A world without the US

[CyranoAH]

American film industry would then move to Canada... err... wait..

[NUKE]

Originally posted by Kieran
Israel would never be able to defend itself against all of the Muslim world conventionally any more than North Viet Nam could have against the US without aid from communist countries. Further, the implied involvement of the US if things get too out of hand make a lot of the Muslim world think twice.

 

Try reading up on the 1967 Arab Israel war. Then read up on the 1973 war.

Not only did Israel defent itself against a large group of Arab countries, they pretty much kicked the hell out of them.....conventionally of course.

The Arabs didn't "think twice" because of the US.

[Kieran]

Originally posted by Curval
Israel has already done so...twice.

Are you suggesting the US didn't throw out warnings to the Arab world to back off? Are you suggesting the millions we throw to Israel every year don't buy weapons? Seriously, I can't understand your viewpoint. Israeli military is tough, no question; but they ARE small, and would not survive a conventional all-out war against the Arab world alone.

[Capt. Pork]

In the question of Israel, I think they deserve more credit. Sure, they benefit from our weapons exports, but they also produce a decent amount on their own. The Merkava MBT is good example of a product they can generate with minimal direct techinical support from the US.

It's also without question that pound for pound, they're many times as formidable as any Muslim nation. Their intel is far ahead, their organization is second to none and their resolve is without peer. Using only what they have at the moment, they should be able to neutralize any immediate threat preemptively. Whether or not they can do it 5 years after the aid stops is another question, but the Israelis aren't known for their complacency. My opinion is that they will make due without using the nuclear option.

[Kieran]

I know about both wars. How's this sound to ya?

On Oct. 6, 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel. The attack caught Israel off guard. It was Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar, and most of Israel was shut down for the holiday.

After suffering heavy losses — more than 2,500 Israelis would die and some 3,000 would be wounded in the 18 days of fighting that followed — Israel appealed for help from the United States.

At first, the U.S. was reluctant to aid Israel. It did not want to upset Arab states on which it had become increasingly dependent for oil. And it did not want to raise tensions with the Soviet Union, its Cold War adversary and patron of Syria and Egypt.

But after learning that the Soviets were airlifting huge amounts of weaponry to Egypt and Syria, President Nixon decided the U.S. had to act.

Six days into the fighting, the U.S. began a massive, $2.2 billion airlift of fighter planes, tanks, helicopters and munitions to Israel. It was worth it, Nixon said, "to maintain a balance of forces and achieve stability in the Middle East."

[maslo]

Originally posted by Saintaw
Straffo & I would take over the world.

you bloody monster ... im going to save world and kick your butt

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Curval
Okay Capt...my $0.02 is that it would be absolutely impossible for the US to return to an isonationalist stance world wide.

Who are you going to trade with?  How will the US get rid of its trade deficit that is higher than it has ever been?

With no trade there would be no trade deficit....

[Kieran]

Now Gscholz... just a few posts up you categorically state the US never gave military aid to Israel (which I knew was untrue)... a quick Google search proves that wrong. Don't go changing your tune.

Isolationism means looking out for #1 period. That means high tariffs, with would be economic suicide, but that's what it means. It means buying American products first. It means cutting off from the rest of the world as much as possible.

As for dealing with the British- that was largely Roosevelt's doing, but then, he wasn't an isolationist. He had to work long and hard to sell the idea to Americans. Most Americans of the time would have been content to let the rest of the world sort out its own trouble.

As for world relief, hey... we have plenty of poor here. Think of the good we could do for our OWN poor if we didn't concern ourselves with the WORLD'S poor. Think if we didn't pour billions into a worthless UN. Truthfully, a lot of good could come of it. You guys would have to find another country to hate, or you could continue to hate us, just without us paying you to do it.

[maslo]

anyway what will happen if US move their army back ?

i dunno. We will still import goods from Taiwan, China.
We coul hopefully start to make bigger bussines with ME region.
We will find out, that people all over the world are not as bad as they were supposed to be.
Holywood will have enough equipment to produce 2 war movies a year


Rats will come and eat us all.

What exactly is purpose of US army at Rammstein ?
Do you expect that Germany will invade france if you go home or  what ?
You probably didnt notice, that you can drive trough Europe from Belgia to Italy w/o any passport control and use 1 money in all states of western, central europe ?

[texace]

I've always felt that if a country hates us, we should stop sending aid. If nothing else, at least it would take a small bite out of what they recieve now.

"You hate us? Very well, we're going to cut all imports to your country and will not send any more money."

[Holden McGroin]

GScholz, please read the post to which I was responding.  You seem to have a problem with that.

And trade would be effected... in those communities around foreign bases strippers and hookers would lose employment, the local economy would collapse, starting a domino effect that would cause widespread european and asian depression.

This would cause us to lose trade.  No trade, no trade deficit.

[maslo]

Originally posted by texace

"You hate us? Very well, we're going to cut all imports to your country and will not send any more money."

LOL whitch country is in your opinion that dependent on US ?

[texace]

There isn't one country that depends on the US, but we do send money and aid to several countries...

Read it again...I never said any country was dependant on US trade...

[Kieran]

Originally posted by GScholz
This is an outright lie. I said "Israel have never received military support (apart from intelligence) from the US"

There is a BIG difference.

Care to give me your definition of "Military Support"? Here's an example of my definition:

Six days into the fighting, the U.S. began a massive, $2.2 billion airlift of fighter planes, tanks, helicopters and munitions to Israel. It was worth it, Nixon said, "to maintain a balance of forces and achieve stability in the Middle East."

I guess you're going to argue troops on the ground, eh? Gee whiz, I said Israel couldn't survive an all-out conventional war against the Arab world alone, and proved it. Don't argue semantics.

Once in a while it's okay to admit you are wrong.

[Capt. Pork]

Remember, trade doesn't HAVE to be affected, although in all variablity it will be. It's more a question of military intervention, active(as in sending troops) and passive (as in providing arms to those who we think need them). As far as oil and cars and plastic goods, let that stand on it own