Kathianne
08-14-2008, 05:17 AM
Is the US on its way to reverting to isolationism? I wouldn't have thought so a year or so ago, I'm not so sure anymore. It seems few are interested in what has been happening in Europe the past few days, which is certainly understandable I suppose. In any case, it's reality. I just can't shake the fact that all 'big' wars have begun in Europe, at least in modern times. In the case of the two world wars, both were preceded by the political and military draw down of the US, as fallout from problems with the economy and the citizens tiring of involvement with the real politiks of the times.
It's always seemed to me that foreign policy was of more interest to 'conservatives', probably because they don't always keep their eye on the domestic side of things, with the exception of politics. As I've written many times, for the first 9 months of GW's administration, it appeared this was going to change, then of course 9/11 brought that to an abrupt end.
Today, well it seems the tide of 'home front' is making a comeback, easy enough when there have been no more attacks on the homeland. There's no doubt that many are tired of being on 'war footing' for going on 7 years now, coupled with the obvious, the war was not about oil, evidenced by our $50+ fill ups. Prices are rising, the debt is enormous, while our infrastructure needs a past due overhaul. There's also the problem that many believe, 'the rest of the world hates us, because of our cowboy tactics.' No surprise that we turn inward, as a nation.
Yet, what might be the repercussions of the US letting the rest of the world, do as they will?
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=MGM5NGE1ZTc2NWUzZTljNjVhZGQ0ZDEwMDJmMGRlMmU=
Brave Old World
In a world without America, the strong do as they will, and the weak suffer as they must.
By Victor Davis Hanson
Russia invades Georgia. China jails dissidents. China and India pollute at levels previously unimaginable. Gulf monarchies make trillions from jacked-up oil prices. Islamic terrorists keep car bombing. Meanwhile, Europe offers moral lectures, while Japan and South Korea shrug and watch — all in a globalized world that tunes into the Olympics each night from Beijing.
“Citizens of the world” were supposed to share, in relative harmony, our new “Planet Earth,” which was to have followed from an interconnected system of free trade, instantaneous electronic communications, civilized diplomacy, and shared consumer capitalism.
But was that ever quite true?
In reality, to the extent globalism worked, it followed from three unspoken assumptions:
First, the U.S. economy would keep importing goods from abroad to drive international economic growth.
Second, the U.S. military would keep the sea-lanes open, and trade and travel protected. After the past destruction of fascism and global communism, the Americans, as global sheriff, would continue to deal with the occasional menace like a Moammar Gaddafi, Slobodan Milosevic, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, or the Taliban.
Third, America would ignore ankle-biting allies and remain engaged with the world — like a good, nurturing mom who at times must put up with the petulance of dependent teenagers.
....Yet globalization, in all its manifestations, will run out of steam the moment we tire of fueling it, as the world returns instead to the mindset of the 1930s — with protectionist tariffs; weak, disarmed democracies; an isolationist America; predatory dictatorships; and a demoralized gloom-and-doom Western elite.
If America adopts the protectionist trade policies of Japan or China, global profits plummet. If our armed forces follow the European lead of demilitarization and inaction, rogue states advance. If we were to treat the environment as do China and India, the world would become quickly a lost cause.
If we flee Iraq and call off the war on terror, Islamic jihadists will regroup, not disband. And when the Russians attack the next democracy, they won’t listen to the United Nations, the European Union, or Michael Moore.
Brace yourself — we may be on our way back to an old world, where the strong do as they will, and the weak suffer as they must.
Lest anyone assume I think it's all 'bad', I'm really of a mixed mind. I'm really not sold on the idea that the 'world hates us', if so, why are so many countries voting in leaders much of the ilk of our own, (FR, GR, SP)? Even where more 'liberal' leaders have been elected, (UK), they have quickly turned more conservative upon taking office, or shortly thereafter. I think it past time for Europe & Japan to add more to the bigger picture than they have, for over 60 years now.
If the US reining itself in means more prosperity at home and less conflict in the world, I'm all for it. It's probably something that we need to try again, hoping the results will be better than in the past.
It's always seemed to me that foreign policy was of more interest to 'conservatives', probably because they don't always keep their eye on the domestic side of things, with the exception of politics. As I've written many times, for the first 9 months of GW's administration, it appeared this was going to change, then of course 9/11 brought that to an abrupt end.
Today, well it seems the tide of 'home front' is making a comeback, easy enough when there have been no more attacks on the homeland. There's no doubt that many are tired of being on 'war footing' for going on 7 years now, coupled with the obvious, the war was not about oil, evidenced by our $50+ fill ups. Prices are rising, the debt is enormous, while our infrastructure needs a past due overhaul. There's also the problem that many believe, 'the rest of the world hates us, because of our cowboy tactics.' No surprise that we turn inward, as a nation.
Yet, what might be the repercussions of the US letting the rest of the world, do as they will?
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=MGM5NGE1ZTc2NWUzZTljNjVhZGQ0ZDEwMDJmMGRlMmU=
Brave Old World
In a world without America, the strong do as they will, and the weak suffer as they must.
By Victor Davis Hanson
Russia invades Georgia. China jails dissidents. China and India pollute at levels previously unimaginable. Gulf monarchies make trillions from jacked-up oil prices. Islamic terrorists keep car bombing. Meanwhile, Europe offers moral lectures, while Japan and South Korea shrug and watch — all in a globalized world that tunes into the Olympics each night from Beijing.
“Citizens of the world” were supposed to share, in relative harmony, our new “Planet Earth,” which was to have followed from an interconnected system of free trade, instantaneous electronic communications, civilized diplomacy, and shared consumer capitalism.
But was that ever quite true?
In reality, to the extent globalism worked, it followed from three unspoken assumptions:
First, the U.S. economy would keep importing goods from abroad to drive international economic growth.
Second, the U.S. military would keep the sea-lanes open, and trade and travel protected. After the past destruction of fascism and global communism, the Americans, as global sheriff, would continue to deal with the occasional menace like a Moammar Gaddafi, Slobodan Milosevic, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, or the Taliban.
Third, America would ignore ankle-biting allies and remain engaged with the world — like a good, nurturing mom who at times must put up with the petulance of dependent teenagers.
....Yet globalization, in all its manifestations, will run out of steam the moment we tire of fueling it, as the world returns instead to the mindset of the 1930s — with protectionist tariffs; weak, disarmed democracies; an isolationist America; predatory dictatorships; and a demoralized gloom-and-doom Western elite.
If America adopts the protectionist trade policies of Japan or China, global profits plummet. If our armed forces follow the European lead of demilitarization and inaction, rogue states advance. If we were to treat the environment as do China and India, the world would become quickly a lost cause.
If we flee Iraq and call off the war on terror, Islamic jihadists will regroup, not disband. And when the Russians attack the next democracy, they won’t listen to the United Nations, the European Union, or Michael Moore.
Brace yourself — we may be on our way back to an old world, where the strong do as they will, and the weak suffer as they must.
Lest anyone assume I think it's all 'bad', I'm really of a mixed mind. I'm really not sold on the idea that the 'world hates us', if so, why are so many countries voting in leaders much of the ilk of our own, (FR, GR, SP)? Even where more 'liberal' leaders have been elected, (UK), they have quickly turned more conservative upon taking office, or shortly thereafter. I think it past time for Europe & Japan to add more to the bigger picture than they have, for over 60 years now.
If the US reining itself in means more prosperity at home and less conflict in the world, I'm all for it. It's probably something that we need to try again, hoping the results will be better than in the past.