Is America To Blame?

[Charles_Main]

if america was imperialistic we would have conquered both japan and australia, iraq, and most of the western hemisphere by now. People who say the US is imperialistic do not know the definition of imperialistic.

Then perhaps it's time for our troops to leave Japan, at the very least? Something tells me they're not a threat anymore.

They are there at the invitation of the government of Japan Jackass. Our troops there have absolutely no control or say over any thing that happens in Japan. Same with the troops in Germany and Korea. The remain there at the behest of the host nation. Their roll is only defense and deterrence and they do not control the government of said countries.

Not imperialism

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

if america was imperialistic we would have conquered both japan and australia, iraq, and most of the western hemisphere by now. People who say the US is imperialistic do not know the definition of imperialistic.

Then perhaps it's time for our troops to leave Japan, at the very least? Something tells me they're not a threat anymore.

They are there at the invitation of the government of Japan Jackass. Our troops there have absolutely no control or say over any thing that happens in Japan. Same with the troops in Germany and Korea. The remain there at the behest of the host nation. Their roll is only defense and deterrence and they do not control the government of said countries.

Not imperialism

It's not nice to call people names.

 

[Dr Grump]

Name another nation that has sacrificed so much Blood and treasure, and repeatedly then returned the conquered land to the conquered? .

Britain....

 

[Charles_Main]

Then perhaps it's time for our troops to leave Japan, at the very least? Something tells me they're not a threat anymore.

They are there at the invitation of the government of Japan Jackass. Our troops there have absolutely no control or say over any thing that happens in Japan. Same with the troops in Germany and Korea. The remain there at the behest of the host nation. Their roll is only defense and deterrence and they do not control the government of said countries.

Not imperialism

It's not nice to call people names.

You are right it isn't and for that I am sorry. However your comment was rather......lets say odd. Were debating if we are imperialist, and you say we should get out of Japan. Which seems to me you are implying still being there makes us Imperialists.

If we were still occupying the nation and running the government. Which we did do for a time. I would agree.

get the difference?

 

[jillian]

No, we didn't. Not even close.

actually, we did... until pearl harbor.

lots of lives lost til then.

Trade embargoes on Japan and supporting the Allies wasn't exactly minding our own business. But not only did we not mind our own business around the time of World War 2, but there was World War 1, the war with the Philippines, the Spanish-American War, etc... Clearly "minding our own business" wasn't an American policy in the late-19th and early-20th centuries.

do you think we should have stayed out of WWII??

I think, Kevin, it appears you dont think any military or even non-military action is appropriate.

the world goes 'round... and there are times it is in our interest to intervene. and there are times it is the right thing to intervene.

 

[Dr Grump]

You are right it isn't and for that I am sorry. However your comment was rather......lets say odd. Were debating if we are imperialist, and you say we should get out of Japan. Which seems to me you are implying still being there makes us Imperialists.

If we were still occupying the nation and running the government. Which we did do for a time. I would agree.

get the difference?

In the original piece I did put the word imperialist in speech marks for a reason, for while I don't mean the term literally, there is an element of expansionism within America.

I think most Americans of any political persuasion hate the term because it's anethema to what your whole country was built on, and indeed what the revolution was all about.

However, when you trot around the globe doing what you are doing, it is a form of imperialism IMO...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

They are there at the invitation of the government of Japan Jackass. Our troops there have absolutely no control or say over any thing that happens in Japan. Same with the troops in Germany and Korea. The remain there at the behest of the host nation. Their roll is only defense and deterrence and they do not control the government of said countries.

Not imperialism

It's not nice to call people names.

You are right it isn't and for that I am sorry. However your comment was rather......lets say odd. Were debating if we are imperialist, and you say we should get out of Japan. Which seems to me you are implying still being there makes us Imperialists.

If we were still occupying the nation and running the government. Which we did do for a time. I would agree.

get the difference?

We're in Japan because we want to be in Japan. Not because Japan asked us to be there. We need to leave Japan, whether they want us there or not.

 

[Dr Grump]

I think Kevin objects to American lives being lost over things that are not intrinsic to the country's survival..

...could be wrong...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

actually, we did... until pearl harbor.

lots of lives lost til then.

Trade embargoes on Japan and supporting the Allies wasn't exactly minding our own business. But not only did we not mind our own business around the time of World War 2, but there was World War 1, the war with the Philippines, the Spanish-American War, etc... Clearly "minding our own business" wasn't an American policy in the late-19th and early-20th centuries.

do you think we should have stayed out of WWII??

I think, Kevin, it appears you dont think any military or even non-military action is appropriate.

the world goes 'round... and there are times it is in our interest to intervene. and there are times it is the right thing to intervene.

I think we should have remained neutral in the first place, and perhaps Japan wouldn't have attacked Pearl Harbor. Then no Americans need have died. Even better, I think we should have stayed out of World War 1 and perhaps Hitler would never have come to power.

I believe in noninterventionism. We can't and shouldn't be getting involved in every conflict that occurs. Though, in my opinion, there has only been one just-war in the history of the United States, and that is the Revolutionary War. I think every other war was a mistake or at the very least was avoidable.

 

[jillian]

Trade embargoes on Japan and supporting the Allies wasn't exactly minding our own business. But not only did we not mind our own business around the time of World War 2, but there was World War 1, the war with the Philippines, the Spanish-American War, etc... Clearly "minding our own business" wasn't an American policy in the late-19th and early-20th centuries.

do you think we should have stayed out of WWII??

I think, Kevin, it appears you dont think any military or even non-military action is appropriate.

the world goes 'round... and there are times it is in our interest to intervene. and there are times it is the right thing to intervene.

I think we should have remained neutral in the first place, and perhaps Japan wouldn't have attacked Pearl Harbor. Then no Americans need have died. Even better, I think we should have stayed out of World War 1 and perhaps Hitler would never have come to power.

I believe in noninterventionism. We can't and shouldn't be getting involved in every conflict that occurs. Though, in my opinion, there has only been one just-war in the history of the United States, and that is the Revolutionary War. I think every other war was a mistake or at the very least was avoidable.

I don't beieve in non-interventionism.

I don't believe in adventurism either.

But I know that a lot of lives were saved by our involvement in WWI and WWII... though had the peace at the end of WWI been smarter, the second might not have happened.

And by the same token... and surmising in the same way... perhaps had we not intervened. Japan and Germany would have divided up the world.

I'm thinking that wouldn't have been so hot.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I think Kevin objects to American lives being lost over things that are not intrinsic to the country's survival..

...could be wrong...

Yes, that's certainly part of it. Though I would also say when we stick our noses where it doesn't belong we inevitably make the situation worse. For example, if the U.S. had not gotten involved in World War 1 then the Allies wouldn't have been able to force the Treaty of Versailles on a defeated Germany, Germany wouldn't have destroyed it's economy, and Hitler would have had no ammunition for his political rise. Now wouldn't the world be better off if Hitler had never come to power? Now we can't know for sure he wouldn't have come to power anyways, but we can safely say it's less likely.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

do you think we should have stayed out of WWII??

I think, Kevin, it appears you dont think any military or even non-military action is appropriate.

the world goes 'round... and there are times it is in our interest to intervene. and there are times it is the right thing to intervene.

I think we should have remained neutral in the first place, and perhaps Japan wouldn't have attacked Pearl Harbor. Then no Americans need have died. Even better, I think we should have stayed out of World War 1 and perhaps Hitler would never have come to power.

I believe in noninterventionism. We can't and shouldn't be getting involved in every conflict that occurs. Though, in my opinion, there has only been one just-war in the history of the United States, and that is the Revolutionary War. I think every other war was a mistake or at the very least was avoidable.

I don't beieve in non-interventionism.

I don't believe in adventurism either.

But I know that a lot of lives were saved by our involvement in WWI and WWII... though had the peace at the end of WWI been smarter, the second might not have happened.

And by the same token... and surmising in the same way... perhaps had we not intervened. Japan and Germany would have divided up the world.

I'm thinking that wouldn't have been so hot.

And perhaps more lives would have been saved in the long run had we stayed out all together.

I think it's unlikely that Germany and Japan would have gotten the chance to divide up the world. Germany didn't want war with the UK, let alone the US.

 

[Charles_Main]

It's not nice to call people names.

You are right it isn't and for that I am sorry. However your comment was rather......lets say odd. Were debating if we are imperialist, and you say we should get out of Japan. Which seems to me you are implying still being there makes us Imperialists.

If we were still occupying the nation and running the government. Which we did do for a time. I would agree.

get the difference?

We're in Japan because we want to be in Japan. Not because Japan asked us to be there. We need to leave Japan, whether they want us there or not.

Now that is a lie. The Japanese Government signed agreements and wants us there.

Of course we want to be there as well or we would have left.

Proximity to China, Taiwan, Korea and Russia are of course our reasons. And they are Japans reasons as well. Denying it is a mutual relationship is a PURE LIE.

 

[Charles_Main]

I think we should have remained neutral in the first place, and perhaps Japan wouldn't have attacked Pearl Harbor. Then no Americans need have died. Even better, I think we should have stayed out of World War 1 and perhaps Hitler would never have come to power.

I believe in noninterventionism. We can't and shouldn't be getting involved in every conflict that occurs. Though, in my opinion, there has only been one just-war in the history of the United States, and that is the Revolutionary War. I think every other war was a mistake or at the very least was avoidable.

I don't beieve in non-interventionism.

I don't believe in adventurism either.

But I know that a lot of lives were saved by our involvement in WWI and WWII... though had the peace at the end of WWI been smarter, the second might not have happened.

And by the same token... and surmising in the same way... perhaps had we not intervened. Japan and Germany would have divided up the world.

I'm thinking that wouldn't have been so hot.

And perhaps more lives would have been saved in the long run had we stayed out all together.

I think it's unlikely that German and Japan would have gotten the chance to divide up the world. Germany didn't want war with the UK, let alone the US.

LOL you are out of your mind.

You do realize that the Russians admit with out Allied support and the Second front they would surely have fallen. They almost did with nearly half the Germany Army on the western Front. After that there would not have been any thing to stop German Expansion And if we stayed out Nobody buy Aussie and the UK would have stood in Japans way.

You clearly do not understand WWII at all.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You are right it isn't and for that I am sorry. However your comment was rather......lets say odd. Were debating if we are imperialist, and you say we should get out of Japan. Which seems to me you are implying still being there makes us Imperialists.

If we were still occupying the nation and running the government. Which we did do for a time. I would agree.

get the difference?

We're in Japan because we want to be in Japan. Not because Japan asked us to be there. We need to leave Japan, whether they want us there or not.

Now that is a lie. The Japanese Government signed agreements and wants us there.

Of course we want to be there as well or we would have left.

Proximity to China, Taiwan, Korea and Russia are of course our reasons. And they are Japans reasons as well. Denying it is a mutual relationship is a PURE LIE.

There was no lie. I made no statement affirming or negating whether Japan actually wants our military presence there or not. I merely made the point that the U.S. government wants our troops there, so it doesn't matter whether Japan wants us there or not.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I don't beieve in non-interventionism.

I don't believe in adventurism either.

But I know that a lot of lives were saved by our involvement in WWI and WWII... though had the peace at the end of WWI been smarter, the second might not have happened.

And by the same token... and surmising in the same way... perhaps had we not intervened. Japan and Germany would have divided up the world.

I'm thinking that wouldn't have been so hot.

And perhaps more lives would have been saved in the long run had we stayed out all together.

I think it's unlikely that Germany and Japan would have gotten the chance to divide up the world. Germany didn't want war with the UK, let alone the US.

LOL you are out of your mind.

You do realize that the Russian admit with out Allied support and the Second front they would surely have fallen. After that there would not have been any thing to stop German Expansion And if we stayed out Nobody buy Aussie and the UK would have stood in Japans way.

You clearly do not understand WWII at all.

Again with the insults. Words can hurt you know.

 

[jillian]

And perhaps more lives would have been saved in the long run had we stayed out all together.

I think it's unlikely that Germany and Japan would have gotten the chance to divide up the world. Germany didn't want war with the UK, let alone the US.

that leaves an interesting quandry for me. I clearly have a vested interest in Hitler having been stopped.... and I don't believe any lives at all would have been saved. Instead, i think it is fantasy to think that they would have been nice had we just handed them the world.

See... you're not going to like this, but I think that the idea that we can sit back and not intervene at all is naive in the extreme.... in the same way that i believe unnecessary wars of choice and over-interventionism is improper, ultimately dangerous and far too costly. I think that you believe that is we're nice, they'll leave us alone. And the reality is that isn't how things work. It's one of the reasons I find Ron Paul to be absurd.

I also suspect that as we get older, we perhaps don't believe things like 'they'll be nice if we leave them alone' in the way we wish we could when we're younger and more idealistic. Reality is there are things worth fighting and dying for.

 

[Charles_Main]

We're in Japan because we want to be in Japan. Not because Japan asked us to be there. We need to leave Japan, whether they want us there or not.

Now that is a lie. The Japanese Government signed agreements and wants us there.

Of course we want to be there as well or we would have left.

Proximity to China, Taiwan, Korea and Russia are of course our reasons. And they are Japans reasons as well. Denying it is a mutual relationship is a PURE LIE.

There was no lie. I made no statement affirming or negating whether Japan actually wants our military presence there or not. I merely made the point that the U.S. government wants our troops there, so it doesn't matter whether Japan wants us there or not.

um yes you did

We're in Japan because we want to be in Japan. Not because Japan asked us to be there. We need to leave Japan, whether they want us there or not.

If the wanted us gone they would tell us.

 

[Dr Grump]

As for my orginal premise, the US can take some blame, but not all, for what happens to it...

 

[Charles_Main]

And perhaps more lives would have been saved in the long run had we stayed out all together.

I think it's unlikely that Germany and Japan would have gotten the chance to divide up the world. Germany didn't want war with the UK, let alone the US.

that leaves an interesting quandry for me. I clearly have a vested interest in Hitler having been stopped.... and I don't believe any lives at all would have been saved. Instead, i think it is fantasy to think that they would have been nice had we just handed them the world.

See... you're not going to like this, but I think that the idea that we can sit back and not intervene at all is naive in the extreme.... in the same way that i believe unnecessary wars of choice and over-interventionism is improper, ultimately dangerous and far too costly. I think that you believe that is we're nice, they'll leave us alone. And the reality is that isn't how things work. It's one of the reasons I find Ron Paul to be absurd.

I also suspect that as we get older, we perhaps don't believe things like 'they'll be nice if we leave them alone' in the way we wish we could when we're younger and more idealistic. Reality is there are things worth fighting and dying for.

Great post. Surely at least if we had not gotten involved a hell of a lot more Jews and Slavs would have died.