user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
smile bank:
|
similiar ballots:
71698. The United States compared to the rest of the world: public institutions, child poverty and income equality
92467. Which of these do you think is most responsible for world: United States, United Kingdom, European Union, G8, G8+5, OPEC, oil nations or none of them?
45330. If the United States stopped it's unconditional military and financial support for Israel, would there be less terrorism directed at the United States
51744. AMERICANS: "All for the United States, nothing outside the United States and no one against the United States." Agree/disagree?
47459. Why does it seem most of the world hates/dislikes the United States?
125851. Should the next President of the United States apologize to the world
92742. United States citizens can claim islands for the United States government.
67808. Should the United States conquer Canada, Mexico... and all of South/Latin America to form the Super United States of America?
65654. Would the world be happy with a totally isolationist america?
58380. Is George W. Bush's goal to weaken the United States in order to make way for a world government?
|
COMMENTS:
I really think that most would be annoyed. The governments would be left to fend for themselves completely.
I know a lot of people will reply that the rest of the world will be pleased- but a good bulk of countries would realistically be annoyed (namely American allies, and smaller powers).
But I'm sure specifically Russia and China, and such would be thrilled.
Although if the US said it really wouldn't care who attacked who- Russia and China would be more suspicious of each other probably.
I really believe that if America became a isolationist nation many countries would begin attacking their perceived enemies.Russia would take back the former Soviet block coutries,China would conquer Taiwan and Iran would attack Israel.Not to mention that the M.E would probably fall to the Jihadist and India and Pakistan would destory eachother.
Corrupt- yes, regional conflicts would explode everywhere it seems?
I think it would be a mixed bag. Lots of little dictatorships and local warlords would be ticked.
Some allies might have been ticked ... about a decade ago, but I suspect would now have mixed feelings.
Some countries would be delighted, although I don't agree that this would 'open the portals to the Forces of Darkness' to descend on the Free World. 
A major factor, I submit, is that the answer to this question has a great degree of dependence upon how the US is perceived, globally -- how well it has acted in a diplomatic sense.
Before Bush, I may have agreed with you, Soc. Post-Bush ... no, I no longer believe we have the goodwill for that reaction.
IMO, this reminds me of a comic book I read a few centuries back, an issue of the Avengers in which the world became concerned and annoyed at the Avengers' constant saving of the world. One day, Captain America ordered the team, and all its auxilliary members, to stand down and do nothing, regardless of what they saw happening, no matter how many lives lay in the balance. Sure enough, not even eight hours later, a bunch of aliens showed up and nearly took over the planet. Rough translation: the world would be pleased at first, all too glad to have the Evil Imperialist Americans out of their collective hair. And, when the first threat looms against them, one which America would normally lend some semblance of aid with, the tune will change...
Some, like north korea, china, Iran, Iraq (if we'd done this prior to the invasion), pakistan, etc would be thrilled. They'd finally have a chance to throw their weight around and become a major regional power without risking americas wrath.
Others would be annoyed at the loss of income from american bases and the prospect of either losing protection and being at the mercy of other nations or actually have to spend the money and blood to defend themselves for the first time in several generations.
Still others wouldn't get a chance to express much of any emotion before losing their sovereignty (south korea. taiwan, how long do you think you'll last with us?
^ It'd be nice to try that experiment like the Avengers.
Except, instead of stepping in to save the day when the rest of the world realizes its folly and begs us to come, we tell them to go to hell and laugh maniacally.
We're damned when we do get involved and we'd be damned if we didn't. It's a no win situation.
cathexis, so you think there wouldn't be any bad effects?
Americans are mental. Can you believe what you people are saying to each other. Fucks sake. reality check here. Go. Go on. fuck off. we dont want you here no matter how much some people may get annoyed. your bad news. fuck off!!
America aaah aaah saviour of the universe. Yeah of course that whats happening how dare i doubt you fake sincerety. PFFFFFFT!!
I am becoming more and more inclined towards the isolationist point of view for the United States. I think we did best when we focused on our own economic interests rather than being obsessed with geopolitical manipulation or international interventions--militarily, by proxy, or otherwise. As far as most of our history, down to the 1890's, we left Europe mainly to its own devices and kept more to ourselves. Even down to World War II, the number of interventions, excepting the era of the Spanish-American War, were normally rather limited and for discrete periods of time, generally again to protect our economic interests. Since the Second World War, the number of U.S. interventions has exploded by a factor of several times what such acts had once been. Now, I think we've again reached the point, where cost-wise and in terms of the limits of our own strength, it's become untenable once more.
I've been reading quite a bit about the "America First" movement of the early 1940's lately and about its most prominent spokesman, Charles Lindbergh. After Pearl Harbor, the America First contingent was discredited, but, in the sweep of American history, this was one of the very few times the isolationists were wrong.
They'd get on our nuts about staying with "the team".
|
|
