Pilgrim,
If you're asking Turtle, he's on a long load right now - he's seen your post, but probably won't reply for at least another 24 hours or so.
OK, I'll ask again - specifically, what meddling??
I provided you with just one example of what happened with respect to Iraq in the 1950's .....
screwing with the right of sovereign people for self-determination and to elect their own leaders.
In my estimation, that's just about as
anti-American as one can get - because it flies directly in the face of what was contained within the Declaration of Independence - which, to a large extent, is a statement of
who we are (or were) as a people, and as a nation:
"..... it becomes necessary for one people ..... and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them .....
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"
If one reads and
understands the above, as something that we as a nation hold
to be true, then it becomes utterly impossible to sanction subverting the rights of others - rights that we believe
all men possess .....
without at the same time violating our own moral integrity as a nation ..... we become utter and total hypocrites.
The Founders warned that our form of government was only suitable for a just and moral people.
FWIW, that kinda screwing around with others lives is pretty big deal to some people .... it's something that most peoples tend to remember .....
and in that part of the world it's not unknown to carry a grudge for awhile ....
Pretend I just landed from Mars,
Well, given your seeming lack of knowledge of the dirty, amoral side of our country's conduct of (so-called) "foreign policy" I suppose that might be a reasonable explanation.
Personally, I'm fairly busy at the moment, but in a couple of weeks I should be able to work something up as far as a little continuing education course if need be.
Of course, anyone could just take some personal responsibility for the state of knowledge (or lack thereof) that they currently find themselves in, in this regard, and do the digging on their own.
Be forewarned however - if anyone is
predisposed to believe certain things - like say for instance, that the
only possible reality is that America is
entirely and
only a
just,
righteous, and
holy nation, then they will be most likely dooming themselves to utter failure .....
as preconceived and fixed ideas are necessarily the mortal enemy of unflinching, accurate observation of the truth.
or just graduated from a public high school.
I bugged out of that scam three times before I finally got it to stick. And I was lucky to have sustained as little damage as I did.
It's truly great conditioning for being ruled by authoritarians ....
just like being in the military is .....
Maybe in some cases, but there's some gray area in between.
No, there really isn't - non-interventionism respects the
rights of other peoples to determine their own political systems, elect their own leaders, fight for their own freedom, be responsible for their own security and their relations with others. It allows for commercial, cultural, educational, and social relations between the peoples of respective countries.
Isolationism on the other hand, suggests having no relations of any sort with others, beyond one's own borders. Further, if strictly enforced by a government (
as it has in the case of the US with respect to Cuba), it acts as a prohibition on free association and relations between private individuals ..... and I can't think of very much that is more authoritarian and against individual liberty than that.
Clearly, that is probably not in anyone's best interest, given what
good things personal observation and the entirety of history tell us about private individuals interacting with other private individuals.
The challenge for us
as a species is to build a human civilization on this planet that really merits being proud of. We clearly ain't there yet.
Yemen might be an example, where their leaders take a public anti-American stance but privately ask for our help against Al Qaeda.
If Yemen has a fight with Al Qaeda then really, it's up to them to handle it - doing what we are doing now is a prime example of an
entangling alliance - since our being there does
nothing more than generate more Al Qaeda and anti-American sentiment, same as it does elsewhere ..... and it makes us a
target due to the inevitable mistakes and "collateral damage" that will most assuredly occur, as it has in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
We need to wise up, consider the Founders very sage advice (
and more importantly, understand why they gave it) ... and stop sticking our collective national wiener in the proverbial meat grinder .... and then, with utter astonishment, asking ourselves in complete amazement:
"Well why did that hurt ?"
Considering that they were visionaries for their time, it's fair to say they didn't see the two World Wars coming, to say nothing of the global economy and oil as the primary source of energy for modern nations. Then there's the intricacies of international finance, the internet, etc.
Surely you're not suggesting that the Founders were ignorant of international finance ?
I would say this: the Founding Fathers considered long and hard the true nature of men and the governments they create ..... they looked to history of both to inform themselves and distilled out of what they found, certain intrinsic and immutable laws with respect to both, and applied it to the task of designing a government worthy of a moral people.
Whether one is speaking of a Roman chariot or a sailing ship of the 18th century (as methods of transport) ..... or the Roman legions vs. the forces of the Third Reich (as implements of war) ..... the true nature of man and government does not substantially change.
You seem to believe that the mere transitory details (
which will always be subject to change) have more relevance and importance, and should be given more weight, than the
fundamental laws which govern man and his nature.
It is a horribly misplaced importance - and absolutely a very dangerous mistake to make.
Maybe - kinda, sorta; but IMHO it's more the politically correct U.S. wanting to be everybody's friend and prove ourselves to be the benevolent providers for the downtrodden along with filling in as the world's police.
That's the spin of it ....
the state-sanctioned narrative ....
The actual truth of it is far, far different ....
I agree we need to cut out ALMOST all foreign aid - it serves no purpose towards America's best interest.
Somewhat inaccurate, although we are in agreement.
It supposedly serves the interests of the US
state (government) - because, well, that's how
bribery works ...
at least in the short term ....
However, in the long-term, it very well may not, likely does not, serve the interests of
the American people for several reasons:
1. It's robbery by the US government of the citizens - you and I have no option to refuse to withhold our tax payments - which are extracted under the threat of force - for foreign aid we don't agree with.
2. Since often the aid is used against the citizens of the government that we are supplying it to, or others, it creates the possibility of blowback against US citizens.
In other cases with true allies - eg. Britain, Israel, India, Australia, Japan, Canada - we need to work with them and offer aid or assistance whenever appropriate.
What part of the following seems corn-fusing:
entangling ... or .... alliance ?
True allies ?
The only "allies" that are true are those which we have a mutual interest with.
And mutual "interests" are not some sort of thing which are forever
static,
immutable and
never changing - they do, in fact, change .... sometimes quite often .....
which is the exact reason why entangling alliances are so dangerous.
If you want to understand
how that works, find a nice girl, establish a serious and close relationship with her, tell her you will love and support her always .... and you want to get married so you can spend the rest of your lives together ......
and then, on the day of the wedding, give her a call and tell her you changed your mind, because you've met someone else ....
I'm sure she won't mind it at all ....
BTW, in the case of Israel, they sure act more like an
enemy in some respects - considering the spying and espionage they have committed against the US.
Also it might not be a bad idea to send the UN packing and maybe let them locate their HQ in Switzerland.
Keep your friends close ......
and your enemies closer ....
