Is America To Blame?

[Dr Grump]

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

...people generally.....

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

I think you misunderstand my position. My position is that Hitler may never have come to power had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW1. Had Hitler not come to power many lives would have been saved. I don't deny that Hitler was evil or think he would have been less evil had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW2, but our intervention set the stage for his political rise.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

So the part of my post that you bolded says "Japan never asked us to be there."?

No. It says exactly what I said it says.

 

[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.

I think you misunderstand my position. My position is that Hitler may never have come to power had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW1. Had Hitler not come to power many lives would have been saved. I don't deny that Hitler was evil or think he would have been less evil had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW2, but our intervention set the stage for his political rise.

but i think that's pure speculation.

i don't really think non-internvention in that case is any different than non-intervention now.... in the sense that if we stay out of things totally, some real wrongs would occur.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

I think you misunderstand my position. My position is that Hitler may never have come to power had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW1. Had Hitler not come to power many lives would have been saved. I don't deny that Hitler was evil or think he would have been less evil had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW2, but our intervention set the stage for his political rise.

but i think that's pure speculation.

i don't really think non-internvention in that case is any different than non-intervention now.... in the sense that if we stay out of things totally, some real wrongs would occur.

On that I have to say you're correct. It is speculation on my part. I've given my reasons for why I speculate that, but it is speculation nonetheless.

As for things going wrong if we practice noninterventionism, I don't deny it. The world is an imperfect place and horrible things will happen. However, if we practice noninterventionism we won't be the cause of those horrible things, and we won't make them worse.

 

[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.

I think you misunderstand my position. My position is that Hitler may never have come to power had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW1. Had Hitler not come to power many lives would have been saved. I don't deny that Hitler was evil or think he would have been less evil had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW2, but our intervention set the stage for his political rise.

Now that is one point on which you may or may not be right. Clearly the Armistice after WWI punished Germany so hard that it lead to conditions that allowed Hitler to thrive. But that was by No Means our doing alone, nor can we say for sure he would not have rose anyways, and it had no effect at all on Japan.

 

[hjmick]

I blame Britain. Had they not lost the Revolutionary War and subsequently the War of 1812, there'd be no American to blame for anything...

Damn Limeys...

 

[Charles_Main]

i blame britain. Had they not lost the revolutionary war and subsequently the war of 1812, there'd be no american to blame for anything...

Damn limeys...

lol

 

[jillian]

I blame Britain. Had they not lost the Revolutionary War and subsequently the War of 1812, there'd be no American to blame for anything...

Damn Limeys...

lol..

interestingly, i do think a lot of what is happening now, particularly in the middle east, is the result of british imperialism and its aftermath.

 

[jillian]

I think you misunderstand my position. My position is that Hitler may never have come to power had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW1. Had Hitler not come to power many lives would have been saved. I don't deny that Hitler was evil or think he would have been less evil had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW2, but our intervention set the stage for his political rise.

but i think that's pure speculation.

i don't really think non-internvention in that case is any different than non-intervention now.... in the sense that if we stay out of things totally, some real wrongs would occur.

On that I have to say you're correct. It is speculation on my part. I've given my reasons for why I speculate that, but it is speculation nonetheless.

As for things going wrong if we practice noninterventionism, I don't deny it. The world is an imperfect place and horrible things will happen. However, if we practice noninterventionism we won't be the cause of those horrible things, and we won't make them worse.

and i don't think the world is a better place if we send israel to the wolves. no different than the people who said WWII was a jewish problem....

 

[Charles_Main]

I blame Britain. Had they not lost the Revolutionary War and subsequently the War of 1812, there'd be no American to blame for anything...

Damn Limeys...

lol..

interestingly, i do think a lot of what is happening now, particularly in the middle east, is the result of british imperialism and its aftermath.

Yep, and other European Imperialism.

Which is one reason why I get so offended when Europe sounds off today about us sticking our nose in shit. In many cases were are dealing with a mess they helped create with their Imperialism.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

I think you misunderstand my position. My position is that Hitler may never have come to power had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW1. Had Hitler not come to power many lives would have been saved. I don't deny that Hitler was evil or think he would have been less evil had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW2, but our intervention set the stage for his political rise.

Now that is one point on which you may or may not be right. Clearly the Armistice after WWI punished Germany so hard that it lead to conditions that allowed Hitler to thrive. But that was by No Means our doing alone, nor can we say for sure he would not have rose anyways, and it had no effect at all on Japan.

No, it wasn't our doing alone, but without our help the Allies would have been in no position to force that Treaty of Versailles on Germany. Germany could have gotten a much fairer deal without our helping the Allies soundly defeating them. No, we can't say Hitler wouldn't have risen to power anyways, but I think we can agree it would have been less likely.

 

[jillian]

I blame Britain. Had they not lost the Revolutionary War and subsequently the War of 1812, there'd be no American to blame for anything...

Damn Limeys...

lol..

interestingly, i do think a lot of what is happening now, particularly in the middle east, is the result of british imperialism and its aftermath.

Yep, and other European Imperialism.

Which is one reason why I get so offended when Europe sounds off today about us sticking our nose in shit. In many cases were are dealing with a mess they helped create with their Imperialism.

well, there are times they complain because its their ox being gored now. and there is an argument to be made for a more 'humble foreign policy'.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

but i think that's pure speculation.

i don't really think non-internvention in that case is any different than non-intervention now.... in the sense that if we stay out of things totally, some real wrongs would occur.

On that I have to say you're correct. It is speculation on my part. I've given my reasons for why I speculate that, but it is speculation nonetheless.

As for things going wrong if we practice noninterventionism, I don't deny it. The world is an imperfect place and horrible things will happen. However, if we practice noninterventionism we won't be the cause of those horrible things, and we won't make them worse.

and i don't think the world is a better place if we send israel to the wolves. no different than the people who said WWII was a jewish problem....

Well I certainly don't think we should send Israel to the wolves, but I'm guessing you and I have different definitions of what that might be. While I don't have any problem with Israel, and would love nothing more than our good relations to continue with them, I don't feel we should be funding them at all. Nor do I think we should be funding their enemies, which we also do.

 

[Charles_Main]

Now people argue that we embargoed Oil on Japan and forced them into war. The plain truth is they had invaded Manchuria Before the embargo. The embargo was meant to try and remove their ability to make war on other nations, and led to them attacking us in the end. However that does not mean we should not have done it.

 

[Charles_Main]

lol..

interestingly, i do think a lot of what is happening now, particularly in the middle east, is the result of british imperialism and its aftermath.

Yep, and other European Imperialism.

Which is one reason why I get so offended when Europe sounds off today about us sticking our nose in shit. In many cases were are dealing with a mess they helped create with their Imperialism.

well, there are times they complain because its their ox being gored now. and there is an argument to be made for a more 'humble foreign policy'.

Agreed, Holy crap? What is going on here. lol

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Now people argue that we embargoed Oil on Japan and forced them into war. The plain truth is they had invaded Manchuria Before the embargo. The embargo was meant to try and remove their ability to make war on other nations, and led to them attacking us in the end. However that does not mean we should not have done it.

Yes, Japan was doing horrible things. It's not, however, our place to try to right every wrong in the world. We didn't have the moral authority back then, and we certainly don't have it now.

“[America] goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.” - John Quincy Adams

 

[Charles_Main]

Now people argue that we embargoed Oil on Japan and forced them into war. The plain truth is they had invaded Manchuria Before the embargo. The embargo was meant to try and remove their ability to make war on other nations, and led to them attacking us in the end. However that does not mean we should not have done it.

Yes, Japan was doing horrible things. It's not, however, our place to try to right every wrong in the world. We didn't have the moral authority back then, and we certainly don't have it now.

We do not need to have Moral Authority to act in our own interests and the interests of others around the world. We simply need the will and the ability and I for one hope we keep both.

Basically what you are saying is because we do not always do the right thing. We should not have raised a finger to stop what Japan and Germany were doing.

Sorry But I think that is BS.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Now people argue that we embargoed Oil on Japan and forced them into war. The plain truth is they had invaded Manchuria Before the embargo. The embargo was meant to try and remove their ability to make war on other nations, and led to them attacking us in the end. However that does not mean we should not have done it.

Yes, Japan was doing horrible things. It's not, however, our place to try to right every wrong in the world. We didn't have the moral authority back then, and we certainly don't have it now.

We do not need to have Moral Authority to act in our own interests and the interests of others around the world. We simply need the will and the ability and I for one hope we keep both.

Basically what you are saying is because we do not always do the right thing. We should not have raised a finger to stop what Japan and Germany were doing.

Sorry But I think that is BS.

Basically what I'm saying is that I believe Germany and Japan wouldn't have been in a position to do anything had the U.S. practiced noninterventionism all along. As for once that was too late, I don't think the U.S. should have engaged in activities to provoke Germany and Japan when the American people largely opposed our entry into WW2.

 

[AllieBaba]

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

Clearly, and we would not be moving towards leaving Iraq, and all those oil contract in Iraq would be ours, and We would still control Germany and much of western Europe. Mexico would be ours as we once sacked mexico city. lol I mean come on people. We may not always do the right thing, but when you call us imperialist you are betraying your utter ignorance to the fact that we are like no nation on earth that has ever existed.

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

Call it what you want, but it is not Imperialism in the purest form of the word by any means.

Returned the conquered land to the conquered, with a puppet government and our military still firmly in place.

Even if we did do that, which we don't, that isn't imperialism.