General Discussion

WinstonSmith00

(228 posts)

37. Intervening in a Country that asks for our help

Wed Sep 20, 2017, 12:36 PM

Sep 2017

Stopping aggression and protecting the soveriegnty of our allies is not comparable to our current state of aggressive strike first world police we are today.

Iraq didnt ask us to invade them. Afghanistan didnt ask us to invade them. Neither country was threatening our allies or aggressively conquering other nations.

The megawealth are fueling both sides of this endless war for greed and nothing more. The fascist totalitarian nations are our allies and who we support the most with our bombs and jets.

Militarily funding the Saudis is the same as funding Hilter or the Daesh.

Over 4000 families destroyed with american bombs in 9 months since trump took office. Ending the murder machine MIC is not isolationism. It is a moral necessity if we ever want to live in a world of peace.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We need an anti-war movement [View all] WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 OP

Every state from Vermont to California has to renounce the pork programs each has encouraged despite bettyellen Sep 2017 #1

What war? There is no war leftstreet Sep 2017 #2

There is no pressure on them to be anti-war inwiththenew Sep 2017 #3

What would a proper and productive response to Rocket Man be? gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #4

Well, if you're looking for "proper and productive" then I'm pretty sure war is not that response ck4829 Sep 2017 #7

Perhaps not but that isn't an answer gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #47

Destroying 300-500 million lives sure will. HughBeaumont Sep 2017 #10

You do not think Mr. Un throwing rockets with potential nuclear payloads gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #48

That's amazing. It wasn't a problem until it became a problem. gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #58

TRUMP IS THE ONE DOING THE RATTLING. HughBeaumont Sep 2017 #60

I would not shed a tear if the USA bombed Pyongyang into a bubbling mass of molten glass. gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #61

War would be productive WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #12

Those who beat their swords into plowshares gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #49

Offer him South Korea Not Ruth Sep 2017 #52

Uh, if we 'gave' him SK (which afaik isn't ours to give) gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #54

K&R nt. Weekend Warrior Sep 2017 #5

When the government starts drafting well to do comradebillyboy Sep 2017 #6

We need an anti republican movement! Initech Sep 2017 #8

Particularly an anti-Republican infiltaration movement. HughBeaumont Sep 2017 #11

No we need to call out Democrats WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #13

I didn't get this as part of my talking points last night... snooper2 Sep 2017 #14

Embracing neo-Isolationism is the most pro-war position we could take... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #9

Voters would support ending military conflict WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #15

Neo-Isolationism would expand military conflicts and increase deaths and brutality... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #18

The US withdrawing would lead to peace WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #24

"Figure it out", that's some brilliant foreign policy right there bettyellen Sep 2017 #29

Neo-Isolationism? When's the last time that happened in our country? jalan48 Sep 2017 #20

The 1930s when populist nativists of both left and right wing persuasions... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #32

So, almost 90 years ago? jalan48 Sep 2017 #34

Intervening in a Country that asks for our help WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #37

How do we offer help to counties that ask for our assistance... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #39

We would still have a military WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #41

A military you propose that we use to offer help to counties that ask for our military assistance... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #42

It's not a binary choice, war or isolationism gratuitous Sep 2017 #22

Of course it isn't a binary choice... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #26

Democrats won't ever repair their brand unless they repudiate war. DemocraticWing Sep 2017 #16

Neo-Isolationism fuels war, it is not a repudiation of war. Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #19

Obama won because he was anti-Iraq WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #21

Trump won because of foreign policy? Said no one ever till you just did. bettyellen Sep 2017 #30

Well he won because of fraud WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #33

Isolationism and ethnic purification aren't actually policy- it's policing. bettyellen Sep 2017 #44

Our obscene Defense budget gobbles up billions of dollars that could be used for social programs. jalan48 Sep 2017 #17

imagine $700,000,000,000.00 WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #27

good luck with that. both parties love a good rush to arms. KG Sep 2017 #23

Primaries 2018 WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #25

Big money rules this country SHRED Sep 2017 #28

I concur.. disillusioned73 Sep 2017 #31

One problem with starting any opposition is the youth are needed---but they won't look up from their WinkyDink Sep 2017 #35

The other problem being... Act_of_Reparation Sep 2017 #59

Less than 80, but what's a decade or so between friends? Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #36

Defunding the MIC WinstonSmith00 Sep 2017 #38

So we should become a permanent minority party and let Warmongers run the show.... to show that we.. SaschaHM Sep 2017 #40

Define anti-war please. PragmaticLiberal Sep 2017 #43

Right. I think some confuse nativist isolationism with being "anti-war." Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #45

Given the timing of this post, it's... SaschaHM Sep 2017 #46

Hey, I have an idea. Let's dig up the bones of gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #50

Peace in our time! Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #51

You are CORRECT but walkingman Sep 2017 #53

If your last sentence is true (and I strongly suspect it is) gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #55

We need an anti-war PARTY alarimer Sep 2017 #56

Personally I would prefer that not all those books gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #57