Foriegn policy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by tpahl, Jul 27, 2004.

  1. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
  2. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    Where are we gonna keep our troops then?
     
  3. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    Well if we are not going to keep our troops in foriegn countries, then I would have to guess we would have them stay here on US soil... protecting us. I know I would feel much safer having troops protecting us in America rather than interfering in other nations by conducting nation building excercises.

    I know President Bush was opposed to nation building during the last election cycle. Appearantly we are supposed to forget that now.
     
  4. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    OOOOOPS 9/11---CMON TP!!!! wake up!!!!

    So our troops sit on thier asses until the enemy hits the beach?
     
  5. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    Hey great, the Navy can stop investing money on expensive deployments. Think of all the tax payer money we can save by having our ships at US docks. :rolleyes:
     
  6. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    I can see it now:

    [cue 70s Village People hit]

    In the Navy,
    You can sail the seven seas (actually, just the three bordering the U.S.)
    In the Navy,
    You can put your heart at ease (not really, since terrorists will try to bomb the boat)
    ...
     
  7. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    :teeth:
     
  8. popefumanchu
    Offline

    popefumanchu Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Thanks Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Nebraska Panhandle
    Ratings:
    +5
    The war on terror must be brought to the enemy. We should not fight them at home. We should pull troops out of countries that are not sharing our interests such as France and Germany.
     
  9. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    Osama gave three reasons for 9/11. they were...

    1. US troops in Saudi Arabia
    2. US embargo against Iraq
    3. US support of Isreal.

    So if we had a non interventionist foreign policy 9/11 would have been MUCH LESS likely. Unfortunately the 9/11 report focused on how our intelligence failed to catch the attack rather than how to prevent people from wanting to attack us to begin with.

    No. Our troops train at home and act as a deterent rather an instigator to attacks on US soil. As pointed out above, 9/11 was a result of US troops not sitting at home. Just because our troops sit at home during peace time does not mean we do not still look out for invasions and attacks on the US and do something about them. It just does not mean we have troops sitting in 100+ countries pissing off people to the point that they fly airplanes into our buildings.

    I understand that you do not agree with this, I do not expect you to. But an non interventionist foriegn policy is something that a large portion of the population is interested in. It is still a reasonable arguement even if you diagree with it. I disagree with bush's plan, but i recognize that it is a popular plan as well and is reasonable. Both should be discussed but unfortunately both Kerry and bush support sending troops to 100's of countries and both want to send more troops to iraq. If the war is such a crucial issue as everyone seems to agree, why would we want to limit the ideas on what to do with iraq to Bush and Kerrys which are both so similar? Badnarik would at the very least bring new ideas to the table. Even if they are dismissed and the voters chose bush instead, I am sure you would agree that america is better off for at least being given the choice.

    Travis

    Travis
     
  10. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    That would be a great start. here is a list of 135 countries we had troops in as of sept 2003. How many are in the coalition of the willing?

    After we remove our troops from all that are not willing to help us, we can then start removing ones that serve no interest to american security.

    After we remove those then we can remove the ones that can afford to provide their own military.

    how many does that leave us?

    SOURCE: http://www.dior.whs.mil/mmid/M05/hst0309.pdf

    Afghanistan
    Albania
    Algeria
    Antigua
    Argentina
    Australia
    Austria
    Azerbaijan
    Bahamas
    Bahrain
    Bangladesh
    Barbados
    Belgium
    Belize
    Bolivia
    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Botswana
    Brazil
    Bulgaria
    Burma
    Burundi
    Cambodia
    Cameroon
    Canada
    Chad
    Chile
    China
    Columbia
    Congo
    Costa Rica
    Cote DÂ’lvoire
    Cuba
    Cyprus
    Czech Republic
    Denmark
    Djibouti
    Dominican Republic
    East Timor
    Ecuador
    Egypt
    El Salvador
    Eritrea
    Estonia
    Ethiopia
    Fiji Finland
    France
    Georgia
    Germany
    Ghana
    Greece
    Guatemala
    Guinea
    Haiti
    Honduras
    Hungary
    Iceland
    India
    Indonesia
    Iraq
    Ireland
    Israel
    Italy
    Jamaica
    Japan
    Jordan
    Kazakhstan
    Kenya
    Kuwait
    Kyrgyzstan
    Laos
    Latvia
    Lebanon
    Liberia
    Lithuania
    Luxembourg
    Macedonia
    Madagascar
    Malawi
    Malaysia
    Mali
    Malta
    Mexico
    Mongolia
    Morocco
    Mozambique
    Nepal
    Netherlands
    New Zealand
    Nicaragua
    Niger
    Nigeria
    North Korea
    Norway
    Oman
    Pakistan
    Paraguay
    Peru
    Philippines
    Poland
    Portugal
    Qatar
    Romania
    Russia
    Saudi Arabia
    Senegal
    Serbia and Montenegro
    Sierra Leone
    Singapore
    Slovenia
    Spain
    South Africa
    South Korea
    Sri Lanka
    Suriname
    Sweden
    Switzerland
    Syria
    Tanzania
    Thailand
    Togo
    Trinidad and Tobago
    Tunisia
    Turkey
    Turkmenistan
    Uganda
    Ukraine
    United Arab Emirates
    United Kingdom
    Uruguay
    Venezuela
    Vietnam
    Yemen
    Zambia
    Zimbabwe
     

Share This Page