Author Topic: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political  (Read 2132 times)

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2012, 05:59:31 PM »
This all goes into Ron Paul's foreign policy argument.  If we pulled back to our borders we would eventually be surrounded by those who would be looking longingly at our property as well.  And it wouldn't take as long as you might think.  Being younger, you'd still be around to see it.

Human nature is what it is.  There will always be unnecessary wars.  Us pulling back to our borders won't stop it or keep us out of them.  It's always been a fact of life.  If we don't go to them they will come to us.  I don't expect everyone to believe it.  But everyone and every generation is going to continue to live it.

There have always been two types of nations.  Those that are victors and those that are trampled on.  Each gets to choose which type they will be.  Usually without even knowing it.

If I wanted more fear-mongering I would have flipped it on Fox News.

I asked for real world examples.  All I hear is fear.

"If we don't attack everyone, and if we don't start a bunch of useless wars, and if we don't stay the policemen of the world and have bases in every country then the US is screwed."

Its a shame that you buy into this line of thinking, sledge.

Instead of wasting all that money on foreign useless wars, why don't we just put that into the National Defense, within our own waters and borders?

If we become the strongest nations from WITHIN, good luck on anybody attacking us and taking us over, besides nukes, but I'm pretty sure they'd have to smuggle it in, because we'd knock a missile out of the sky, from what I understand we have that technology.  With a strong defense, and if we secured the border, they'd have a hard time smuggling it in.

I'm not talking about isolationism, either, I'm talking about non-interventionism.  There is a huge difference. 

Also, I think we're spread WAY too thin right now, we need to bring it all back, and make our country the strongest from within, and secure our country first, before we go be the police of the entire world again.

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2012, 06:06:09 PM »
I'm sorry.  I disagree with your reasoning.  In fact, if China could figure a way to boat their billion + army over here it wouldn't matter how strong we were we would be in a world of trouble.  It's not fear mongering when there is good reason to be concerned.  (IE:  For example it's not fear mongering to say the Federal Reserve is sending us all to hell in a hand basket.  It's fact.)



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline RS762

  • Committed prepper
  • *****
  • Posts: 989
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2012, 06:15:11 PM »
Quote
(IE:  For example it's not fear mongering to say the Federal Reserve is sending us all to hell in a hand basket.  It's fact.)


an irrefutable one at that [URL=http://www.smileyvault.co

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2012, 06:31:08 PM »
Just so they can make sure we all stay informed.

"Israel news agencies are reporting the western media outlets are obtaining assets and gearing up infrastructure to provide live coverage of war with between Iran and Israel."

Media Making Emergency Preparations To Cover War With Iran

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/02/08/media-preparing-infrastructure-war-iran-81991/



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2012, 07:42:47 AM »
I'm sorry.  I disagree with your reasoning.  In fact, if China could figure a way to boat their billion + army over here it wouldn't matter how strong we were we would be in a world of trouble.  It's not fear mongering when there is good reason to be concerned.  (IE:  For example it's not fear mongering to say the Federal Reserve is sending us all to hell in a hand basket.  It's fact.)

OK, are you going to give me one example of things that hurt us while we were being non-interventionist, or are you just going to ignore my question?

I can give you one example, right now, of something that hurt our freedoms here at home as well as our economy, 9/11 was BLOWBACK from all of our meddling in the Middle East, and also, the bombing of the USS Cole as well.  Beruit comes to mind. 

I believe that being the policemen of the entire world and getting in everyone's business has had a FAR greater negative impact on our national security and our freedoms here at home, more so that when we were a non-interventionist country.

I'm still waiting for you to provide me with examples that I'm not right.  Please show me in our nation's history where being non-interventionist HURT us as a country. 

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2012, 09:11:05 AM »
I'm sorry.  I disagree with your reasoning.  In fact, if China could figure a way to boat their billion + army over here it wouldn't matter how strong we were we would be in a world of trouble.  It's not fear mongering when there is good reason to be concerned.  (IE:  For example it's not fear mongering to say the Federal Reserve is sending us all to hell in a hand basket.  It's fact.)

OK, are you going to give me one example of things that hurt us while we were being non-interventionist, or are you just going to ignore my question?

I can give you one example, right now, of something that hurt our freedoms here at home as well as our economy, 9/11 was BLOWBACK from all of our meddling in the Middle East, and also, the bombing of the USS Cole as well.  Beruit comes to mind. 

I believe that being the policemen of the entire world and getting in everyone's business has had a FAR greater negative impact on our national security and our freedoms here at home, more so that when we were a non-interventionist country.

I'm still waiting for you to provide me with examples that I'm not right.  Please show me in our nation's history where being non-interventionist HURT us as a country.

Look EJR, this isn't an insult or putting you down.  It doesn't do me any good to try to explain foreign policy to you.  Because we are looking at two separate things.  You're looking at a smaller picture that has it's frames surrounding the U.S.   I see that picture plus a lot larger picture that apparently you can't see yet.

It's not much different than when you try to explain to someone why you prep and they give you the look.  They do that because they don't see the same picture  that you do.  They see the picture of what is going on in their lives but not the things that can affect it.  This discussion we are a having is the same thing.

You think the reason we were attacked on 9/11 or on the Cole was because we are meddling in other people affairs.  I disagree.  We would have been attacked anyway.  Maybe not at those precise times, at those precise locations, but we would have been attacked and will be attacked anyway.  Not because we are "over there", but because we are two different cultures and theirs tells them to take over the world for Allah.

Yes, WWII is an excellent example of what happens if we step out of the picture.  It encourages and allows expansionist policy by those who desire more power.  In that case Hitler.  Now, what do you think the world would look like today if we had followed the foreign policy you are advocating then?  What if we had stayed out of WWII? You would have Germany, Japan ad Italy ruling a large portion of the world if not all of it.  Do you think they would have left our continent or South America alone after completing those conquests? 

If we follow the foreign policy you advocate today we will get the same result from the major players active today.  The U.S. has been able until today to hold those players in check.  We haven't permanently taken over other peoples lands and planted our flag on them.  There are still only 50 states.  Our problem is that we spent vast sums of money trying to rebuild nations we defeated.  We never get paid back when we do that. 

The U.S. looks to be in decline at this point and it's ability to hold those other players in check may come to an end.  So it is highly likely you will get your wish at some point.  My only comment is to be careful what you wish for.  It comes with consequences as has been shown in the past.  If it occurs the U.S. will find itself surrounded by a world power military it won't be able to match and will be forced to submit.   

   



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2012, 09:25:16 AM »
Yes, WWII is an excellent example of what happens if we step out of the picture.  It encourages and allows expansionist policy by those who desire more power.  In that case Hitler.  Now, what do you think the world would look like today if we had followed the foreign policy you are advocating then?  What if we had stayed out of WWII? You would have Germany, Japan ad Italy ruling a large portion of the world if not all of it.  Do you think they would have left our continent or South America alone after completing those conquests? 

You sure do assume a lot don't you sledge?  Where did I ever say that I advocated us not getting invovled in WWII?  I think we were forced to act in WWII.  There you go again, putting words and ideas into my mouth.  I hate it when people do that.  Its what makes posting in forums and trying to have discussions on the internet so impossible.  Stop putting words and ideas into my mouth that I never said.   ::)

If we follow the foreign policy you advocate today we will get the same result from the major players active today.  The U.S. has been able until today to hold those players in check.  We haven't permanently taken over other peoples lands and planted our flag on them.  There are still only 50 states.  Our problem is that we spent vast sums of money trying to rebuild nations we defeated.  We never get paid back when we do that. 

Umm, actually, we've acquired quite a few territories beyond the 50 states.  Guam, the Phillipines, and I believe Puerta Rico as well.  Just to name a few.  That's really besides the point.  I also, believe you are wrong as you are still putting words into my mouth.  I believe you do not have a firm grasp at all to what a non-interventionist policy is.  You think it means you never go to war, you think it means that you just sit on your ass while the whole world goes to shit.  You are wrong.

I agree, we need to stop the nation building, which is a huge part of our foreign policy now.


The U.S. looks to be in decline at this point and it's ability to hold those other players in check may come to an end.  So it is highly likely you will get your wish at some point.  My only comment is to be careful what you wish for.  It comes with consequences as has been shown in the past.  If it occurs the U.S. will find itself surrounded by a world power military it won't be able to match and will be forced to submit.   

Yes, and it will be our piss poor economy that does us in, because our politicians have sold  us up the river, when it comes to our economy.  When the US had more of a capitalist economy, our economy was the envy of the whole world.  Through government regulation, the central bank, high taxation, wealth redistribution, ect, our government has turned our economy into a government demand socialist corporatist economy, and it KILLED our thriving economy.  We have our elected officials to blame for this, and the electorate, nobody else is to blame.  If we had an electorate that paid attention to who they voted into office and what their policies did to our economy, and elected men that were not corrupt and actually supported capitalism, we wouldn't be in this position anyway.

And yes, I firmly believe that we if just left the Muslims alone, and wouldn't have gone over their training them, giving them weapons, vehicles, and other material support, and money, and then backed out on them, we would have never had the blowback attacks that we have had.

You think its a flaw in their religion, I think its because of our meddling in their business and their affairs that has pissed them off.

The fact that you and many others cannot see it, is quite startling to me.  The Muslims are NOT the boogey man.  If we left them alone, we would stop getting attacked. 


   

Also, to add to this, I think you're WRONG about me not seeing the big picture, I believe it is you who is looking at a small picture because of your preconceived notion that Muslims are the boogey man, and they are all out to destory the United States because we're a "Christian nation" which we actually are not.  You are wrong about that.  I see the bigger picture of our CIA and all the toppling of leaders, and setting up dictators, then taking out those same dictators that we set up, and the bombing and the terrorism that our CIA does in other countries.  I truly believe that they think all the killing and bombing is "for the greater good" but what they don't see is that all it makes the people of other countries do is hate us.  Also, the CIA are doing all this in our foreign policy for one thing right now, trade, oil, precious metals, ect.  They think they are doing the right thing for the US, what they don't understand is that the BLOWBACK from these actions is why we are being attacked.  Not because of the Muslim boogey man.  After all, its our fault that we don't have our own oil, we shouldn't even need the Middle East right now.  We should be drilling our own oil and becoming energy dependent so we don't have to keep getting into these wars over oil. 

I know quite a few Muslims, they don't want to all kill us, you're wrong about that.  Sure a small amount of people have bastardized the religion called Wahhabism, don't believe me look it up. 

I truly believe that one huge problem that I see is that the older guys, are so set in their ways, so engrained in their thinking that they will not accept or even look at other ideas and see if they have any merit on their own.

You see, I was just like you when 9/11 happened.  I thought Muslims were the problem, that they will attack us no matter what we did, but I researched it, and did a lot of reading, talking to Muslims, ect, and I realized it was our foreign policy, our CIA actions, our military actions that have lead to these attacks, and NOT a religion. 

Open your mind, stop being so close-minded, and actually try to look at these ideas, see if they actually make sense if the situation was reversed, if we constantly had a country over here, like China, that was constantly bombing us, killing citizens, toppling our leadership, and instituting dictators, that WE WOULD BE ATTACKING THEM TOO.  I beg you to please open your mind and look at the merit, the logic, and the reasoning behind these ideas.

What would YOU be doing, if a country like China, was over in the United States doing exactly what we do in the Middle East?  Would you be attacking Chinese soldiers?  Would you be carrying out terror plots in China trying to get them to stop?

What would you do if China was over here bombing us, killing citizens, had drones flying over our country armed with surveillance equipment and bombs, killing citizens, toppling our leadership, instituting dictators?  Please answer that for me. 
« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 09:41:29 AM by EJR914 »

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #32 on: February 10, 2012, 09:43:39 AM »
So we disagree.  Man, I'm really shocked by that.  :o  It really doesn't matter if you are wrong or I am wrong.  There are consequences either way.   Sorry if I miss understood what you said and put words in your mouth.  I must have misunderstood:

  "If we don't attack everyone, and if we don't start a bunch of useless wars, and if we don't stay the policemen of the world and have bases in every country then the US is screwed."

I took from that statement that your belief was that we shouldn't get involved in a war unless we are attacked on our own shores.  My belief is following that line of thought ensures that it will happen.

By the way, I think you've missed something in that statement.   We haven't started any wars.   We have gone to war in response to what other nations have done.

Anyway, I'm done with this.  It's not going to get us anywhere by continuing to prove that we disagree.  You have your point of view, I have mine, and the world is full of people who think totally differently than both of us.

Cheers  :)



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2012, 09:48:10 AM »
So we disagree.  Man, I'm really shocked by that.  :o  It really doesn't matter if you are wrong or I am wrong.  There are consequences either way.   Sorry if I miss understood what you said and put words in your mouth.  I must have misunderstood:

  "If we don't attack everyone, and if we don't start a bunch of useless wars, and if we don't stay the policemen of the world and have bases in every country then the US is screwed."

I took from that statement that your belief was that we shouldn't get involved in a war unless we are attacked on our own shores.  My belief is following that line of thought ensures that it will happen.

By the way, I think you've missed something in that statement.   We haven't started any wars.   We have gone to war in response to what other nations have done.

Anyway, I'm done with this.  It's not going to get us anywhere by continuing to prove that we disagree.  You have your point of view, I have mine, and the world is full of people who think totally differently than both of us.

Cheers  :)

Why won't you even look at the ideas that I'm talking about?  Why will you not even roll them around in your head and consider them?  See if they make any sense.

What are you so afraid of?

Please answer me this question.

What would YOU be doing right now, if China was over here, occupying our country, or bombing us, killing citizens, had drones flying over our country with surveillance equipment and bombs, toppled our leadership and put in their own dictators that they liked?

What would you be doing right now?

Just please, answer that one question.

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #34 on: February 10, 2012, 10:24:30 AM »
EJR what makes you think I haven't considered the ideas you are talking about?  I have thought about it, examined it, forecast where I think it leads, and decided it carries more risk than what we face by holding adversaries in check.

It's not that I don't see what you are saying because I do.  We just disagree on the safest course for our country and many others.  I believe in peace through strength and power projection.  That does not include fighting other people for no reason.  It does include carrying a big stick and using it on people who would try to subjugate others until they were strong enough to subjugate us.  Your question on a Chinese invasion ties in directly to the above statement.  No big deal because neither of us has any way to have an affect on what will happen.

Of course I would fight if China invaded us.  I understand that you are saying the people of the middle east are fighting us because we are there.  That is a tiny part of the entire equation. 

There is a difference between your China invasion question and what we are doing in the middle east.  We are fighting there because of the actions of those people.  We didn't start it.  We do not go to war to take over territory like your Chinese invasion would be.  They have been able to hold elections and elect whomever they chose.  We are leaving them to rule themselves however they wish to do so.

And the message is fuck up again and we'll be back.  If your neighbor fucks up and becomes aggressive we'll visit him as well.  Why, because that's the way the world is and someone has to do it.  Thank God it's us.  Because if it wasn't us it would be someone else forcing their will upon us.  Someone without our morals, standards, and sense of justice.

I know you don't agree with that.  But I do. 

Anyway, be happy! :)     

 



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #35 on: February 10, 2012, 11:30:10 AM »
EJR what makes you think I haven't considered the ideas you are talking about?  I have thought about it, examined it, forecast where I think it leads, and decided it carries more risk than what we face by holding adversaries in check.

Ok, fair enough.

It's not that I don't see what you are saying because I do.  We just disagree on the safest course for our country and many others.  I believe in peace through strength and power projection.  That does not include fighting other people for no reason.  It does include carrying a big stick and using it on people who would try to subjugate others until they were strong enough to subjugate us.  Your question on a Chinese invasion ties in directly to the above statement.  No big deal because neither of us has any way to have an affect on what will happen.

You do realize that right now, we do not and are not trying to get or do have peace through strength and power projection, because I totally agree with looking as strong and powerful as we can to everyone, including our enemies.  I want us to look like a tank sitting there to a guy that has a spit wad.  As you know, that is not the case.  I'd say our country is really weak right now, and is about to become powerless because of our economy.  I hope you understand that right now, we are the police of the world.  See, that's the thing, you think that people could get strong enough to subjugate us.  I hate to say it, but that is never happening.  Its fear mongering to think otherwise.  They'd literally have to kill everyone with nuclear bombs to subjugate us, another thing that is not happening. 

Of course I would fight if China invaded us.  I understand that you are saying the people of the middle east are fighting us because we are there.  That is a tiny part of the entire equation. 

Nope, that is the equation, sledge.  They fight us because we are over there, they fight us because our country, our military and CIA, controlled by our government is over there getting all up in their business, killing citizens accidentally, flying armed drones over their country, bombing them, toppling their leaderships and setting up dictators that we like in their place, and most of the time, these dictators are bad for the people of the countries.  Is it any wonder that we have blowback?  Is it any wonder that they attack us and hate us?  I hate to break it to you, sledge, the religion aspect of it is is the small part of the equation.  The meddling in their affairs is the huge part of the equation, you have it completely backwards. 

There is a difference between your China invasion question and what we are doing in the middle east.  We are fighting there because of the actions of those people.  We didn't start it.  We do not go to war to take over territory like your Chinese invasion would be.  They have been able to hold elections and elect whomever they chose.  We are leaving them to rule themselves however they wish to do so.

First, you're wrong, when we got done with many countries, WE propped up a dictator that WE wanted in, and the people of that country suffered under their rule, until recently, they have been toppled.  You're looking back in the past decade or so.  I'm looking back many decades and the way the US has chosen to act in its foreign policy.  You need to look a lot further back then a decade, sledge, you need to look back many decades to understand this.  If you do not look further back, you will NEVER understand why the rest of the world hates us and wants to kill and attack us.  You're being WAY too short sighted. 

Ok, well feel free to tell me what Iraq did to the Unites States of America to make us go over there, and kill countless civilians, bomb them, topple their leadership, and establish a government that the United States wanted.  The same with Afghanistan, the same with Libya, and while you're at it, explain to me what Egypt did or Iran did to us, before we took out their leaders, and replaced them with someone that we wanted in power.  Explain to me what all the countries did to us, where we toppled their leadership and put in a government that we wanted.  Include all the South American countries into that equation as well, sledge.  Please explain to me what they did to us, that forced our hand to go over there and do what we did to them.  You could not be more wrong in your above paragraph sledge.  You're just plain wrong. 

What we are following right now, is the Wolfowitz Doctrine... look it up.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine

Do you think that governments or tribes in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya or now Iran had anything to do with 9/11?  Please tell me that you don't actually believe that, right?  We had NO business invading Iraq or Afghanistan.   

We invaded Iraq because we WANTED TO, because we needed a war to feed the MIC cash.  We were being the police of the world because we suspected they broke UN rules.  They never did SHIT TO US.  Saddam, never did shit to the US.  The UN should have taken care of Iraq breaking rules, the US had no business going in there in the first place. 


And the message is fuck up again and we'll be back.  If your neighbor fucks up and becomes aggressive we'll visit him as well.  Why, because that's the way the world is and someone has to do it.  Thank God it's us.  Because if it wasn't us it would be someone else forcing their will upon us.  Someone without our morals, standards, and sense of justice.

I know you don't agree with that.  But I do. 

I think its great that we did what we did in WWII.  I'm glad that it was US that have the power and capability to help other countries and people out, when they call on us and need our help.  My problem is that most of the time, THEY DON'T ASK FOR OUR HELP.  We just show up and become Team America World Police.  We show up even when we aren't wanted.  We topple leaders that the people of the country either didn't want out, or were to pussy to topple the leader themselves.  Let the people earn their own freedom like we did.  Why do we always have to be doing it?  Like I said, we are completely sticking our nose in places where it doesn't belong, in people's business that don't even want us there. 

If people want freedom in their country, they are going to have to earn it themselves, or that freedom will be lost in a shorter period of time that it took for us to give it to them.  Make them bleed their own blood like we did to get our own freedom if they want it that bad.  Because I promise you this, if you go around the world trying to give people their freedom, when they don't want it enough to take it themselves, you are literally wasting your time, because they will not keep that freedom worth a damn.  A people have to be willing to kill and die for their freedom, because if not, they will not keep it.  You're literally wasting your time.

You sure do paint a completely naive and rosie glasses pictures of what we have actually done in the past in our foreign policy, I don't know if its out of ignorance or if you just think it will help make your argument look better. 


Anyway, be happy! :)     


I'll be happy when our government stops being Team America World Police, and stops destroying MY freedoms and liberties here at home.  Until that happens, no, I won't be happy.

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #36 on: February 10, 2012, 01:24:36 PM »
EJR you should talk to Rah.  You both have very close views and could bounce this stuff off of each other.   You see what you see, you think what you think, and I'm fine with it.  I don't agree with you at all on this subject and I think you miss a lot because in my opinion your evaluation is off.  I'm fine with that too.  It doesn't matter to me.

I know you think my evaluation is off.  That doesn't matter to me either.

Now, did we solve anything by continuing this discussion?  What a waste of time.

I hope you can spend yours more usefully.  I know I will.  :)




In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #37 on: February 10, 2012, 01:35:25 PM »
EJR you should talk to Rah.  You both have very close views and could bounce this stuff off of each other.   You see what you see, you think what you think, and I'm fine with it.  I don't agree with you at all on this subject and I think you miss a lot because in my opinion your evaluation is off.  I'm fine with that too.  It doesn't matter to me.

I know you think my evaluation is off.  That doesn't matter to me either.

Now, did we solve anything by continuing this discussion?  What a waste of time.

I hope you can spend yours more usefully.  I know I will.  :)

I don't consider it a waste of time at all.  If we have a crash and if we have the ability to rebuild this country, I don't want our country falling into the same traps that have brought on our own destruction, again.  If we have people in this country that still feel the way that you do, there is no doubt it my mind that we will again, one day, suffer the same fate again.

I've talked to Rah before, Rah is the guy who got me over to LNL in the beginning anyway, we have discussed this in length, and he and I agree with some things, other we do not.  I've known RAH for quite some time.

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #38 on: February 10, 2012, 01:48:24 PM »
If we have a crash and if we have the ability to rebuild this country, I don't want our country falling into the same traps that have brought on our own destruction, again.  If we have people in this country that still feel the way that you do, there is no doubt it my mind that we will again, one day, suffer the same fate again.

Good luck with all of that and changing the way the world works!  It hasn't happened since the dawn of time.  But maybe you'll do it.   :)  I suspect you are going to experience a lot of frustration in your life.



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #39 on: February 10, 2012, 02:19:15 PM »
If we have a crash and if we have the ability to rebuild this country, I don't want our country falling into the same traps that have brought on our own destruction, again.  If we have people in this country that still feel the way that you do, there is no doubt it my mind that we will again, one day, suffer the same fate again.


Good luck with all of that and changing the way the world works!  It hasn't happened since the dawn of time.  But maybe you'll do it.   :)  I suspect you are going to experience a lot of frustration in your life.


Yeah, since our country had a non-interventionist foreign policy for the first hundred and some odd years and it actually worked for them.   [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #40 on: February 10, 2012, 02:30:08 PM »

Yeah, since our country had a non-interventionist foreign policy for the first hundred and some odd years and it actually worked for them.

First Barbary War (1801 to 1805)
War of 1812 (1812 to 1815)
Mexican- American War (1846 to 1848)
Spanish-American War (April 25?August 12, 1898)



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #41 on: February 10, 2012, 02:44:57 PM »

Yeah, since our country had a non-interventionist foreign policy for the first hundred and some odd years and it actually worked for them.


First Barbary War (1801 to 1805)
War of 1812 (1812 to 1815)
Mexican- American War (1846 to 1848)
Spanish-American War (April 25?August 12, 1898)


Thanks for proving my point.  None of those wars were brought on by us being interventionist in our foreign policy.

Quote
Non-interventionism, the diplomatic policy whereby a nation seeks to avoid alliances with other nations in order to avoid being drawn into wars not related to direct territorial self-defense, has had a long history in the United States. It is a form of "realism".

Non-interventionism on the part of the United States over the course of its foreign policy, is more of a want to aggressively protect the United States' interests than a want to shun the rest of the world.

Non-intervention, sometimes referred to as military non-interventionism, seems to some to be the antithesis of isolationism.[1] Maintaining the participation of the United States in global economic affairs is thought to likely boost trade and expand US diplomacy, in the view of Edward A. Olsen.[1]

Early background

Thomas Paine is generally credited with instilling the first non-interventionist ideas into the American body politic; his work Common Sense contains many arguments in favor of avoiding alliances. These ideas introduced by Paine took such a firm foothold that the Second Continental Congress struggled against forming an alliance with France and only agreed to do so when it was apparent that the American Revolutionary War could be won in no other manner.

George Washington's farewell address is often cited as laying the foundation for a tradition of American non-interventionism:

    The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

[edit] No entangling alliances (19th century)

President Thomas Jefferson extended Washington's ideas in his March 4, 1801 inaugural address: "peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." Jefferson's phrase "entangling alliances" is, incidentally, sometimes incorrectly attributed to Washington.[2]

In 1823, President James Monroe articulated what would come to be known as the Monroe Doctrine, which some have interpreted as non-interventionist in intent: "In the wars of the European powers, in matters relating to themselves, we have never taken part, nor does it comport with our policy, so to do. It is only when our rights are invaded, or seriously menaced that we resent injuries, or make preparations for our defense."

After Tsar Alexander II put down the 1863 January Uprising in Poland, French Emperor Napoleon III asked the United States to "join in a protest to the Tsar."[3] Secretary of State William H. Seward declined, "defending 'our policy of non-intervention ? straight, absolute, and peculiar as it may seem to other nations,'" and insisted that "[t]he American people must be content to recommend the cause of human progress by the wisdom with which they should exercise the powers of self-government, forbearing at all times, and in every way, from foreign alliances, intervention, and interference."[3]

The United States' policy of non-intervention was maintained throughout most of the 19th century. The first significant foreign intervention by the US was the Spanish-American War, which saw the US occupy and control the Philippines.

20th century non-intervention

Theodore Roosevelt's administration is credited with inciting the Panamanian Revolt against Colombia in order to secure construction rights for the Panama Canal (begun in 1904).

United States President Woodrow Wilson, after winning reelection with the slogan "He kept us out of war," promptly intervened in World War I. Yet non-interventionist sentiment remained; the U.S. Congress refused to endorse the Treaty of Versailles or the League of Nations.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism

There is a lot more there, I beg that you please go read it all and educate yourself.

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #42 on: February 10, 2012, 02:56:03 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism   LOLOLOLOLOL!
Thanks for proving my point.  None of those wars were brought on by us being interventionist in our foreign policy.  LOL!
There is a lot more there, I beg that you please go read it all and educate yourself.  LOL!

Oh that's funny!    :)   I'm getting tears in my eyes from laughing so hard.   LOL!  Thanks I needed that!

Ok EJR,  LOL!  Thank you for bringing those to my attention.  LOL!

Somebody help me!  LOL!   I can't quit laughing!  LOL!








In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #43 on: February 10, 2012, 02:57:55 PM »
Umm ok.   ::)

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #44 on: February 10, 2012, 02:59:59 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism   LOLOLOLOLOL!
Thanks for proving my point.  None of those wars were brought on by us being interventionist in our foreign policy.  LOL!
There is a lot more there, I beg that you please go read it all and educate yourself.  LOL!

Oh that's funny!    :)   I'm getting tears in my eyes from laughing so hard.   LOL!  Thanks I needed that!

Ok EJR,  LOL!  Thank you for bringing those to my attention.  LOL!

Somebody help me!  LOL!   I can't quit laughing!  LOL!


So when you get proven wrong with cold hard facts, your baseline reaction is to revert to putting LOL! all over the screen? 

Offline Outonowhere

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 1353
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #45 on: February 10, 2012, 03:02:15 PM »
So... what was the OP about again?   [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at lol
"A GREAT CONTRADICTION IS THE BELIEF IN STATES RIGHTS WHILE NOT SUPPORTING THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL."  - Me
Han shot first!

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #46 on: February 10, 2012, 03:04:47 PM »
Here is another link for your funny bone so you can get on the LOLZCoaster...

Quote
Non-interventionism, sometimes called neutrality or ?isolationism? (more often by its detractors), refers, unsurprisingly, to a government?s deliberate policy of abstaining from interfering in the affairs of other countries. It was the foreign policy of such early American statesmen as George Washington (as seen in his Farewell Address), Thomas Jefferson (as seen in his First Inaugural Address), and John Quincy Adams (as seen in his July 4, 1821, address as Secretary of State) and of later political leaders such as Senators Robert LaFollette and Robert Taft.

Traditional American non-interventionism was combined with advocacy of free international trade and the free movement of people, which is why the term ?isolationism? was inappropriate. These policies are consistent because they avoid intervention in the affairs of foreign nations and in the private transactions of international finance and commerce. Today many left and right opponents of abstaining from military intervention nevertheless want the government to limit private global commercial relations. In fact, both proponents of military interventionism and opponents of free global trade and capital flows are the true ?isolationists.? Classical liberals also oppose neo-mercantilist policies--that is governmental subsidization of industry through subsidies of the use of armed force to open or guarantee foreign markets. But the classical-liberal descendants of America?s founding generation (libertarians) consistently uphold non-intervention and private global free-market activity. They oppose both economic nationalism and the sort of globalism that entails trade managed by governments or their international organizations, realizing that both approaches require government control over private resources and individual liberty.

Non-interventionism averts the perilous dynamic of its opposite policy, in which government meddling creates crises that in turn rationalize more power and further meddling. For this reason, it has also been called the foreign policy of peace.


http://www.onpower.org/foreign_non_inter.html


Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #47 on: February 10, 2012, 03:07:37 PM »
So... what was the OP about again? 

John, Mosby, a former special forces soldier does not support our interventionist foreign policies, especially with Iran.  He's saying we should get Israel's back, but only attack Iran after certain things take place.  I tend to agree with him.

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #48 on: February 10, 2012, 03:17:44 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism   LOLOLOLOLOL!
Thanks for proving my point.  None of those wars were brought on by us being interventionist in our foreign policy.  LOL!
There is a lot more there, I beg that you please go read it all and educate yourself.  LOL!

Oh that's funny!    :)   I'm getting tears in my eyes from laughing so hard.   LOL!  Thanks I needed that!

Ok EJR,  LOL!  Thank you for bringing those to my attention.  LOL!

Somebody help me!  LOL!   I can't quit laughing!  LOL!


So when you get proven wrong with cold hard facts, your baseline reaction is to revert to putting LOL! all over the screen?


LOL!  Stop it, your killing me!   :)  EJR if Wiki is what you base your "cold hard facts" on I'm starting to understand your positions better.   :)  Yeah, that's a pretty good argument there.  Run with it.  You've convinced me that I've been wrong all these years.  Thank you!

But I'm still confused about one thing.  How will Non-interventionism keep other countries from overtaking their neighbors?  And as those countries continue to get larger and more powerful how will we keep them from reaching a point where they over take us.  When it eventually reaches the point of us against the world what happens then?

By the way, all of those wars in the 1800's.  We started.  I guess isolationism and non-interventionism leads to such things.

 



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline EJR914

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 2423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • EJR914 Youtube Page
Re: War with Iran- John Mosby of Nous Defions Gets Political
« Reply #49 on: February 10, 2012, 03:27:28 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism   LOLOLOLOLOL!
Thanks for proving my point.  None of those wars were brought on by us being interventionist in our foreign policy.  LOL!
There is a lot more there, I beg that you please go read it all and educate yourself.  LOL!

Oh that's funny!    :)   I'm getting tears in my eyes from laughing so hard.   LOL!  Thanks I needed that!

Ok EJR,  LOL!  Thank you for bringing those to my attention.  LOL!

Somebody help me!  LOL!   I can't quit laughing!  LOL!


So when you get proven wrong with cold hard facts, your baseline reaction is to revert to putting LOL! all over the screen?


LOL!  Stop it, your killing me!   :)  EJR if Wiki is what you base your "cold hard facts" on I'm starting to understand your positions better.   :)  Yeah, that's a pretty good argument there.  Run with it.  You've convinced me that I've been wrong all these years.  Thank you!

But I'm still confused about one thing.  How will Non-interventionism keep other countries from overtaking their neighbors?  And as those countries continue to get larger and more powerful how will we keep them from reaching a point where they over take us.  When it eventually reaches the point of us against the world what happens then?

By the way, all of those wars in the 1800's.  We started.  I guess isolationism and non-interventionism leads to such things.

 


Bullshit sledge, I'm calling bullshit on you.  Also, each one of those things on Wikipedia comes with its own source.  Why don't you start looking at the base sources first?   ::)

Also, more fear mongering.  Our enemy is going to invade Canada and Mexico, and then they're going to invade us and take us over.  Yeah, because that's so easy and so many times it has almost been successful, I just don't know how we ever got out of that.

The closest we ever came to that was the Cuban Missile Crisis, and everyone decided that they didn't want to nuke each other into oblivion.   ::)