Originally Posted By: Salmo g.
Streamer,

I once thought isolationism would be a preferred strategy for the US. But I wasn't yet up to 5th grade level knowledge (to use FP's term) of world affairs. US interests are so inextricably tied to points all around the planet that isolationism is counter to our needs and interests. I think isolationism would lead to a world where allied forces opposed to us would become large and powerful enough to take us down. That's an outcome to be avoided IMO.


Salmo,

At least at one point you thought somewhat correctly on the issue. To clarify, avoiding unnecessary wars and alliances is starkly different than isolationism. War isn’t necessary to ensure free trade and commerce. War is necessary for the military industrial complex, though. NATO is nothing more than a guaranteed contract for corporate interests at the taxpayer expense. The US also pays proportionally more than other countries and receives the least benefit.

When you factor in the lives lost, families destroyed and tax dollars spent on these wars and the hardships they create, it isn’t worth it. Being an old school lib hippy, I’m surprised that you seem to endorse interventionism and war. I’m equally surprised at your Rich G-esque paranoia of the rest of the world coming together to collectively to take us down. It won’t happen. Did Rich share some mushrooms with you lately?


Streamer
_________________________
“Obviously you don't care about democracy if you vote for Trump” - Salmo g.

Space Available! Say something idiotic today!