[Truth-a-naut]

England being invaded by Germany, even if it was one of the most homicidal maniacs ever, is not a matter of the United States.

What about the humanitarian position behind the whole thing?

If this happened would you advocate trading with the Nazis?

[Todd D.]

The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another.

If you want to buy German goods, go ahead. I would suggest that the system was inherantly backwards and doomed to failure, and that once the horrors of their methods were seen, even in victory, trade with them would be much lower.

As for the humanitarian thing, Military Isolationism is not an embargo against United States aid, merely United States GOVERNMENT aid. People of the United States have historically been the most generous on Earth. Just because the government does not provide the aid does not mean that the people would not voluntarily choose to aid the hurt.

[Pope Perseus Peptabysmal]

What's your point? The enemy may bitch slap you with a Pearl Harbor or a 9/11, but if you don't get involved in idiotic wars, you can swiftly pimp slap the motherf**kers back. See?

Its better to cut off the head of the snake before is bites you.

And if you don't walk in the garden, the snake won't see you. Come on B5C, no need for the metaphors anymore. Military Isolationism is a smart idea. Let the fools kill themselves over land that isn't even larger than 3 or 4 states in this country. They'll wisen up or die off. It's that simple.

[The American Lion]

Its better to cut off the head of the snake before is bites you.

And if you don't walk in the garden, the snake won't see you. Come on B5C, no need for the metaphors anymore. Military Isolationism is a smart idea. Let the fools kill themselves over land that isn't even larger than 3 or 4 states in this country. They'll wisen up or die off. It's that simple.[/quote]

how do you know my other name?

[Pope Perseus Peptabysmal]

Its better to cut off the head of the snake before is bites you.

And if you don't walk in the garden, the snake won't see you. Come on B5C, no need for the metaphors anymore. Military Isolationism is a smart idea. Let the fools kill themselves over land that isn't even larger than 3 or 4 states in this country. They'll wisen up or die off. It's that simple.

how do you know my other name? [/quote]

lol, I lurked at SGN for a while, then I heard that you left SGN for these forums so I went to see what was going on. Don't be afraid.

[Truth-a-naut]

As for the humanitarian thing, Military Isolationism is not an embargo against United States aid, merely United States GOVERNMENT aid. People of the United States have historically been the most generous on Earth. Just because the government does not provide the aid does not mean that the people would not voluntarily choose to aid the hurt.

Like sending redcross packages too the camps?

[The American Lion]

lol, I lurked at SGN for a while, then I heard that you left SGN for these forums so I went to see what was going on. Don't be afraid.

Tell me now!

[| I, CWAS |]

You do know that Communism is a threat to our lifestye. Why dont you stop it now before its lands on our shores?

What is with your right wing paranoia, When was the last time a communist agent was spotted in America? I oppose communism a outrance, but it would be simply fatuous to go on a campaign against it, especially since a movement needs support to have way, if americans supported communism, technically the government of the people, by the people is powerless.

[The American Lion]

When was the last time a communist agent was spotted in America?

Here in the forum.

[CCJ]

*gasp*

C'mon. Military Isolationism isn't such a bad idea. Except as a superpower we'll get blamed for letting genocides happen.

But who cares about other human beings, right?

[smashthestate]

C'mon. Military Isolationism isn't such a bad idea. Except as a superpower we'll get blamed for letting genocides happen.

And when they try and stop the genocides, they are accused of ruthless imperialism.

[MB.]

There's a lot of nonesense getting tossed around here... primarily from The Republican Party:

You're actively advocating war with anyone who may pose a threat to the US?

That's a recipe for death- endless death 1984 style. Hardly a Democratic thing to do at all.

As for these Libertatians, though I applaud your issolationist attitude in the light of recent American Agression, I do of course, oppose it on the basis of the role America *should* play in the world as one of the locale protectoraite superpowers- no, its of little interest to the US what occures in Europe, but it should be of interst to the US what occures in Mexico, Canada, and latin-America; ie, the classical American 'sphere of influence'.

In other words, complete isolation, while idiologicaly exceptable is not a realistic, nor a very appealing goal.

[Garibaldi]

Mr. Bill, I disagree. While the government should keep an eye on foreign nations which might have some influence, some of our worst atrocities have occured in the "tradional sphere of influence". If, let's say, Mexico became a big enough threat for American's to put more money into our military, have a drastic increase in new military recruits, and for 90% of the population to push for a war, then obviously Mexico has to be some type of threat to the soveirgnty and freedoms of this nation.

[MB.]

Of course- what I meant when I mentioend the 'sphere of influence' was merely the region in which the US should be immediatly responsible for dealing with local issues, ie, peacekeeping, foriegn aide, etc.

I by no means meant the US should run around policing emerging governments as it has done to date- in other words, the US should be the keystone of internationalism in its region, being as it is the largest and most powerful nation on this continant, it only makes sense that the US should champion an international movment here, rather then fester away in petty isolation.

[Garibaldi]

Of course- what I meant when I mentioend the 'sphere of influence' was merely the region in which the US should be immediatly responsible for dealing with local issues, ie, peacekeeping, foriegn aide, etc.

No, I still disagree. The US should never worry about foreign aid or peacekeeping unless it's voluntary actions generated from the citizens directly.

[christianfundamentalist]

We all know what happens to nations who uses Isolationism...What does the libertarians provide us to protect us agaist a future version of Hitler?

A very good question! I support classical liberalism but libertarians seem to be championing freedom whilst forgetting it needs to be protected and exported.

[Todd D.]

A very good question! I support classical liberalism but libertarians seem to be championing freedom whilst forgetting it needs to be protected and exported.

Protected yes, exported, no. What right do we have to say that we are right and they are wrong. We are a sovreign nation, as are other countries. Just because they have a form of government that we view as deplorable (and in most cases, rightfully so in my opinion), I believe that we have no right to enforce those beliefs on someone who chooses not to accept them.

People say Hitler this and Hitler that, but keep something very important in mind, had we not been so Interventionalist, and had Europe not had so many mutual defense treaties, a simple murder would not have sparked a World War. No World War I = no crippling of Germany. No crippled Germany = no Hitler.

Interventionalist politics got us into the Hitler mess.

[Garibaldi]

Very good point Todd, but I do have to disagree with you. While, without a doubt, interventionist policies have created some of the most terrible tradgedies throughout history, and constantly have caused problems, somebody like hitler could rise without interventism. However, should this be the case, any libertarian society near the Hitler-esque nation would feel threatened enough that it's citizens would join the military, would fund the military, and would enact a pre-emptive war in alliance with other nations where a majority of the citizens feel threatened.

[Clovis]

A very good question! I support classical liberalism but libertarians seem to be championing freedom whilst forgetting it needs to be protected and exported.

Protected yes, exported, no. What right do we have to say that we are right and they are wrong.

We have the right as members of the human race who successfully created our freedoms and institutions. We are obligated to tell others to try what worked for us. A huge clue exists that lets us know that others value what we have done, and would be eager to have: people immigrate here in droves from all parts of the world.

[Todd D.]

We have the right as members of the human race who successfully created our freedoms and institutions. We are obligated to tell others to try what worked for us. A huge clue exists that lets us know that others value what we have done, and would be eager to have: people immigrate here in droves from all parts of the world.

I would agree with this, but policies of going in and disposing of "dictators" or "communists" in countries is not the same as talking with them and showing them how well our system works. One is voluntarily sharing information, the other is forcing our beliefs on other people.