what would happen.... ?

[Boyd]

Ok mods, this is slightly a political question, but it is something I know nothing about and am curious. If you want to del I will not complain

Ok, my question is thus: What would happen if the USA quit sending foreign aid packages across the world, and sent our military all over the world?

Reason I ask, is I do a lot of reading, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, ALJAZEERA, BBC, etc etc etc and there seems to be no middle ground. People either want our help and aid, or they want us away and uninvolved. Travelling has shown me that some folks from other countries view us as warmongering folks who think ourselves superior to other countries.... Not saying I agree/disagree with any of this blather, but an article I read this morning on the Iran/Israel issue heating up really got me thinking. I'll go back and find link to article in a minute.


ETA: found it. http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/24/martin.obama.iran/index.html

 

[Davaroo]

How about we do this:

Price a bushel of our wheat equal to one barrel of oil, a ton of iron ore, or some measure of whatever valued resource they have?

Then they have something to work for, and we can have a business relationship with them. We could always discount for our friends, if we wanted.

This gives a third choice - profit incentive. You don't have to be beholding to anyone, nor even like them, to do business with them. America has more competitors now than ever. We used to be the best at everything, now there are many nations who are working as hard at everything as we used to.

But the fact is you cannot be the best at everything. So lets choose instead to become the best, main supplier of something they absolutely need. In the history of the world, it is the merchant classes that drove advancement. Meanwhile, they avoided most of the strife around them and prospered in the bargain. It's how the Japanese did it. Today they are seen by many as the best auto makers in the world.

As it stands now, we cling to the old notion that we are still the best at everything. This foster's only two choices, love or hate. You're either with us or against us, so to speak. It's time to evolve.

 

[beak]

There's no doubt that we are perceived as thinking we are #1 and everyone else is below us. It would be nice if we stuck to actual foreign aid only. As in money going to countries that truly need help. Instead we spend a lot of money bribing and paying off countries to support us. The reason we got hit on 911 was because of our meddling in Middle East affairs. Specifically Saudi Arabia. That was what Osama Bin Ladin said after the fact. I guess that's the reason why there is a lot of anti American sentiment around the world. The latest world polls say that is changing. In the past 5 months the US approval rating has gone up quite a lot. For a while everyone except our closest allies were looking at us as the evil empire with Darth Vader at the controls and Alfred E Newman as the second in command. I know a lot of people could care less what the world thinks but I care.

JMHO because I certainly don't know everything.

 

[Boyd]

I've seen that our approval ratings have gone up, but it still seems like a love hate thing. I can easily see us drawn back into another middle eastern war because we are committed to the protection of Israel, yet they are at the brink of war.

 

[Reinbeau]

Personally I'm not a huge globalist, I'm in favor of taking care of US (pun intended) first, but the past few administrations have been bent on turning our economy into one that depends on globalism - that's going to be a hard thing to undo if they ever realize it's the wrong direction to go in.

 

[Davaroo]

The reason we got hit on 911 was because of our meddling in Middle East affairs. Specifically Saudi Arabia. That was what Osama Bin Ladin said after the fact.

It always interests me to note that in 1948, the sheiks of Saudi Arabia were as keen to join with us as we were to have them.
Ever heard of a little oil conglomerate called ARAMCO?

How we get the sole blame for all that came after escapes me.

Even more interesting, Osama bin Laden is a son of one of the very sheiks who profited from the arrangement. Like Fidel Castro, he is a rich boy, gone snotty... hardly the dirt-bred hero of the movement he is portrayed as. He's more like a noble bred opportunist, looking for a place to get to the top. He couldn't cut it at home, his family displeased with him and his rebellious ways.

In the 1980's, during the Russian "vacation" in Afghanistan, he and his "freedom fighters" gladly accepted all the military aid we could give him. When that died out, his own people refused to fund his continued rambunctiousness, so he turned on them and anyone in league with them.

It all about profit and gain, who wins and who loses.​

 

[Boyd]

Quote:
That kind of goes to the heart of the question. Would you hear the big sucking sound as we withdraw all our military, money and assest to focus on fixing what is wrong in america first? Sort of reminds me of one of my favorite movies that is a deliberately unPC farce... Team America : World Police

 

[Davaroo]

Quote:
That kind of goes to the heart of the question. Would you hear the big sucking sound as we withdraw all our military, money and assest to focus on fixing what is wrong in america first?

Ever heard of a guy named Vilfredo Pareto?

He wrote a treatise on social economics called "Trattato di Sociologia Generale" (The Mind and Society, in English) in which he suggested that most of the wealth of any people is held by an elite minority of the people. He argued that democracy was an illusion, and that a ruling class always emerged and enriched itself... no matter what it is called.
In essence, you reach a point where it is not possible to make anyone better off - without making someone else worse off.

Pareto divided the elite class into two groups: the conservative defenders of status quo (aggressive 'lions'), and the radical promoters of change (cunning 'foxes'). In his view of society, the power constantly passes from 'foxes' to 'lions' and vice-versa.

In one age, the Lion comes to the fore, but the fox inevitably perseveres, whether the lion is on top or not.

He also said this: "History is a graveyard of aristocracies."

This guy was H-U-G-E and has been touted as perhaps the most influential social thinker in history, shaping the policies and thoughts of entire nations - and most have never even heard of him!

If we are to persevere, we must now leave our lion-like ideals behind and become more like the fox, calculating and discrete. It is what it is.
Let the many aristocracies rise and fall... we can stand among them and trade with them as they do. In the end, we will remain to hold all the cards.

At the end of the day, the victor is the one who remains standing.

 

[Reinbeau]

Exactly, David, and I want US to be the ones standing. I really don't give a fig about the rest of them. I believe in the USA. The real one, the melting pot, the land of opportunity if you work hard and persevere.

 

[Rusty Hills Farm]

Would you hear the big sucking sound as we withdraw all our military, money and assest to focus on fixing what is wrong in america first?

Errr...hate to break it to you but we OWE way more than we spend on foreign aid. That sucking noise MIGHT turn out to be foreign interests withdrawing all of their money from US.

We are trapped into the global economy because we owe everybody and his brother from the Chinese to the Saudis. We cannot produce our way out of that debt because our corporations have moved all the manufacturing jobs overseas.


Rusty​