Thank for the rationality.
Terrorism is real. We ignore it at our peril. It is immature political thought to believe that, if we just absent ourselves from the Middle East, Islamists will leave us alone. They won't. No doubt there are many Arabs who would react positively to our being gone from the region. However, they are not the ones we really need to worry about.
Israel is the only reliable ally in that part of the world. Mutual defense alliances are reasonable. We cannot survive unless other nations are willing to help us protect ourselves, as we would help them protect themselves. When we abandon some allies, all of our allies become less reliable partners.
We have accomplished what we set out to accomplish in Iran and Afghanistan. More (not perfectly) responsible governments are in place. Now is the time to leave--with some words of caution left behind: If we ever feel threatened again, we will return and do the job again.
We send way too much money to nations that do not support us in return. We should turn the tap way down--not off completely. Foreign aid serves two necessary purposes: It aids nations in need of emergency help. It helps nations that would mutually defend us. Trying to buy the love of the world before they have demonstrated a willingness to give it is silly. That is international welfare. Any support we give should be either earned or else warranted due to disaster.
It is reasonable to work against nations like Iran getting nukes. These people do not think like we do. Islamists have already demonstrated a willingness to die in order to terrorize and kill infidels. Iran will not hesitate to turn nukes over to terrorists, regardless of the consequences to their nation. Again, they do not think like we do. When we were in the Cold War, the Russians could be counted on to act in their self-preservation interests. Not so for extremist Islamists. The threat of retaliation will not deter them.
The UN is a useless pile of fetid waste. It is unnecessary to our constructive international engagement. Why we provide the lion's share of its support and allow it on our territory is beyond me. It serves mainly as a soapbox for America-haters. The way they feel about us is reminiscent of how the "unfortunate" in America feel about those who have worked for success and achieved it.
The gold standard is a silly bit of rigidity that is reminiscent of the Einstein-deniers who tried to apply a grid to the universe instead of recognizing that bits of reality float against other bits of reality in a relativistic way. Commodities float against each other in a relativistic way. By introducing a commodity that represents the productivity of an economy provides a buffer commodity between other commodities that fluctuate wildly against each other without claiming that any one commodity is a clock or a ruler against which all other commodities are to be measured.
If Paul is elected and succeeds in his isolationist policies and restoring the gold standard, I believe that the result will be war within our border (that we otherwise could have prevented) or economic strangulation due to "gridifying" the economy--or both. (The only reason that we wouldn't get both would be if one of the two were so destructive as to make the other moot.)
Again, thanks for the rationality. It is so refreshing to share ideas with someone genuinely interested in hearing and discussing them.
I just hit the above in order... Just read paragraph for paragraph.
No worries. I will occasionally take a shot when I perceive someone is being dumb, i.e. picking the low hanging fruit, but generally I prefer a discussion.
They also will not leave us alone if we invade every nation with a Muslim majority. Somewhere between ignoring the issue of Muslim terrorism and attacking sovereign nations is an appropriate response. Letters of Marque?
I question whether or not the US has been a reliable “ally” to Israel. We meddle in their internal policies with a free hand. I regularly listen to Israel National Radio online and it presents an interesting perspective to the events of the day.
As a man who values the Constitution, maybe you can answer this, “When does the Constitution assign our role as Americans to be the changers or shapers other nations into our own image? “We must make the world safe for democracy.” Woodrow Wilson… Based on the Framers thoughts, an immoral people cannot rule themselves. I think this has been played out in history even here in America. “(The constitution will function properly) until the People become corrupted and require despotic government.” Ben Franklin, On the faults of the constitution. We will not be able to force a functional government upon a backward, immoral and lawless place like Afganistan. So, why spend the lives, both ours and theirs?
I agree. It’s a waste of debt to support others with our children’s futures. When we are weaned off debt and are living within our means, as a nation, then we should look at supporting other, like minded nations, with increased trade, not gifts.
Dealing with nuclear proliferation is not an easy task. This is one of the few instances where I believe that a pre-emptive strategy is appropriate. As a man who understands the threat to our families posed by a single EMP nuke aimed against our home, I would stop at nothing to destroy any threat of that attack.
The purpose of the UN cannot be truly described without a good understanding of central banking. Today it is functioning as initially designed but not according to our understanding of its purpose. One world under one government under one currency. “Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild The UN is the Holy Grail of the central banker.
If gold is so silly, then why is it so important in national relations and the functioning of the central banks? Why did FDR seize gold? On the other hand, I do see historically that a gold-less society can function. It has happened in the past. But there has always been some form of currency. When that non-gold currency was left alone to find its own place in the world, only the strong and most desirable survive. That leads us back to gold.
As in a civil war or an invasion? And honestly, are we not already undergoing an “economic strangulation”? Maybe you could expand a bit on this statement?
I would suggest that you do some personal investigation into the role of central banking in the function and dysfunction of our government today. Read up on the history of money and banking. Read Keynes and Mises (Rothbard). Then look at your government again and how it functions today as opposed to how it was designed.
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Henry Ford
