Discussions
Should the United States remove their military presence from around the world?
Posted by iyaayasmoderator • 5/01/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: military, United States
Should we, as a Nation, disban the military?
Do we need a military?
Is there anything worth fighting for or defending that the United States would need a military?
Now, should all U.S. companies based overseas, return to to U.S. soil?
User Comments
-
no
yes
yes
no -
No, we should not disband our military.
Yes, we need our military.
Yes, there is stuff that is worth defending, oil is not one of them.
Yes, most US companies should return to US soil as it is good for American business to hire American workers.
In order for our economy to be stronger, not just growing but actually stronger, we need to have a better balance between service and manufacturing. Right now, we have too many lawyers, douchebag wannabe lawyers, too many finance majors, and not enough engineers, manufacturing jobs, teachers, people who build things and make things.
But in order for manufacturing to return to the US, people have to start buying based on community values rather than CHEAP.-
What about the title question? Should the United States remove their military presence from around the world? As an example, should we close all the overseas military installations?
-
Jobs like teachers, counselors, people who work in human/social services also need to make a better living. Because these are the lowest paying jobs, they are not the ones that the best and brightest generally will go for. Of course, there are exceptions to this and some brilliant people do work in these fields (I am one of them--I am a teacher--but most people will choose money over passion.
Until teachers/human service workers are paid a better salary, there are going to be lots of problems in those areas. And really, nothing is more important than our children--they are the future, yet we still don't value them as we should.
To the OP: Sorry for the rant--I don't want to sidetrack your thread. -
No, I don't believe that we should be removing our troops from overseas installations. If you read my comment on your other thread about patriotism, I believe that the US presence in Korea is highly beneficial to American interests in Korea as well as welcomed by the Korean people.
I also believe that since we created the mess, pulling out now before the job is done is the worst possible thing to do in Iraq in Afghanistan. If we had followed up with proper nation building and foreign aid after the Soviets pulled out in the eighties, we wouldn't have this situation to begin with. We threw away a great deal of good will towards us from the Afghanis by abandoning them after we armed the Mujahadeen.
-
-
Using violence against violence is setting bad examples for the young. Fighting is no good...
My kindergarten teacher used to teach me that -
Also, do you consider the military as an extension of politics, used in place of politics, or used as a means when politics fail?
-
No, no and no.
-
-
Should we, as a Nation, disban the military? No
Should the United States remove their military presence from around the world? No
Do we need a military? Yes
Is there anything worth fighting for or defending that the United States would need a military? Yes
Now, should all U.S. companies based overseas, return to to U.S. soil? No -
For mtyler77. Teachers are people too. It would be nice if their conditions were different. They are an effective tool in our society.
-
I think it's time to remove most US military camps back to US soil. We are not the world police, and we have no business setting up camp in other countries just because we were allowed to during one war or another.
Should we, as a Nation, disban the military?
No, although I'd like to see some changes. I would however, like to disband "private military" groups, who I think are an insult to our troops.
Do we need a military?
Yep.
Is there anything worth fighting for or defending that the United States would need a military?
Yes, I support having a military to defend our country, and to offer aid to other countries in times of war. I do not agree with using the military to further American ideals (no matter how well intentioned) or to secure areas of occupation in other countries (no matter how small).
Now, should all U.S. companies based overseas, return to to U.S. soil?
I think that if a company decides to stay overseas, it should lose it's status as a US company. Because it's overseas, and not in the US anymore.-
Good point. If their assets abroad are greater than their assets here, they should have some kind of international status rather than a U.S. status. That would end their tax shelters and some of their influence on U.S. policies.
-
-
I'm still shaking my head that the Canadian Military left thier "Peacekeeper" way of thinking behind ..don't even get me started on the US Military .. -
My answers:
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
And for: "Also, do you consider the military as an extension of politics, used in place of politics, or used as a means when politics fail?"
The military is an extension of politics.-
The military is an extension of politics.
Explain please.
-
-
-
That happens after you're banned and then you're no longer banned.
-
-
For satijournal.
More often than not, politics and policies fail, or need a nudge. The military is often used as a "tool" to convince someone else of our intent or convictions.-
This is the same reasoning that Mussolini, Franco, Hitler, Castro, Kim Jung Il, Stalin, Chavez, Sadaam...
Shall I go on? I think you are mixing up diplomacy and politics. Politics is a general term that includes domestic policy as well as foreign.
I don't want the military playing any role in domestic policy. We have Congress, the Senate, and the executive branch, all democratically elected. We did not elect the military and they do not represent our interests as civilians within our borders. -
Why do we call upon our military during disasters and riots (to list only two)if "they do not represent our interests as civilians within our borders"
Now I'm confused.
I stand corrected tho, I used "politics" in too general of fashion.
......And we did not elect the Generals who control the intrests of the military. Yet most high ranking Generals also play the role of politician. What do you consider persons appointed to a position, rather than be voted in? Do they not represent us? -
The National Guard typically responds to domestic crises (unless it's real bad, I would guess). Of course, the National Guard and "The Military" are not the same thing.
Of course, we did have a law protecting US citizens from having the US military used against them within the borders of the country - the Posse Comitatus act. Bush over turned that act, in the John Warner Defense act of 2006. I haven't heard if Obama reinstated it? -
but we should not be using the military to enforce a particular political viewpoint. Keeping the public peace during a national disaster is one thing, but using the military to get your way is another.
Now I am worked up and angry and done with this thread. -
And we did not elect the Generals who control the intrests of the military.
The commander-in-chief controls the generals. -
I have been both, active duty Air Force and also Air National Guard. There is a fine line between the two. One specified for domestic affairs and one for foreign. Being I live on the gulf coast, and have been through some nasty hurricanes the last few years, I was reactivated to active duty on reserve status. My job, in general, to help enforce basic humanity. Disasters bring out the best and the worst in people, no matter what the motivation.
We also activate our reservist and guardsman to active duty status, to fight wars, to keep the peace. So, yes, different organizations, but similar directives.
The military bases scattered around the United States aren't there for the looks. They are there for three reasons which are the defense against invasion, revolution, and for deployment anywhere in the world.
-
-
The constitution allows providing for the "common defense" of the states. Perhaps in our modern age we might interpret this as including the maintenance of a standing army (even though this was not our founders intention, we might well interpret this as liberally as we define the "common welfare"). I cannot possibly fathom a constitutional case for our military actions in Iraq, Bosnia, Vietnam, Korea, or WWI (and perhaps others). Simply absurd.-
I doubt quite seriously I am qualified to interpret the constitution. From a peon's point of view such as mine, I don't believe that the way the "constitution" is tossed around to fit the needs of people at any given time for whatever purpose was the intent of the men who wrote it. Is it abused? Yes. Can we go go back in time and correct the misuse of it? No. So, we watch every day as our "elected" representitives give us there opinion of what is best, based on their interpretation of the constitution and the laws governing this country.
-
No but we can try to do better in the future.
As to the military. We need to ask more of our allies, and less of our taxpayers.
-
-
No - Pacifism assumes a level of ability no one possesses.
Yes
Yes
Definitely Not:
I know it is very common to simplify all of world economics in to "hire American" but the problem is that workers have a limit to how well they can be paid, determined by how productive they are, and if you allow "cheap labor" type industries (the ones that require too much labor for what they produce) to artificially reside in your nation, this level of productivity will drop, whereas if you allow them to naturally follow to where they are most effective, production levels, the real determinant of wealth, will increase.
And business will boon (assuming, perhaps foolishly, that all other factors are likewise solid, but those are separate issues) to the point of eventually bringing down the unemployment rate to a level where workers are paid at least near that level. For too long now we've been inflating our real estate and financial sectors at the expense of the rest of our economy, and it's coming back to bite us, but I think as this slightly painful therapeutic bloodletting passes along, we will find once again growth in REAL wealth. -
To All-
I just wanted to thank everyone who participated in this discussion. It was a real eye opener with the variety of responses from a variety of people from around the world in different walks of life. Gave me alot of research info for future reference.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
