NationStates Jolt Archive

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

About the same. Nobody exactly charged into Rwanda now, did they? The US constantly holds back its funds from the UN to try to force into a tool of US policy....I'd say fuck off and good riddance, meself. Might force people to get off their asses and stop sucking up in the hope of a scrap from the table.

I think the world would breath a sigh of relief.

I think the world would breath a sigh of relief.

I would sigh a breath of relief. Our aggressive, unilateralist policy does more to destabilize the world than it does to help it.

I know the various terrorist organizations would.

Really now?

Tell me, has worldwide terrorism increased or decreased since the pro-active stance of the US since 2001?

Well, I can't support pulling out of Iraq, for the good of Iraqi people. Iraq will be absolutely fucked, I still hope that we can prevent it from being so fucked up, and make it shit but not that shit.

I think the world would breath a sigh of relief.

I know the various terrorist organizations would.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

Look at China's isolationist policy in the 1600's, and at the rate the world is shirnking (proverbially), I'd say it would do us no good. ('us' being America)

Really now?

Tell me, has worldwide terrorism increased or decreased since the pro-active stance of the US since 2001?

increased.:sniper:

That would be mmore destablizing then benefitial. If you look at the numbers, The USA gives more to the UN and NATO than anyone else so there go alot of peacekeepers. Not to mention the fact the countries like russia and china and Iran have nothing to stop them fromattacking other countries in wars of conquest because we won't step in. Good bye taiwan, Iraq, saudi arabia, israel, ukrain, belarus, south korea, japan, kuwait, india and pakistan(not conquered just nuclear wastleands) The United states' policies and things aren't perfect but it does a lot to keep the world from going into utter chaos. World war 3 would break out soon enough with u.s. isolationism.

It would be like removing a large splinter. There would be temporary, brief distress, but ultimately people would be far more comfortable.

Peace keepers are good but they shouldn't have restrictions put on them. a terrorist or some guy in a civil war isn't going to say oh peacekeeper i won't shoot. he'll be like "guy gun kill":sniper:
peace keepers hould be able to be proactive in their own defense and to protect peolple. the only way to keep peace is to get the bad guys off the streets wehter that means jail or bullets during a fire fight:mp5:

Really now?

Tell me, has worldwide terrorism increased or decreased since the pro-active stance of the US since 2001?

Actually, yes, worldwide terrorism has increased something like threefold since 2001. So much for unilateralism.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?
I think that the EU would become more of a world player.

Incidentally, not putting troops in to help peacekeeping efforts is just as irresponsible as launching invasions around the place.

It would be like removing a large splinter. There would be temporary, brief distress, but ultimately people would be far more comfortable.

You, as a Canadian, would be shielded from the numerous minior wars that would pop up. Granted they would be resolved soon, so I guess you are right. But you canadians are shielded from any type of war, because the U.S practically is your military.

God I hope the Feds would pursue an isolationist policy like this. It would mean that they would no longer be able to use war as an excuse to increase their power, and we would be able to enjoy a peace dividend from the reduced military spending. It would also disadvantage the Western financial and industrial elites who benefit from an 'activist' foreign policy, and allow for increased liberalism across the world.

You, as a Canadian, would be shielded from the numerous minior wars that would pop up. Granted they would be resolved soon, so I guess you are right. But you canadians are shielded from any type of war, because the U.S practically is your military.When was the last time you had to fight a war for us?

You, as a Canadian, would be shielded from the numerous minior wars that would pop up. Granted they would be resolved soon, so I guess you are right. But you canadians are shielded from any type of war, because the U.S practically is your military.

Oh, yes. Do tell that to the young Canadians that are fighting in Afghanistan right now. I'm sure they'll appreciate the hearty laugh.

In any case, we've been sheltered from war in the past primarily because of our foreign policy and our position on a continent occupied exclusively by first world countries. But, yes, we certainly owe our safety to the United States, who have bravely protect us by flying their troops to countries that have nothing to do with North America and justifying their wanton disregard for human life with the flimsiest of moral pretexts.

However would we get along without that?

I say it's time we quit trying to be the policemen of the world. Let's limit our military presence in foreign countries to the Marines stationed at our embassies and perhaps a half-dozen overseas military bases (which would only be located in countries that explicitly request that we stay). let's cut the crap, streamline the immigration laws so there's no more than a 1-month wait between applying and receiving U.S. citizenship, tell the illegals to go to the back of the line ("no cutting" is a universal principle, right?) and actually enforce the immigration laws.

As a side note, the U.S government should no longer provide foreign aid, but should act as the administrator for voluntary civilian donations to disaster relief - no tax dollars, just civilian donations. Donations would increase because people would no longer wait for Uncle Sam to do the charity work.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

Why would any wise leader trust the US to stay isolationist? In ten years, the US can quite easily change its mind. Like they did with Saddam.

Donations would increase because people would no longer wait for Uncle Sam to do the charity work.

Thats doubtful, they would still wait for the next, Sam, or Joe to donate in their stead.

I say it's time we quit trying to be the policemen of the world. Let's limit our military presence in foreign countries to the Marines stationed at our embassies and perhaps a half-dozen overseas military bases (which would only be located in countries that explicitly request that we stay). let's cut the crap, streamline the immigration laws so there's no more than a 1-month wait between applying and receiving U.S. citizenship, tell the illegals to go to the back of the line ("no cutting" is a universal principle, right?) and actually enforce the immigration laws.

As a side note, the U.S government should no longer provide foreign aid, but should act as the administrator for voluntary civilian donations to disaster relief - no tax dollars, just civilian donations. Donations would increase because people would no longer wait for Uncle Sam to do the charity work.
you mean the highwayman?

We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not.

Like we do now?

Like we do now?

*cough*Clinton,UN*cough*

Sorry...but anyone who says that the US isolating itself would be good...is FUCKING RETARDED...I'm not gonna get into cause there's FAR too many points...I have too little patience...and I don't care that much...cause will anyone listen? no

Sorry...but anyone who says that the US isolating itself would be good...is FUCKING RETARDED...I'm not gonna get into cause there's FAR too many points...I have too little patience...and I don't care that much...cause will anyone listen? no

Well, if you had good reasons I would listen, but as it is....

I imagine places like, say, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States, and Kazakhstan would issue a collective "Oh SHIT." before being re-integrated into Putin's New Warsaw Pact.

*cough*Clinton,UN*cough*

Clinton isn't President at the moment, is he?

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

Being as it all usually comes down to the money, are you proposing that the US not only pack up its soldiers and go home but also stop (or massively reduce) international trade? We're not just in the UN, we're in the WTO and we go to G8 meetings. Are we going to pull out of those, too?

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

A couple of little countries would change their stances. The European Union would probably be compelled to be a little more proactive. The UN would have to streamline a bit, and could stop trying to accomodate the intractible yanks at the table.

But, as it is, we only fuck with little ducks anyway. We piss and moan about Israel as a target for Iran, or whatever, but we sit on our asses while China disappears more people every year, than there even ARE in Israel.

For those who think Isolationism is a good idea, all I want to know is, what exactly are we going to do about our national debts and energy crisis? Where do we get all the resources to sustain those expected exponential energy demands without going out and "trading" with other countries combine with oversea military presence? After all the US does use up 1/4 of the world's resources today and our demands for resources have been rapidly growing over the years.

For those who think Isolationism is a good idea, all I want to know is, what exactly are we going to do about our national debts and energy crisis? Where do we get all the resources to sustain those expected exponential energy demands without going out and "trading" with other countries combine with oversea military presence? After all the US does use up 1/4 of the world's resources today and our demands for resources have been rapidly growing over the years.

I dunno. Horses? We had success with that before cars came along. We can go back, can't we? I say screw the rest of the world. Screw global economy. Survival of the fittest. MAD would apply more than ever.

Being as it all usually comes down to the money, are you proposing that the US not only pack up its soldiers and go home but also stop (or massively reduce) international trade? We're not just in the UN, we're in the WTO and we go to G8 meetings. Are we going to pull out of those, too?

Yeah. If they want the good that comes with the US not being isolated (money. and lots of it. Also, carpet bombing smurfs), they should accept the cost (Iraq, the Middle East in general, tourists, etc.). Nothing is free. Accept all or accept none.

I dunno. Horses? We had success with that before cars came along. We can go back, can't we? I say screw the rest of the world. Screw global economy. Survival of the fittest. MAD would apply more than ever.

Horses are great.

Unfortunately, other nations might still use tanks... and horses are a bit shit against armour and artillery.

Horses are great.

Unfortunately, other nations might still use tanks... and horses are a bit shit against armour and artillery.

WMDs. Build a few million secret bunkers hundreds of feet below the surface of the earth, then unleash all hell. Whoever, and whatever, survives shall take part in a new radioactive world order.

WMDs. Build a few million secret bunkers hundreds of feet below the surface of the earth, then unleash all hell. Whoever, and whatever, survives shall take part in a new radioactive world order.

Who is going to fire all those wmd's? The cream of America's finest, mounted on their war-ponies, will put up scant resistance to threat of invasion with modern armour. Hell, even the French could take the White House.

Once a French puppetking is imposed, who is going to fire of your final solution?

Also... MAD was a psychology, it was never actually going to happen. Given that the nearest parts of the former USSR and the USA are something like 150 miles from one another, and given the remarkable lack of precision inherent in wmds, it's not a matter of mutual destruction... even the arsenal of just one of the powers would have been death to all.

I dunno. Horses? We had success with that before cars came along. We can go back, can't we? I say screw the rest of the world. Screw global economy. Survival of the fittest. MAD would apply more than ever.

Right because with horses food magically appears in the supermarkets or something to sustain the population in cities like, say the NYC.

Personally I like the US as a modernize powerhouse more than a living hell of death and starvation. But at least you will keep the Mexicans out now that even Mexico have a better living standards than the US. It will be a sad day when Americans are climbing that Mexico border looking for jobs rather than the other way around.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

The other countries would want their stuff back.
Excuse me - that is MY aircraftcarrier you are holding there. Hey ! Stop hiding those nukes ! If you want to keep them, pay your debts !

Who is going to fire all those wmd's? The cream of America's finest, mounted on their war-ponies, will put up scant resistance to threat of invasion with modern armour. Hell, even the French could take the White House.

Once a French puppetking is imposed, who is going to fire of your final solution?

Also... MAD was a psychology, it was never actually going to happen. Given that the nearest parts of the former USSR and the USA are something like 150 miles from one another, and given the remarkable lack of precision inherent in wmds, it's not a matter of mutual destruction... even the arsenal of just one of the powers would have been death to all.

The trick is to become such a huge important part of the global economy, that once you pull out, the global economy basically collapses. Follow that with a nukefest. No nuke goes unspammed. Everyone says that the US should have 0 nukes. We would just appease those people. We have no nukes left.....because we just launched them all.

In preperation for Nukefest (insert year here), we would build many hidden bunkers. They will all be a secret to all who are not deemed worthy of temporary salvation. We would leave just enough of certain parts of the world unnuked so that any and all survivors wouldn't be screwed.

An alternative plan would call for a huge electro-magnetic bomb that would render all unprotected circuitry useless. Those caught unprepared would be rendered unable to launch a coordinated attack on a newly isolated US.

The other countries would want their stuff back.
Excuse me - that is MY aircraftcarrier you are holding there. Hey ! Stop hiding those nukes ! If you want to keep them, pay your debts !

Hey. If we don't pay our debts, you're screwed. If you owe somebody a million dollars, that's yor problem. If you owe him billions of dollars, that's his problem.

That would be mmore destablizing then benefitial. If you look at the numbers, The USA gives more to the UN and NATO than anyone else so there go alot of peacekeepers. Not to mention the fact the countries like russia and china and Iran have nothing to stop them fromattacking other countries in wars of conquest because we won't step in. Good bye taiwan, Iraq, saudi arabia, israel, ukrain, belarus, south korea, japan, kuwait, india and pakistan(not conquered just nuclear wastleands) The United states' policies and things aren't perfect but it does a lot to keep the world from going into utter chaos. World war 3 would break out soon enough with u.s. isolationism.

i wonder who will stop usa from attacking countries... sorry, but these thoughts are very naive.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?China would most likely emerge as the leading world power after the economic crisis.

i wonder who will stop usa from attacking countries... sorry, but these thoughts are very naive.

Not so naive, really.

Let me ask you this:

Who stops us now?

We invaded two nations, againnst global protest, and not only did no one but the oppositional forces oppose us, several nations helped out.

The only thing that stops the US military is its wallet.
America could literally grind Iraq under our boot heel if we really, really wanted to, it would just cost so much money, it wouldnt even be remotely worth it. Not to mention extremely unpopular with the american people.

Thats the other thing that can limit our military.
An election year.

As the Republicans will soon find out in the forthcoming election, politicians who support unpopular wars, started by ignorant Presidents, dont get elected.

There would likely be a massive power vacuum, which would be filled by other ambitious powers. I'd guess that no new global superpower would immediately form, but several regional superpowers. These powers could either work together or end up starting lovely things like arms races or outright wars.

The United States would both benefit and hurt from such a move. On the one hand, the military budget would implode and free up hundreds of billions of dollars for domestic programs or the largest tax cut in the history of the country. The country would be greatly harmed if it did not continue to interact in global commerce and science though. It would also lose huge amounts of influence over different regions or be shut-out from particularly hostile regions altogether. It would take a while for the anti-Americanism to die down in areas that have suffered the most from interventionism. People won't forget injustices right away and some might see the more isolated United States as a vulnerable target or they would leave it alone and hope nothing ever provokes the US out of isolation again.

Also, free ice cream and puppies will be given out to the world's children and some international organizations will probably be crippled or disappear without US funding and support.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

well the first thing that would happen, is just about everybody would breath a huge sigh of relief. at first. oh there would still emerge other 'players', but it is far from certain any would be able to exert as brutal and universal a grip on the internal affairs of other nations as america has.

no mention is made however in the op, about the international corporate mafia, and whether or not, a voluntarily self isolated america would defend its environment and its people from the forces that have currently usurped its political proccess, nor how, such a shift in policy could occur, without dealing with this issue.

dropping out of the u.n., and or arbitrarily closing borders or imposing punitive tariffs on imported goods are no part of a policy i would advocate. but reversing more then 60 years that i know of, of demonizing everything that refuses to kiss the ass of little green pieces of paper, and backing the corporate mafia against any nation honestly trying to protect its environment and its people for its deprivations, is one the i would, and do.

no mention was made either of standing down its nuclear arsonal, and begining by example a world wide trend of doing so, which i also wholeheartedly advocate. standing down its military presence beyond its borders would be a good first move yes.

as for preventing genocide, it has been a bald faced lie for that more then 60 years, that america has ever had or practiced any such policy of actually doing so.

if that had been the case, there would in all likelyhood still be a united, peaceful and free jugoslavia. nor would there ever have been a pol pot in cambodia, nor would there have been a tallibon, and quite likely, pacistan would never have become nuclear armed. and there are probably at least dozzens of instances in africa and elsewhere the u.s. WOULD have actually interviened in a timely and effective manor. but no, history shows that this did NOT happen, and only did not happen, because the real intrests of american forign policy was to defend keeping corporate hands in the pockets of the rest of the world.

=^^=
.../\...

as for what would happen? i belive most countries would develop better schools and better networks of public transportation and alternative energy. the incentives are there, only american bludgeoning of them stands in the way of doing so. there's even a real possibility global warming would roll off in twenty or thirty years. oh yes, there's still be some pugalistic nations making small regeonal wars. and many experiments in economic and political alternatives, including noncapital economies. it would certainly become a more healthily diverse world, and while by no means an absolutely 'safe' one, quite possibly, in many if not most places, a much safer one, then it is now.

=^^=
.../\...

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

There are to potential, and radically different, worlds that could come out of this.

In the event that the U.S. became radically isolationist but not protectionist, the world would remain relatively stable. This would be due to the rapid increase in wealth that would be freed up from useless military endevours. Since the very poor benifit the most from rapid growth (a growing economy is the only economic state that can raise the value of menial labor about bare substinance), the cost of going to war increases. Even though the impetuous to go to war would be removed from the bottom of society, there would still be wars of conquest occuring around the edges of several empires.

The other possibility, a U.S. that is both radically isolationist and radically protectionist would not be a stable international enviroment. The withdraw of almost a quarter of the worlds economy would create a massive depression and famine. In such a world, the meager wealth of your equally starving neighbor would look much more attractive. Nations around the world would likely be swallowed up into a few large empires. These empires would subsiquently disinegrate either in disasterous wars with each other or civil war as soon as the people could not be distracted by more minor wars around their borders.

I suspect that the military-industrial combine would buy a president to reverse the decision as they would stand to lose a lot of money.

Personally I think it would be a shame, as a superpower the US should be showing some leadership to the world (though it should listen to what the UN says more and not try and railroad the UN).

What I would like to see is the US separate what it does for its own selfish ends and the things it does for genuine humanitarian reasons.

Also to stop playing stupid realpolitik games - your enemies enemy is not your friend so don't give them guns - Kissinger is an idiot.

Hey. If we don't pay our debts, you're screwed. If you owe somebody a million dollars, that's yor problem. If you owe him billions of dollars, that's his problem.

True. Even though the USA military in theory is not owned by the US anymore, actual possesion goes a long way...

Would be intruiging to see the worlds countries to demand it now though :)

*cough*Clinton,UN*cough*

Nasty cough you got there. You should get it looked at.:rolleyes:

I imagine places like, say, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States, and Kazakhstan would issue a collective "Oh SHIT." before being re-integrated into Putin's New Warsaw Pact.

Tsk, tsk.

Putin doesn't want to rule the Soviet Union, he's too much of a pragmatist for that. No, I'd imagine they'd be reabsorbed into a renewed Russian Empire, under Tsar Vladimir I, of the Putin dynasty.

The trick is to become such a huge important part of the global economy, that once you pull out, the global economy basically collapses. Follow that with a nukefest. No nuke goes unspammed. Everyone says that the US should have 0 nukes. We would just appease those people. We have no nukes left.....because we just launched them all.

In preperation for Nukefest (insert year here), we would build many hidden bunkers. They will all be a secret to all who are not deemed worthy of temporary salvation. We would leave just enough of certain parts of the world unnuked so that any and all survivors wouldn't be screwed.

An alternative plan would call for a huge electro-magnetic bomb that would render all unprotected circuitry useless. Those caught unprepared would be rendered unable to launch a coordinated attack on a newly isolated US.

Someone has no clue what they are talking about... hidden bunkers? parts unnuked?

This is why democracy doesn't work....

Hey. If we don't pay our debts, you're screwed. If you owe somebody a million dollars, that's yor problem. If you owe him billions of dollars, that's his problem.

Kind of.... not really true, though.

If your economy is unlikely to buck up, they'll write-off the debt. They have no chocie.

Of course, they might set conditions on it...

And, once people start starving all across America, people will be a lot more willing to listen to that kind of talk.

For those who think Isolationism is a good idea, all I want to know is, what exactly are we going to do about our national debts and energy crisis? Where do we get all the resources to sustain those expected exponential energy demands without going out and "trading" with other countries combine with oversea military presence? After all the US does use up 1/4 of the world's resources today and our demands for resources have been rapidly growing over the years.

Well, if we have no tariffs or barriers to trade, they would want to sell to us and thus would foot the bill to sell to us. Plus, there would be private security for trading fleets, kind of like what they have now on land. (After all, there are more than twice as many private police as there are public police already, we would have some kind of naval equivalent if this area is desocialized.)

Then the needy of the world would whine that America only cares about its balance sheets. Then again, the US gets criticized by people who ay, in the same sentence that the Americans are cowards for waiting 2 years to intervene in WWII and warmongers for everyhing else

Anyway, I think that the US should pull out of all foreign wars, stop giving out foreign aid, and collect what is owed. Staying in the UN and NATO and trade agreements are essential though.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

Ugh.

So the choice is "let us do what we want, when we want, or we won't stop genocide na na na"?

Bullshit choice.

To the people that say isolationism is a good idea look at the years between 1918 and 1940. After WWI the United States took an isolationist stance and it was not pretty. The League of Nations was useless; the European economy tanked; the Nazis came to power in Germany; Japan invaded Manchuria and China; and Germany overran most of Europe. If the United States did it today the road to WWIII would open up.

Ugh.

So the choice is "let us do what we want, when we want, or we won't stop genocide na na na"?

Bullshit choice.

Yep, thats the choice.

Ugh.

So the choice is "let us do what we want, when we want, or we won't stop genocide na na na"?

Bullshit choice.

I thought of another option.
There is no choice at all, everything will lead to one outcome, pre-determined by the causes of other actions. All we do is spend words on the wind.
Or get more power to not a UN but two seperate groups for each issue, one group focuses on the wider political aspects, the other oblivious to the political group focuses on getting as much human aid and support to struggling nations. Instead of one UN, which could be ignored wholly, have seperate forces which work to the same goal but follow different routes to achieve it. Just a thought.

Some of you have a very inflated worth of America.


Really, if we stopped meddlingin everyone elses affairs, the world would not end, and some of you are arrogant enough to believe otherwise.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

It would be a crippling blow to the prostitution industries of several countries around the world.

Ugh.

So the choice is "let us do what we want, when we want, or we won't stop genocide na na na"?

Bullshit choice.

No. We already don't stop Genocide. The choice is, let us do what we want when we want and we won't start genocide, unless that's what we want.

It would be a crippling blow to the prostitution industries of several countries around the world.

Funny, and sadly partly accurate, your comment gets a 4 out of 5.

I bet it's gonna be Robert "Snake" Plissken meats "Mad" Max Rockatansky in no time. Throw in some Max Guevara and John Henry Brennick and I'm sure you'll enjoy your downfall a lot - at least on TV! ;):p:D

Some will benefit, some will suffer, but nothing will really change. When the inevitable happens, and America is no longer in the position of world leader, then another power (probably the chinese next, although the EU could have a shot) will rise and take its place. It doesn't matter whether Americas fall come from external sources, or by its own choice. It will happen, and we will simply be replaced.

That would be mmore destablizing then benefitial. If you look at the numbers, The USA gives more to the UN and NATO than anyone else so there go alot of peacekeepers. Not to mention the fact the countries like russia and china and Iran have nothing to stop them fromattacking other countries in wars of conquest because we won't step in. Good bye taiwan, Iraq, saudi arabia, israel, ukrain, belarus, south korea, japan, kuwait, india and pakistan(not conquered just nuclear wastleands) The United states' policies and things aren't perfect but it does a lot to keep the world from going into utter chaos. World war 3 would break out soon enough with u.s. isolationism.


Are you kidding? Our gov't here in the USA will be the spark that ignites WW3.
I mean come on now our retard president is already talking about it.We americans(or me at least) with military family members(like me) would sure like some isolation for the US.America spends to much time in other nation's affairs when we have plenty to do domesticly.

No. We already don't stop Genocide. The choice is, let us do what we want when we want and we won't start genocide, unless that's what we want.

Sadly you're correct. The US does absolutly nothing about real world problems(Sudan for example).

The U.S. doesnt really have to stay out of the entire world. I say just follow what George Washington said and stay out of Europe's wars.

The U.S. doesnt really have to stay out of the entire world. I say just follow what George Washington said and stay out of Europe's wars.

It's possible that the world has changed since George Washington's oh-so-recent death

The U.S. doesnt really have to stay out of the entire world. I say just follow what George Washington said and stay out of Europe's wars.

Which we've so far managed to do this millennia. Iraq and Afghanistan aren't European, are they? No, so we're following his advice now.

What if tomorrow the U.S pulled our troops out of everywhere, dropped out of the UN and pretty much became as isolationist as possible. We So isolationist that even if say, an african country begged us to stop a genoside there and we would not. How do you think the Global power structure would change?

Korean War resumes
Taiwan ceases to exist as independent
Many countries fall to internal rebellion because of lack of US aide
Iraq continues to be a shitstorm except now no more Americans get blown up
A lot of people are jobless without embassies and consulates
Afghanistan returns to its factional fighting
Pakistan becomes overrun by militants and extremeists
Africa grows even more chaotic
The UN is now without the bulk of its fighting force and left with few forces that won't retreat at the sight of blood
We have no more but no less genocides in the world
Israel becomes entangled in war
Iran gets nuclear weapons
Saudi Arabia gets shakier
US banks essentially fail without foreign bail-outs [though that sucks for us]

I say go for it, it's about time we stopped supporting the world.

And, without a doubt, everyone comes to the US and begs us for help as always.

Korean War resumes
Taiwan ceases to exist as independent
Many countries fall to internal rebellion because of lack of US aide
Iraq continues to be a shitstorm except now no more Americans get blown up
A lot of people are jobless without embassies and consulates
Afghanistan returns to its factional fighting
Pakistan becomes overrun by militants and extremeists
Africa grows even more chaotic
The UN is now without the bulk of its fighting force and left with few forces that won't retreat at the sight of blood
We have no more but no less genocides in the world
Israel becomes entangled in war
Iran gets nuclear weapons
Saudi Arabia gets shakier
US banks essentially fail without foreign bail-outs [though that sucks for us]

I say go for it, it's about time we stopped supporting the world.

And, without a doubt, everyone comes to the US and begs us for help as always.

Communist world revolution ( :awesome: )

Well, I'd like an exemple of US help in the UN...
For what I know, US doesn't even pay it's share, and still hold to it's chair of Security Member.

For Africa, I really think that US didn't do anything out there.
In Rwanda, we really fucked up.
But there's also EU good moves, two exemples gets immediatly on my mind in the few last years:

_War in Sierra Leone, ended by UK intervention.
_Civil war in Côte d'Ivoire: France break in, now the two sides are on the same government.

To the topic now.

If USA get's isolationnist, I guess it's not on an economical way, without the world trade, no modern country could survive actually.
For the UN, I think that USA does already nothing to help it, and in fact, do it's worse to corrupt the essence of this utopic organisation.

The world would probably see some disorders, as every dictators helped by US gov' would have to ressort to another protector, but, no nation is vital to the world, don't forget it.

Seing an Hyperpower letting the place to a few world powers would be interesting, and if it could stop some imperialims in the cultural and economical aspects, I would be glad.

At last, for the US people, it would be a very good tax cut in this military who is far to expensive for the use you make of it...come on, do you really think that you need 500 billions dollars a year to keep your country SAFE ?

Well, I'd like an exemple of US help in the UN...
For what I know, US doesn't even pay it's share, and still hold to it's chair of Security Member.

For Africa, I really think that US didn't do anything out there.
In Rwanda, we really fucked up.
But there's also EU good moves, two exemples gets immediatly on my mind in the few last years:

_War in Sierra Leone, ended by UK intervention.
_Civil war in Côte d'Ivoire: France break in, now the two sides are on the same government.

To the topic now.

If USA get's isolationnist, I guess it's not on an economical way, without the world trade, no modern country could survive actually.
For the UN, I think that USA does already nothing to help it, and in fact, do it's worse to corrupt the essence of this utopic organisation.

The world would probably see some disorders, as every dictators helped by US gov' would have to ressort to another protector, but, no nation is vital to the world, don't forget it.

Seing an Hyperpower letting the place to a few world powers would be interesting, and if it could stop some imperialims in the cultural and economical aspects, I would be glad.

At last, for the US people, it would be a very good tax cut in this military who is far to expensive for the use you make of it...come on, do you really think that you need 500 billions dollars a year to keep your country SAFE ?

Pssh. Waste, my ass. Those 500 billion pay for one of the most feared militaries in the world. No country wants us to invade them, unless they want to wind up like Iraq. Granted, it could use SOME trimming. We could compensate the fewer tanks and troops with nuclear warheads. Nobody wants to mess with a coountry that could potentially wipe out all life on earth and Mars, if Mars had life. We'd have enough left over to make Mercury nice and glowy. Okay, those suicidal terrorists might want the extinction of the human race. They already blow themselves up. What do they care if we blow them up? They still wind up explodey.

I imagine places like, say, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States, and Kazakhstan would issue a collective "Oh SHIT." before being re-integrated into Putin's New Warsaw Pact.

... Starting a war with the EU in the process (although Putin looks like he wouldn't mind one with the UK at the moment), since the Baltic states are full EU members. I don't think Russia is going to go for that one... although Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan may be more of an issue.

I don't understand why it seems when US foreign policy comes up it becomes about either complete withdrawal and isolationism or unilateral influence and involvement. Surely there's a middle ground the US can occupy, including continued economic and political involvement without unilateral involvement in other countries politics (multilateral involvement through UN peacekeeping mission are a different kettle of fish). Interacting with other nations as equals in a mutually beneficial fashion will do a lot more for selling ideals or freedom and democracy than military force.

My view. If the US stopped propping up dictatorships, overthrowing governments and manipulating (through threats or economic pressure) other nations to achieve their own ends, then yes, the world will be a better place. In the short term there may be a few issues, but in the long-term self-determination always leads to greater stability. Immediat and complete withdrawal and isolation will lead to a great power vaccume, which may be filled by newer super-powers (China, EU, India and possibly Japan looking at current trends) but the transition will be somewhat messy and also end up extremly badly for the US since it is exceedingly reliant on both imports and exports to keep it's economy going.