as we continue give the terrorists a reason to attack us.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinepattern
multiplayer

Registered: 07/19/02
Posts: 2,185
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: silversoul7]
    #1467385 - 04/17/03 03:32 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

> do you think that americans need to see these things to know that people died?

Yes.


--------------------
man = monkey + mushroom


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: silversoul7]
    #1467424 - 04/17/03 03:47 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Terrorism will thrive as long as we continue give the terrorists a reason to attack us.



Do you mean, bring home U.S. troops from the approx 130 or 140 countires they're stationed in BESIDES THE U.S.?

Do you mean, stop giving money to foreign governments so their people won't perceive the U.S. as funding their oppressors?

Do you mean, stop using the U.S. military to make sure foreign countries are 'friendly' to U.S. business operations outside of the U.S. borders and not in international waters?

Do you mean, stop having the U.S. government fund foreign military operations in the name of combating 'the war on drugs?'

Do you mean stop having the U.S. government subsidizing U.S.business operations to promote them overseas?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Edited by Evolving (04/17/03 03:52 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: silversoul7]
    #1467426 - 04/17/03 03:47 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Even if every government stopped sponsoring terrorism(which is almost impossible without us conquering the world),



not really, the threat of force is enough. Don't you think Syria is seriously reconsidering their stance? If the countries that currently support terrorism thought that the US is going to crush them unless they give up the terrorists, would they keep supporting them? Probably not.
Quote:

there are certain countries where the government doesn't have a very firm control over the populace except in certain areas.



so, we push the terrorist to these areas, don't you see how this would be a big help? state-sponsered terrorism is the worst kind, with the entire world against terrorists, they would have to run and hide somewhere, and while there running and hiding, they're not attacking. also, they're not going to be doing much recruiting if they have to hide.
Quote:

Terrorism will thrive as long as we continue give the terrorists a reason to attack us.



true, there will always be terrorism, because they can come up with whatever reason they want to attack. But state-sponsered terrorism can be stopped.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Evolving]
    #1467436 - 04/17/03 03:50 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

Terrorism will thrive as long as we continue give the terrorists a reason to attack us.



Do you mean, bring home U.S. troops from the approx 130 or 140 countires they're stationed in BESIDES THE U.S.?

Do you mean, stop giving money to foreign governments so their people won't perceive the U.S. as funding their oppressors?

Do you mean, stop using the U.S. military to make sure foreign countries are 'friendly' to U.S. business operations outside of the U.S. borders and not in international waters?

Do you mean, stop having the U.S. government fund foreign military operations in the name of combating 'the war on drugs?'

Do you mean stop having the U.S. government stop subsidizing U.S.business operations to promote them overseas?



Yes to all of those things you mentioned.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: silversoul7]
    #1467443 - 04/17/03 03:53 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Kewl, then we're in agreement. :cool:


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Evolving]
    #1467455 - 04/17/03 03:57 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

so, isolationism then? i'll admit, if we tottaly cut ourselves off from the rest of the world, we would be much less likely to be the targets of terrorists, but can we really just say fuck you to the rest of the world?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: flow]
    #1467466 - 04/17/03 04:00 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

what evolving recommended there isn't isolationism.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: flow]
    #1467498 - 04/17/03 04:07 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

No, not isolationism. You can have free and open trade, no punitive or discriminatory tariffs and free travel between nations.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: ]
    #1467516 - 04/17/03 04:11 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

what evolving recommended there isn't isolationism.



how do you figure?

Quote:

Do you mean, bring home U.S. troops from the approx 130 or 140 countires they're stationed in BESIDES THE U.S.?



so, bring home all of the US troops stationed abroad. 1st step in isolationism. while a good idea in theory, most of our troops abroad are wanted there.

Quote:

Do you mean, stop giving money to foreign governments so their people won't perceive the U.S. as funding their oppressors?



so, no financial aid whatsoever to anyone. 2nd step in isolatoinism. again, while good in theory, the US gives more money in foreign aid than any other country, and many of these countries are suffering greatly right now, and would be far worse without some US help.

Quote:

Do you mean, stop using the U.S. military to make sure foreign countries are 'friendly' to U.S. business operations outside of the U.S. borders and not in international waters?



well, as for this one, im not sure what you mean by it.

Quote:

Do you mean, stop having the U.S. government fund foreign military operations in the name of combating 'the war on drugs?'



i agree with this one 100%. but i really don't think it is a big factor in terrorism.

Quote:

Do you mean stop having the U.S. government stop subsidizing U.S.business operations to promote them overseas?



so, end all business ties with other countries. shut down factories and "sweat shops" in all other countries and move them back to the US. 3rd step in isolationism. again, good idea in theory, but the US employs more people in foreign countries than does any other country. while sweat shops are usually bad, many of the people working there would be starving if they didn't.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Evolving]
    #1467527 - 04/17/03 04:13 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

You can have free and open trade,



but not support US businesses overseas? or just no US factories and such?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: flow]
    #1467568 - 04/17/03 04:25 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

how do you figure?

One entry found for isolationism.

Main Entry: iso?la?tion?ism
Pronunciation: -sh&-"ni-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1922
: a policy of national isolation by abstention from alliances and other international political and economic relations
- iso?la?tion?ist /-sh(&-)nist/ noun or adjective

Merriam-Webster Online: Isolationism

what he was recommending was that the US stop its military adventures in foreign countries. that and a policy of free trade. how many other nations in the world have so many troops stationed overseas? do you consider nations that do not station their military all over the world isolationist?

so, bring home all of the US troops stationed abroad. 1st step in isolationism. while a good idea in theory, most of our troops abroad are wanted there.

again, not isolationism. most of them are wanted there? first: can you prove this? i would argue that most of them are NOT wanted there. second: who cares if they ARE wanted there? why should american taxpayers pay to send american troops to be stationed in foriegn nations? it doesn't matter if they "want" us there or not.

so, no financial aid whatsoever to anyone. 2nd step in isolatoinism. again, while good in theory, the US gives more money in foreign aid than any other country, and many of these countries are suffering greatly right now, and would be far worse without some US help.

again, NOT isolationism. not giving away free money does not make us isolationist. so what if other countries would like to have our money? should american taxpayers expect to not only pay welfare for american citizens, but also to the governments of foreign nations?

so, end all business ties with other countries. shut down factories and "sweat shops" in all other countries and move them back to the US. 3rd step in isolationism. again, good idea in theory, but the US employs more people in foreign countries than does any other country. while sweat shops are usually bad, many of the people working there would be starving if they didn't.

this is not ending all business ties with other nations. do you know the meaning of the word "subsidizing"?

evolving is talking about free trade without economic or military intervention. he is in no way describing 'isolationism'. isolationism means ending trade and diplomacy with other nations.

a policy of free trade and military non-intervention is not isolationism.


Edited by mushmaster (04/17/03 04:37 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: ]
    #1467666 - 04/17/03 04:52 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

a policy of national isolation by abstention from alliances



so removing troops from nations that are our allies that want us there doesn't qualify for this? many of our alliances basically require that we have troops in other countries.
Quote:

and other international political and economic relations



like overseas business ventures? i still don't get what your saying.
your definition of isolationism seems to be exactly what mine is.
Quote:

how many other nations in the world have so many troops stationed overseas?



per capita? Britain and France are probably pretty close.
Quote:

why should american taxpayers pay to send american troops to be stationed in foriegn nations?



to protect our allies. not bothering to protect our allies is isolationism.
Quote:

so what if other countries would like to have our money? should american taxpayers expect to not only pay welfare for american citizens, but also to the governments of foreign nations?



i agree, but you still seem to be making arguments for isolationism. i don't get how you don't see this as isolationist.
Quote:

a policy of free trade and military non-intervention is not isolationism.



but if military non-intervention results in the US ignoring the needs of allies to have US troops stationed there, then it is most definetely isolationism. Get it?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: flow]
    #1467714 - 04/17/03 05:09 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

and other international political and economic relations
like overseas business ventures? i still don't get what your saying.

if the american government by law ended all american business ventures overseas, this would be an isolationist policy. i am not advocating this. neither is evolving.

per capita? Britain and France are probably pretty close.

1. source?
2. if this is true, so what? most nations in the world restrict the use of their armed forces to national defense. they are not considered isolationist for doing so. are the US, britain, and france the only 'non-isolationist' nations in the world? is sending your military all around the world a requisite of being 'non-isolationist'?

i agree, but you still seem to be making arguments for isolationism. i don't get how you don't see this as isolationist.

how does refusing to send free money to other nations in the world make us isolationist?

so removing troops from nations that are our allies that want us there doesn't qualify for this? many of our alliances basically require that we have troops in other countries.

to protect our allies. not bothering to protect our allies is isolationism.

but if military non-intervention results in the US ignoring the needs of allies to have US troops stationed there, then it is most definetely isolationism. Get it?

not entering into alliances that require the US to station troops abroad in the first place would be a good idea. there are a few cases in which it is genuinely in the interest of the people of the united states to have our troops stationed abroad. it is only in these instances that we should ever enter into an agreement requiring us to send our military abroad. our armed forces are not mercenaries.

if the united states maintains free trade and diplomatic relations with other nations of the world, but refuses to send troops and aid, this does not make us isolationist.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinepattern
multiplayer

Registered: 07/19/02
Posts: 2,185
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
Re: Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right [Re: Evolving]
    #1467814 - 04/17/03 05:44 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Do you mean, stop having the U.S. government fund foreign military operations in the name of combating 'the war on drugs?'





Thats the one that pisses me off the most: imposing American anti-drug morality on the world.


--------------------
man = monkey + mushroom


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Why The Anti-War Movement Was Right
( 1 2 all )
jimsuzo 2,026 20 04/23/03 06:14 PM
by Xlea321
* anti war Lenore 1,107 6 10/16/01 05:13 AM
by MokshaMan
* Pigs Attack California Anti-War Protesters
( 1 2 3 4 all )
LearyfanS 4,801 71 04/09/03 05:22 AM
by Paid
* Carving up 10 anti-war arguments
( 1 2 3 all )
Anonymous 3,665 42 04/09/03 01:26 PM
by friartuck
* February 15 Anti-War Demonstrations....
( 1 2 all )
Angry Mycologist 4,696 33 02/16/03 04:36 PM
by Angry Mycologist
* Why The Anti-War Movement AND The Pope Were Right
( 1 2 all )
jimsuzo 1,982 31 04/25/03 07:00 PM
by wingnutx
* US Anti-War Protests Flare, More Than 1,000 Arrests
( 1 2 3 4 all )
pattern 6,586 66 03/24/03 01:19 AM
by Xlea321
* Are you anti-war and pro-democracy?
( 1 2 3 all )
Evolving 4,901 48 03/27/03 12:19 AM
by JonnyOnTheSpot

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
2,739 topic views. 3 members, 1 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2022 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.037 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.