What would the world be like if US pulled out of everywhere?

[PLATO]

So much discussion on people being happy that the US is pulling out of this place or considering pulling out of that one.

What is your real opinion on the US taking an isolationist position? Would this be good or bad for the world? Which countries would it help the most and which would it hurt the most?

Here's your chance to make your case.

[Japher]

Everyone would get F'd, even the US.

[Chemical Ollie]

If I recall right, GW Bush promised to take a more isolationist position during his election campaign. We haven't seen much of that after he won, have we? The only isolationist act I can think of was the introduction of import duties on steel.

[yavoon]

yah olaf, 9-11 happened.

[Japher]

I think 9/11 forced him to reconsider that.

[Boris Godunov]

If the U.S. doesn't pull out soon, somebody's gonna end up in a clinic!

[Nubclear]

If the US were to pull out EVERYWHERE......Well, lets just say North Korea and folk would LOVE it

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Japher
I think 9/11 forced him to reconsider that.

In case of the Afghanistan war, fair enough, but what about North Korea, Iraq and the arrogant "Axis of Evil" diplomacy? What would that have to do with 9/11?

[Japher]

Yeah, North Korea, China, and Russia would have a field day. What about Pakistan?

I think Africa's population would half in about one year.

Come to think of it, I think the whole world population would drop drastically, and quick.

The olympics would be boring.

Would cuba be our best friend?

[yavoon]

9-11 changed a lot of american views. ur being really narrow minded about this olaf. were u unaware that 9-11 had a drastic change on a lot of american views or are u just trying to steup some kind of ground to fight on?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Why would we be screwed if we pulled out of everywhere militairly? First of all we would be saving lots of money, and second of all, everyone who hates us would stop hating us.

[Japher]

what about North Korea, Iraq and the arrogant "Axis of Evil" diplomacy? What would that have to do with 9/11?

They support terrorists... supposidly. So, THEY MUST DIE!!!

[Harovan]

I don't think they should pull out everywhere. In South Korea, for instance, their presence seems to be necessary. But they could for a start pull out of Europe.

[Chemical Ollie]

I assume you are ironic?

Edit: Japher, that is

[Japher]

Why would we be screwed if we pulled out of everywhere militairly?

Good question. Long answer. Short answer; the question was about isolationism, and IMO that means more than just removing ones military.

[Spiffor]

I don't think it would have that much effect, since US troops are not the bulk of peacekeeping forces (except in Iraq, and maybe Afghanistan, but I'm not sure of it). So, it wouldn't make internal chaos more likely or not.

There are two areas where US troops have a cold-war-like deterrent role to foreign agression : Europe and East Asia. In Europe, they are now useless, since Russia doesn't intend to invade anytime soon. In East Asia, the pulling out of troops would probably give Kim more incentive to start a war and wreak havoc. Even if Kim doesn't do this, it will give much more leeway to China once it becomes militarily ambitious, and the pulling out of there could help starting a war too.

I don't think US troops stationed in the ME have any effect on the order/chaos there. And I'm not aware of any massive US stationaing in Africa.

In short : should the US pull out of everywhere in the world, things would be mostly unchanged, except in eastern Asia where war and chaos would be more likely.

[Japher]

I assume you are ironic?

Me?

I hope so.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Ah, so it seems I misunderstood the question.

[Japher]

Ah, so it seems I misunderstood the question.

or I did?

[PLATO]

9/11 did change a lot of American perceptions about what to do in the world. Wherever US troops have been stationed for the long term, it seems to me that peace has reigned. Places that have had little or no US troop presence seem to be where the trouble spots are. Don't get me wrong, I am NOT advocating US troop presences everywhere there is trouble. It just does seem that they have a stabalizing influence whereever they have been LONG TERM.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
I don't think they should pull out everywhere. In South Korea, for instance, their presence seems to be necessary. But they could for a start pull out of Europe.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Not in Korea. That theory works in Europe, Japan. Also not in Afghanistan. (but we didnt have troops there, we had CIA. Maybe that doesnt count)

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by yavoon
9-11 changed a lot of american views. ur being really narrow minded about this olaf. were u unaware that 9-11 had a drastic change on a lot of american views or are u just trying to steup some kind of ground to fight on?

Yeah, it changed a lot of minds, just like Bin Ladin wanted. But why does the Americans want to attack people who had nothing to do with it?

[yavoon]

it changed our minds on how we have to deal w/ certain types of countries in the world.

is that plain enuff for u olaf?

[I Am Jeff]

If the U.S. became isolationist, the world would be less safe and the chance for a WWIII becomes greater.

Lets point to some historical precedents. The U.S. was isolationist during the early 20th century. WWI broke out and for about the last year the U.S. was some what forced to join in and stop the war.

The U.S. was also Isolationist before WWII to an extent. Signs of Germany regaining power were clear when Hitler came to power. And Japan, who was bitter over the treaty to WWI, was angry at the U.S. The world saw what Hitler was doing in the early 30's but no one reacted. Nearing the end of the decade everyone knew the war was coming and this is when the U.S. started to build up and get ready for war.

Bottom line is, if there is no threat of punishment for doing something bad, people will do bad things. Becoming isolationist now, will not stop the fire of hatred towards the U.S. in the middle east. And then with the threat of retaliation gone, attacks would be greater. Not only to the U.S., but to Europe as well.

If the U.S. were to become Isolationist, something will fill the power vaccume. My choice for which would fill this is China. Would the world really be better if this happend? We all saw what china did with SARS, they denied its knowledge for weeks (maybe months). They are still too oppressive to help the world.

[orange]

The world would be better off, but I didn't vote the second option. That's just ignorant.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by yavoon
it changed our minds on how we have to deal w/ certain types of countries in the world.

is that plain enuff for u olaf?

Your answer explains why the number of US bashers have increased after the initial 9/11 sympathy. The world hates US because the US hates the world after 9/11. Bin Ladin won - Bush fell right into his trap!

[Lawrence of Arabia]

If the U.S. became isolationist, the world would be less safe and the chance for a WWIII becomes greater.

Lets point to some historical precedents. The U.S. was isolationist during the early 20th century. WWI broke out and for about the last year the U.S. was some what forced to join in and stop the war.

The U.S. was also Isolationist before WWII to an extent. Signs of Germany regaining power were clear when Hitler came to power. And Japan, who was bitter over the treaty to WWI, was angry at the U.S. The world saw what Hitler was doing in the early 30's but no one reacted. Nearing the end of the decade everyone knew the war was coming and this is when the U.S. started to build up and get ready for war.

Bottom line is, if there is no threat of punishment for doing something bad, people will do bad things. Becoming isolationist now, will not stop the fire of hatred towards the U.S. in the middle east. And then with the threat of retaliation gone, attacks would be greater. Not only to the U.S., but to Europe as well.

If the U.S. were to become Isolationist, something will fill the power vaccume. My choice for which would fill this is China. Would the world really be better if this happend? We all saw what china did with SARS, they denied its knowledge for weeks (maybe months). They are still too oppressive to help the world.

If China wants to, let them. If it takes a country to be the worlds policemen, thats fine. But im tired of getting my country blamed for all of the worlds problems, and Im tired of being threatened by some tin pot dictator/ tin pot fundamentalist. If we pull our military out of everywhere, and stop meddeling in other people's crap, OBL and terrorism will disappear.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by orange
The world would be better off, but I didn't vote the second option. That's just ignorant.

Hence, the "Other" category. But thanks for the input...I guess.

[orange]

that's what I chose.