The world without US - Movie

[netsecurity]

Anyone else seen this on Netflix? What would happen if our military was withdrawn from foreign soil, and we kept to ourselves?

[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py4jVOJDwXU[/ame]

 

[spec4]

He's got my vote. I'm putting this in my Netflix queue. This is timely for me because the more I think of the crap in the middle east, the more I think we should get the hell out and let them do whatever they want to each other with their 6th century minds. Likewise for Europe and the Far East. If there's a problem, that's what ICBM's are for.

 

[indykid]

I think if we withdrew from the world, it would be like it was right after WWI, which lead to the Japanese attempted takeover of the eastern hemisphere and Germany attempted takeover of Europe, western Asia, northern Aftica, and South America.

Only this time it would be a group called Muslims spiraling out of the middle east. As it is they are doing a good job of it even with our military presence.

 

[netsecurity]

He's got my vote. I'm putting this in my Netflix queue. This is timely for me because the more I think of the crap in the middle east, the more I think we should get the hell out and let them do whatever they want to each other with their 6th century minds. Likewise for Europe and the Far East. If there's a problem, that's what ICBM's are for.

I'd love to discuss how you feel after seeing the film.

 

[indiucky]

I'd love to discuss how you feel after seeing the film.

^^^^^^^

It is worth a watch...It's not as pretty a picture as Isolationist want to paint...One and Fifty hundred years ago?? Maybe...Today. Not so much...IMHO ofcourse.

 

[netsecurity]

Everyone should watch this movie and study ww2, and at least know some basic facts about our recent geopolitical history, because there is a lot of misinformation out there.

 

[poptab]

This is all probabilities who can say what actually would happen.

BTW I am all for withdrawing from policing the world.

 

[ABolt243]

OK, from an old man (me). Back in 1967, I was 17 and just beginning to be aware of world events. The Six Day War broke out and I asked my Dad (WWII vet, both theatres) what he thought about the middle east situation. His answer: "Son, those folks have been fightin' and "makin' babies" (insert a little coarser word there) since time began. They "make babies" until they can't stand each other, then fight until they get the numbers down to where they can stand each other again. Leave 'em alone, let 'em fight. But if they threaten our people or our shores, then flatten the whole region.

I think it's still a valid middle east policy.

AB

 

[netsecurity]

"America imposes freedom":

It Wasn't Just an Apology Tour, It Was a Condemnation Tour! And We Have All the Evidence to Prove It Right Here... - The Rush Limbaugh Show

 

[CombatRex]

Your looking at it the wrong way. We should withdraw and bring all the troops home. All the nations needing our help would howl and beg for assistance. Then we charge them billions and billions and fix our national debt. Keep world peace and fix our economy...two birds with one stone.

 

[KoopaKGB]

Your looking at it the wrong way. We should withdraw and bring all the troops home. All the nations needing our help would howl and beg for assistance. Then we charge them billions and billions and fix our national debt. Keep world peace and fix our economy...two birds with one stone.

Hmm I partly like that idea. Of course there would have to be a re organization of our military first. "America: Private security services worldwide. Now accepting bids"

 

[netsecurity]

Hmm I partly like that idea. Of course there would have to be a re organization of our military first. "America: Private security services worldwide. Now accepting bids"

It's not a bad plan, except that it would be immoral to let them kill themselves enough to beg for help, which is what the movie points out if you watch it. But we do charge many countries for security in that we are the biggest arms supplier. We do have private security world wide, but we're usually paying for it, and asking nothing in return besides peace and free trade.

 

[g+16]

I have posted this before,screw the world!!, pull all our people home, army, marines, air force and navy, place the army across the border with canada, the marines across border with mex. air force patrol all borders, like wise with the navy guard our waters, train our missles on all major targets of depolyment, suck up higher gas prices, let the damn a**holes have the world. Why have we shed blood since WW2 to keep everyone else free? How do you think Germany and Japan got so far ahead of us as have money to spend, when someone else is providing your security for you, you have more money. The middle east has always had war and will till the end of time, one sect. or the other is always killing the other and will till they are all gone. Oh but wait I forgot the world ends in december, never mind. just my

 

[KoopaKGB]

It's not a bad plan, except that it would be immoral to let them kill themselves enough to beg for help, which is what the movie points out if you watch it. But we do charge many countries for security in that we are the biggest arms supplier. We do have private security world wide, but we're usually paying for it, and asking nothing in return besides peace and free trade.

I was once told by credible officers that the US pays the government of Djibouti to lease the land there for a base Camp Lemonnier. We pay them, they dont pay us.

 

[netsecurity]

I was once told by credible officers that the US pays the government of Djibouti to lease the land there for a base Camp Lemonnier. We pay them, they dont pay us.

Djibouti probably couldn't afford to pay us if they wanted to. Japan and South Korea could though. I'm not sure exactly why they don't after all these years, but I think it is very likely because it would be seen by their general population as a "imperial tax", and "occupation" if we required payment, and then they would eject us, and then the region would become unstable.

So it is what it is--we pay for world peace, and everyone benefits. It is good while it lasts, but when our military bases worldwide close because we run out of money, WW3 is pretty much guaranteed if no one takes their place. That is where we stand today. Will it cost us more to keep paying for world security, or to be drawn into WW3? The analysts always have come to the conclusion that we should maintain the status quotas long as possible, at practically any cost. Nothing is worse than another world war, and money is cheap compared to lives. Keep in mind that after another global war, someone would have to once again occupy the defeated countries, and it all starts again...

You know the United Nations was created to actually enforce world peace. But they made the absolutely idiotic mistake of allowing Russia and China veto status, so the UN is impotent. I see it as little more than an international charity organization. Perhaps some day soon NATO, which doesn't include our political foes, could take over world security. So all we need is for France, Germany, Italy and pals to invest in a REAL military.

 

[KoopaKGB]

I wouldnt say ww3 is guaranteed. I suppose its inevitable in either case but it would boil down to alot of innocent folks getting slaughtered. This already happens in lawless Africa as UN soldiers sit around collecting their paychecks. UN is about worthless. So America foots the bill, both in manpower and materials/money. It would be very interesting to see what would happen if the US drastically reduced our foreign presence.

Israel and South Korea both need our help, they have some pretty powerful enemies. But as far as policing the world, its just not possible for us to do it anymore.