AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › immovable object meets irresistible force
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

immovable object meets irresistible force - Page 3

post #81 of 88
7/17/11 at 5:10pm
So does this mean that China is isolationist?

If the US has 95% of the worlds foreign soil bases, does that make the rest of the world isolationist?

Maybe as a rule the US should never have more foreign soil bases than the rest of the world combined. How does that sound?

Including Afghanistan and Iraq, Iraq having an absolutely whoppingly big base in particular, I bet the US is somewhere around the $120 billion a year range to keep them operating. 120 divided by 20= $6 billion. Making an annual saving of about $114 billion.

If there's one thing you can be sure of is that these bases aren't getting any cheaper. Over the next 10 years that's $1.14 trillion dollars saved not including the the amount it costs to pay the interest during that time.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #82 of 88
7/18/11 at 9:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You can post all the dictionary definitions you want, and we can play semantics. I maintain that the US closing all of its 700 bases amounts to isolationism. Why? Because it does.

Actually, I am going to disagree here. It is not isolationism. I don't believe we should close all our bases around the world, but if we did it would not be a terrible thing either. And it would not be isolationism. It would be cutting down on US imperialism. ( A term I use for lack of a better word. )
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #83 of 88
7/18/11 at 11:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I just made the argument. I even used real words and their real meanings. You completely dismissed them with the wave of a hand. If this is what I'm to expect from others, then I don't expect much real thought to have been put to the question but rather answers from emotional irrationality.



Words have meanings. Emotion and irrationality and wishes and hopes don't change that.

Semantics. That is the game you're playing right now. I'm not playing.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #84 of 88
7/18/11 at 11:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

So does this mean that China is isolationist?

If the US has 95% of the worlds foreign soil bases, does that make the rest of the world isolationist?

Maybe as a rule the US should never have more foreign soil bases than the rest of the world combined. How does that sound?

Including Afghanistan and Iraq, Iraq having an absolutely whoppingly big base in particular, I bet the US is somewhere around the $120 billion a year range to keep them operating. 120 divided by 20= $6 billion. Making an annual saving of about $114 billion.

If there's one thing you can be sure of is that these bases aren't getting any cheaper. Over the next 10 years that's $1.14 trillion dollars saved not including the the amount it costs to pay the interest during that time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Actually, I am going to disagree here. It is not isolationism. I don't believe we should close all our bases around the world, but if we did it would not be a terrible thing either. And it would not be isolationism. It would be cutting down on US imperialism. ( A term I use for lack of a better word. )

We weren't talking about closing some of them. We were talking about closing all 700 foreign bases. Going from 700 to 0 amounts to isolationism. It's hard to believe this is such a radical idea to you guys. I've got MJ posting dictionary definitions for Christ's sake. 700 bases hypothetically close, and were arguing whether it's isolationist policy or not. I mean...fuck.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #85 of 88
7/18/11 at 11:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Semantics. That is the game you're playing right now. I'm not playing.

But surely you can admit that "non-interventionism" is not the same as "isolationism".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #86 of 88
7/18/11 at 2:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Semantics. That is the game you're playing right now. I'm not playing.

The "game" I'm playing is using words as they are meant to be used. And, no, you're not playing that game.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #87 of 88
7/18/11 at 2:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Going from 700 to 0 amounts to isolationism.

Actually it doesn't, and I clearly, calmly and politely explained why.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I've got MJ posting dictionary definitions for Christ's sake.

God forbid that we should actually use words as they are meant to be used. \


Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

700 bases hypothetically close, and were arguing whether it's isolationist policy or not. I mean...fuck.

Well, we're trying to discuss it...but you're merely dismissing anyone who disagrees with your own definitions.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #88 of 88
7/19/11 at 6:31am
@sdw

The real point is that there's a very long way to go in cutting bases before the US could be described as becoming isolationist.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › immovable object meets irresistible force