So why does the US need to meddle in regional conflicts?

[Wharf Rat2]

Golfboy said the answer is because it affects the whole world.

 

Ok so I asked how it affects the whole world.

 

Then I asked why the countries in the region didn't take care of it and I was told because the US was supposed to.

 

Thats when I knew somethin ws going on.

 

At that point I tried to call Don Johnson.at Miami Po Po.

[Jaydublu]

I like the pre-inauguration day 2009 answer made by our liberal friends most of all. If a country doesn't directly attack us (example: Iraq and Afghanistan) then we mustn't go to war with them.

[Ayn Stein]

To positively influence our preferred outcome, hopefully. It doesn't always work out. But that's no excuse to not keep trying to serve our interests, globally.

[Zaro]

manifest destiny

To positively influence our preferred outcome, hopefully. It doesn't always work out.

But that's no excuse to not keep trying to serve our interests, globally.

which is?

[Wharf Rat2]

I like that too.

 

I left a message at Mimi Po Po for Don, he hasn't called back.

[Ayn Stein]

manifest destiny

 

 

>>> which is?

The better of the potential outcomes in a rapidly changing environment. Which is better is subjective; and it no doubt varies depending on the Administration. But all Admins have tons of bright folks making estimates, for better or worse. The worst of all choices would be head-in-the-sand isolationism. We do what we think best, I hope, even if not all outcomes go as we wished they might.

[Zaro]

The better of the potential outcomes in a rapidly changing environment. Which is better is subjective; and it no doubt varies depending on the Administration. But all Admins have tons of bright folks making estimates, for better or worse. The worst of all choices would be head-in-the-sand isolationism. We do what we think best, I hope, even if not all outcomes go as we wished they might.

we meddle because we like it and spend a ton of money on "defense"

if it were about the potential outcome we would have stopped after Vietnam

[lefty]

Golfboy said the answer is because it affects the whole world.

 

Ok so I asked how it affects the whole world.

 

Then I asked why the countries in the region didn't take care of it and I was told because the US was supposed to.

 

Thats when I knew somethin ws going on.

 

At that point I tried to call Don Johnson.at Miami Po Po.

You won't get it , not smart enough .

So why try?

 

It's like repigs trying to understand welfare for people .

[Ayn Stein]

we meddle because we like it and spend a ton of money on "defense"

if it were about the potential outcome we would have stopped after Vietnam

We meddle because we can, and have certain interests in the various potential outcomes. Thinking we're doing much for humanitarian reasons is a smidge delusional, albeit, a favorite assertion when we go meddling.

 

It seems freeing Iraqis from Saddam's terrible rule, since they sat atop vast oil reserves, was far more "humanitarian" than saving innocent children from having their arms lopped off in Darfur, which among its unfortunate circumstances was no oil reserves nor vital minerals, etc, which the US thought critivcal economically or militarily. In the end, we act on our own behalf, and not much on the behalf of others, truth be told.

 

As for our large military, the main problem it creates is our "solving" problems militarily which would be better-solved other ways.

[Zaro]

We meddle because we can, and have certain interests in the various potential outcomes. Thinking we're doing much for humanitarian reasons is a smidge delusional, albeit, a favorite assertion when we go meddling.

 

It seems freeing Iraqis from Saddam's terrible rule, since they sat atop vast oil reserves, was far more "humanitarian" than saving innocent children from having their arms lopped off in Darfur, which among its unfortunate circumstances was no oil reserves nor vital minerals, etc, which the US thought critivcal economically or militarily. In the end, we act on our own behalf, and not much on the behalf of others, truth be told.

 

As for our large military, the main problem it creates is our "solving" problems militarily which would be better-solved other ways.

well, not anymore

outa bucks

our military spending - combined with corporate welfare - has bankrupted this country

in return

we got our ass beat by the flintstones - meaning people who come at us with homemade explosives and small arms

maybe we meddle because we like to be humiliated

[Ayn Stein]

well, not anymore

outa bucks

our military spending - combined with corporate welfare - has bankrupted this country

in return

we got our ass beat by the flintstones - meaning people who come at us with homemade explosives and small arms

maybe we meddle because we like to be humiliated

Hardly. The USA is the richest country on the planet, and richer than at any time in our history, including yesterday. We're merely not paying our way, sans borrowing, due to a couple problems that need fixing, which can be fixed, easily, with changes in policy that do not require a penny in spending: wage disparity, ergo millions falling off the tax rolls; tax rates that are insufficient to pay for the stuff we're funding publically.

[Zaro]

Hardly. The USA is the richest country on the planet, and richer than at any time in our history, including yesterday. We're merely not paying our way, sans borrowing, due to a couple problems that need fixing, which can be fixed, easily, with changes in policy that do not require a penny in spending: wage disparity, ergo millions falling off the tax rolls; tax rates that are insufficient to pay for the stuff we're funding publically.

due to a couple of problems - like trillions in the hole and nothing to show for it

so

why don't we just fix them problems - easily at that?

[Ayn Stein]

due to a couple of problems - like trillions in the hole and nothing to show for it

so

why don't we just fix them problems - easily at that?

Much to show for it. Roads are built creating jobs and wealth for road contractors; war toys are bought creating wealth for shareholders, and jobs for Boeing, Lockheed and Grumman workers; food assistance saves millions from hunger, and creates billions in sales for Walmart and other grocery chains; insurance companies will be getting millions of new customers at public expense, vis a vis ACA ... the money goes somewhere. The question is: how do we fund it? Borrowing? Taxes?

 

due to a couple of problems - like trillions in the hole and nothing to show for it

so

why don't we just fix them problems - easily at that?

Political will; fear among uniformed voters. For example, many fear that the products they buy will be more expensive if service workers are fairly-paid (they won't be). Others fear that if taxes are raised the wealthy will not longer seize profit opportunities (they will).

 

Just a will / irrational fear problem.

[Zaro]

Much to show for it. Roads are built creating jobs and wealth for road contractors; war toys are bought creating wealth for shareholders, and jobs for Boeing, Lockheed and Grumman workers; food assistance saves millions from hunger, and creates billions in sales for Walmart and other grocery chains; insurance companies will be getting millions of new customers at public expense, vis a vis ACA ... the money goes somewhere. The question is: how do we fund it? Borrowing? Taxes?

trillions in roads and foodstamps

lol

[Ayn Stein]

trillions in roads and foodstamps

lol

If you have a company that supplies or lays down asphalt, you'd be laughing all the way to the bank.

 

If you managed a Walmart you'd like the long lines of full carts every month when EBTs are re-loaded; ditto if distributed or made packaged goods, grew produce, milled wheat, etc, etc.

[Zaro]

If you have a company that supplies or lays down asphalt, you'd be laughing all the way to the bank.

 

If you managed a Walmart you'd like the long lines of full carts every month when EBTs are re-loaded; ditto if distributed or made packaged goods, grew produce, milled wheat, etc, etc.

still lol

that ain't adding up to trillions

and besides

it has little to do with the topic

[skews13]

Golfboy said the answer is because it affects the whole world.

 

Ok so I asked how it affects the whole world.

 

Then I asked why the countries in the region didn't take care of it and I was told because the US was supposed to.

 

Thats when I knew somethin ws going on.

 

At that point I tried to call Don Johnson.at Miami Po Po.

The long time generic answer to that question has been "to protect US interests in the region".

 

Translation:

 

To protect oil company profits, and the lobbying money it brings to Washington.

[blackdog]

The long time generic answer to that question has been "to protect US interests in the region".

 

Translation:

 

To protect oil company profits, and the lobbying money it brings to Washington.

 

Yeah look at all that oil our companies are getting from Iraq!

 

You are right about MONEY.....just don't be naive to think is is all one party or only for oil.

[Wharf Rat2]

A really nice girl just called from Miami PoPo. She said nobody by the name of Sonny Crockett works there or ever worked there.

 

Now I really think he did but I guess I'll keep asking.

 

The meddling part is hard to understand when the US is so fuhked up already. Its like having Ricky Ricardo going over to Fred and lecturing him on Ethels blunt nature.

[Redwood]

To positively influence our preferred outcome, hopefully. It doesn't always work out. But that's no excuse to not keep trying to serve our interests, globally.

Pretty much the correct answer.

 

In Politics,Economics,Culture,Business, Military Power...We are the Big Fish in the pond. That has a lot of advantages but tends to also have responsibilities and costs. In theory we could, I guess,be Brazil North,isolationist, not a global player. However...someone else then fills the void. We might not LIKE how that goes.

 

The Middlle East is frustrating and volatile but we DO have "interests"

[blackdog]

A really nice girl just called from Miami PoPo. She said nobody by the name of Sonny Crockett works there or ever worked there.

 

Now I really think he did but I guess I'll keep asking.

 

The meddling part is hard to understand when the US is so fuhked up already. Its like having Ricky Ricardo going over to Fred and lecturing him on Ethels blunt nature.

 

 

Think of the money we could save!

 

Just need the "Thermonuclear doctrine" implemented and then let the savings begin.

 

Day one....no foriegn aid.

Day two call Saudi and tell them to fix it or they get nuked first.

Day three....free food and edumacation for all democrat voters and thier chilluns.

Day four.....global warming ends and utopia breaks out.

[skews13]

 

Yeah look at all that oil our companies are getting from Iraq!

 

You are right about MONEY.....just don't be naive to think is is all one party or only for oil.

Not naïve to that fact at all. I find your reply curious considering the fact that the cons still consider invading Iraq the right thing to do. How's that whole spreading Democracy, nation building thingy working out for you?

[blackdog]

Not naïve to that fact at all. I find your reply curious considering the fact that the cons still consider invading Iraq the right thing to do. How's that whole spreading Democracy, nation building thingy working out for you?

 

Killing fire ants doesn't bother me.....trying to teach them not to be fire ants is like teaching a pig to dance.

 

I would have been for a more violent war, followed by a confiscation of oil assets to pay for it back whne Daddy Bush was pres...

 

Then folks might get the idea not to jack with us or it will get real bad real quick.

 

The reason to invade Iraq was accepted and believed by BOTH parties and to say otherwise is a re-write of history.

 

I still stil think we should not got to war unless we are out for TOTAL victory and unconditional surrender. I think all weapons should be on the table and the outcome clear. Our enemies will CEASE TO EXIST if we have to come straighten you out.

[Ayn Stein]

still lol

that ain't adding up to trillions

and besides

it has little to do with the topic

Not trillions per year, but then, the debt was not accrued in a year, either.

 

But do not let that interfere with you being a laughing fool, Laugh on, fool.

[Zaro]

Not trillions per year, but then, the debt was not accrued in a year, either.

 

But do not let that interfere with you being a laughing fool, Laugh on, fool.

didn't say in a year. we're meddling since ever. and our "interests" in those conflicts have always been "special interests". we flip the bill and get our men shot and a handful of big wigs cash in