Non-Interventionism: America's Original Foreign Policy...

[Dschrute3]

As the Communists and Neocons continue dragging us closer to WWIII, it's time all Americans begin questioning their Government's aggressive interventionist foreign policy.

 

[Moonglow]

The original intent didn't last very long before the country started to intervene in Indians lands and settlers....and yes Indian nations were considered sovereign nations...

 

[gipper]

As the Communists and Neocons continue dragging us closer to WWIII, it's time all Americans begin questioning their Government's aggressive interventionist foreign policy.

One would think after all the lies told to the American people by the ruling class and the state run media to promote war, it would not be difficult. Problem is the money and power the ruling class attains during war, is just too good.

 

[Dschrute3]

As the Communists and Neocons continue dragging us closer to WWIII, it's time all Americans begin questioning their Government's aggressive interventionist foreign policy.

One would think after all the lies told to the American people by the ruling class and the state run media to promote war, it would not be difficult. Problem is the money and power the ruling class attains during war, is just too good.

Yeah, they have vast resources and control the narratives. They've convinced the American Sheeple that there's always a Boogeyman that needs to be slayed. The MIC Elites are masters of deception.

 

[jwoodie]

Ever heard of the Monroe Doctrine?

P.S. Vast oceans are no protection against nuclear ICBMs.

 

[Kondor3]

Isolationism will not work for the United States in modern times.

The Paulites are both unrealistic and just plain wrong in this context.

The last time we tried heading backwards in that direction (1920s-1930s) we got caught with our pants down on December 7, 1941.

What we CAN do is to choose our alignments and interventions and fights more wisely so as to avoid pointless waste of blood and treasure.

 

[Dschrute3]

Isolationism will not work for the United States in modern times.

The Paulites are both unrealistic and just plain wrong in this context.

The last time we tried heading backwards in that direction (1920s-1930s) we got caught with our pants down on December 7, 1941.

What we CAN do is to choose our alignments and interventions and fights more wisely so as to avoid pointless waste of blood and treasure.

Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations... Entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson

 

[Kondor3]

Isolationism will not work for the United States in modern times.

The Paulites are both unrealistic and just plain wrong in this context.

The last time we tried heading backwards in that direction (1920s-1930s) we got caught with our pants down on December 7, 1941.

What we CAN do is to choose our alignments and interventions and fights more wisely so as to avoid pointless waste of blood and treasure.

Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations... Entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson

Given the state of the world, non-interventionalism may as well be isolationism - for all intents and purposes - close enough for Gubmint work.

 

[Dschrute3]

Isolationism will not work for the United States in modern times.

The Paulites are both unrealistic and just plain wrong in this context.

The last time we tried heading backwards in that direction (1920s-1930s) we got caught with our pants down on December 7, 1941.

What we CAN do is to choose our alignments and interventions and fights more wisely so as to avoid pointless waste of blood and treasure.

Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations... Entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson

Given the state of the world, non-interventionalism may as well be isolationism - for all intents and purposes - close enough for Gubmint work.

Again, Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

 

[Pogo]

The original intent didn't last very long before the country started to intervene in Indians lands and settlers....and yes Indian nations were considered sovereign nations...

And pretty soon after, we were trying to take Canada, which fortunately kicked our ass....

 

[gipper]

As the Communists and Neocons continue dragging us closer to WWIII, it's time all Americans begin questioning their Government's aggressive interventionist foreign policy.

One would think after all the lies told to the American people by the ruling class and the state run media to promote war, it would not be difficult. Problem is the money and power the ruling class attains during war, is just too good.

Yeah, they have vast resources and control the narratives. They've convinced the American Sheeple that there's always a Boogeyman that needs to be slayed. The MIC Elites are masters of deception.

So true. This is why the ruling class and it's media keep telling us about THREATS to America, which of course include Russia, China, and NK. What a bad joke that is. There are no REAL external threats to America. As a result the ruling class has to make them up, to keep the people in line and generate enormous power and wealth for themselves.

 

[mikegriffith1]

I agree, and I'm glad that Trump is proving to be more non-interventionist than interventionist.

 

[Kondor3]

Isolationism will not work for the United States in modern times.

The Paulites are both unrealistic and just plain wrong in this context.

The last time we tried heading backwards in that direction (1920s-1930s) we got caught with our pants down on December 7, 1941.

What we CAN do is to choose our alignments and interventions and fights more wisely so as to avoid pointless waste of blood and treasure.

Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations... Entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson

Given the state of the world, non-interventionalism may as well be isolationism - for all intents and purposes - close enough for Gubmint work.

Again, Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

And let me explain to you my own position, once again...

In the modern world, failure to intervene in specific circumstances is the functional equivalent of isolationism.

I'm not talking about what Webster's Dictionary says... I'm talking about the Real World... APPLIED meanings... which, in the end, is the only thing that signifies.

 

[Hossfly]

Well, if we get invaded and they take our guns away, our sovereignty could be lost. We do need to have policies and regulations to prevent that from happening.
The bill of rights was put into place to make sure Americans have the rights needed for us to keep America. When they start taking away these rights, it's a sign our country has been compromised and war could be coming.

The 2nd Amendment will keep us safe. Anyone fucking with the 2nd Amendment will be vaporized.

 

[Tehon]

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ12 of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination13 of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

Those truths are well established. They are read in every page which records the progression from a less arbitrary to a more arbitrary government, or the transition from a popular government to an aristocracy or a monarchy.

James Madison

Founders Online: Political Observations, 20 April 1795

 

[Dschrute3]

As the Communists and Neocons continue dragging us closer to WWIII, it's time all Americans begin questioning their Government's aggressive interventionist foreign policy.

One would think after all the lies told to the American people by the ruling class and the state run media to promote war, it would not be difficult. Problem is the money and power the ruling class attains during war, is just too good.

Yeah, they have vast resources and control the narratives. They've convinced the American Sheeple that there's always a Boogeyman that needs to be slayed. The MIC Elites are masters of deception.

So true. This is why the ruling class and it's media keep telling us about THREATS to America, which of course include Russia, China, and NK. What a bad joke that is. There are no REAL external threats to America. As a result the ruling class has to make them up, to keep the people in line and generate enormous power and wealth for themselves.

Another day, another Boogeyman. They keep the American Sheeple fearful and paranoid. In that state, they tend to support any war being pushed by the Elites. They're also willing to give up their freedom & liberty. It's very sad.

 

[Dschrute3]

Isolationism will not work for the United States in modern times.

The Paulites are both unrealistic and just plain wrong in this context.

The last time we tried heading backwards in that direction (1920s-1930s) we got caught with our pants down on December 7, 1941.

What we CAN do is to choose our alignments and interventions and fights more wisely so as to avoid pointless waste of blood and treasure.

Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations... Entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson

Given the state of the world, non-interventionalism may as well be isolationism - for all intents and purposes - close enough for Gubmint work.

Again, Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

And let me explain to you my own position, once again...

In the modern world, failure to intervene in specific circumstances is the functional equivalent of isolationism.

I'm not talking about what Webster's Dictionary says... I'm talking about the Real World... APPLIED meanings... which, in the end, is the only thing that signifies.

We should listen to Thomas Jefferson...

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations -- entangling alliances with none."


“The principles of Jefferson are the axioms of a free society.” ~ Abraham Lincoln

Thomas Jefferson (1743—1826) was no ordinary Founding Father. He served as a member of the Virginia House of Burgesses (1769), a delegate to the Continental Congress (1775), the governor of Virginia (1779), minister to France (1785), the first Secretary of State (1789), the vice president of the United States (1796), and finally, the president of the United States (1801). He also established the University of Virginia (1810)...

Read More:
Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

 

[gipper]

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ12 of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination13 of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

Those truths are well established. They are read in every page which records the progression from a less arbitrary to a more arbitrary government, or the transition from a popular government to an aristocracy or a monarchy.

James Madison

Founders Online: Political Observations, 20 April 1795

Strange no?

Some of the Founders knew that war leads to tyranny and inequality. Certainly many others around the world knew this fundamental fact centuries ago. Too bad so many Americans today have failed to learn this fundamental fact of reality.

Think of the few politicians over the past 50 years who have opposed the MIC, empire building, and non-stop foriegn interventions. They are all denigrated as quacks and crackpots, by the establishment media and political class. Yet they are the ones who espouse what the Founders believed.

 

[gipper]

I agree, and I'm glad that Trump is proving to be more non-interventionist than interventionist.

I hope you are right that he is trending toward non-intervention, but fear you are not. His administration is full of warmongers, with Bolton being the latest blood lust addition. Time will tell.

 

[gipper]

Isolationism will not work for the United States in modern times.

The Paulites are both unrealistic and just plain wrong in this context.

The last time we tried heading backwards in that direction (1920s-1930s) we got caught with our pants down on December 7, 1941.

What we CAN do is to choose our alignments and interventions and fights more wisely so as to avoid pointless waste of blood and treasure.

Non-Interventionism doesn't = 'Isolationism.'

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations... Entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson

Why is it the warmongers always try to disparage non-intervention as isolationism?

To answer my own question...to belittle and defame, is why.