Would isolationism be a good approach for the U.S. to take with the world?

Would isolationism be a good approach for the U.S. to take with the world?
It was speculated that Trump would be an isolationist, but he appears to be the opposite.

Other urls found in this thread:

johnpilger.com/articles/the-killing-of-history
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I'd prefer it. Even as an isolationist though, Trump threatening a state that shoots missiles over our allies' airspace and threatens us with nuclear war isn't interventionism.

The problem is that we're too entangled in international affairs already. After taking care of North Korea we should disband NATO.

Trump changed his mind on NATO.

Not sure why we would. I don't see anything wrong with involving ourselves in world affairs if it improves our lot on the world stage. That said, when it doesn't benefit our people but a few money-combines or the (((greatest ally))) it's a problem. We should have put Iraqi oil revenue into a pension fund, like the Norwegians did with their own oil.

Also, I mean "our people" loosely. I think the real USA has eroded to the monstrosity it is now. My point is that there is nothing wrong with a nation participating in the zero-sum game that is global politics.

I know, I just want to make sure you're not equating isolationism with pacifism.

The problem is that the democrats are neoliberals and a lot of Republicans agree with the neocons. Also the deep state wants to ensure that isolationism is impossible. Unless you can convince most of the country to vote for Ron/Rand Paul it'll never happen.

It's gotten so bad that people don't even associate the military with protecting the flag and the country. It's too easy to remove the military from its original intention of protecting the constitution and flag itself.

Do you not think another power would fill the vacuum of NATO?

yes

The EU military that Germany wants to institute? Why do we care what happens to Europe when we have enough ordinance to protect ourselves from any threat?

Any threat other than the left which wants to bring our enemies right inside the US and give them full legal rights.

EU should pursue it's own destiny. I was referring more to an arab-israeli annihilation war with nuclear weapons, or Chinese expansion in SE Asia, or Arabs squeezing us with their oil leverage.
In 1917 or 1941, I'd totally agree with you, but the nuclear age makes things much more dangerous i m o

Japan and South Korea are fully allowed to obtain nukes because of North Korea. We're lucky that Japan is so cucked at the moment they haven't declared war on NK.

You support the proliferation of nuclear weapons?

Yes. We haven't done shit to stop it anyway and even encouraged it. Yet no one's been nuked yet. Just set up missile defense systems ASAP in the US.

Most Americans support this. There are extensive problems with achieving it, however. The Pentagon and CIA have undue influence on politics, and we don't get to elect them. They also have a huge influence on news media and Hollywood. John Pilger puts it well in this (very recent) article: johnpilger.com/articles/the-killing-of-history

the problem is that isolationism isn't an option for the US anymore, we missed that opportunity in 1914 when we gave material support to the allies in WWI. Ever since then we've been destroying countries around the world. We've destroyed so many countries that we can't go back to non-interventionism.

Well. We don't really have a choice in the situation at the moment. NK and the mid-east needs to be taken out. Afterwards, I believe we should.

America is one of the few nations that can be self sustaining, but the world who hates us will beg us if/when we do the following.

- Not respond to requests to rescue other nations.

- Cut money off to the rest of the world.

- No exports nor imports

- No sharing of our tech (both from the private sector and military)

- No seat on the UN (which we really should leave the UN) and NATO.

But it would be a good thing for us.

>Not engaging in permanent wars with other countries is isolationism
The absolute state of the US.

Seems like a real dangerous game, all it takes is one getting "lost" to cause serious problems for the whole world. Missile defense can't stop a cargo ship from unknowingly carrying a bomb into a harbor.

isolation isn't an actual option. a state necessarily must expand until its progress is arrested by other states or a lack of internal resources/will. the world map as we know it is not a static thing but rather a rendering of temporary equilibrium.

the united states returning to isolationism is the end of the empire and empires only end because something makes them

Sup Forums is the real hippies
Sup Forums is the only group that actually DOESN'T want a global thermonuclear war unfortunately
the rest of the world is ready to doom our posterity, they've been poisoning the well since 1965.

hope you bought your thermal radiation suits lads

>NK and the mid-east needs to be taken out
When did Sup Forums turn on Best Korea anyway?

America should collect tribute from the rest of the world

>Sup Forums doesn't crave the happening
wat

>captcha: golfstein

Only wars in order to directly defend attacks on the us are necessary and if you disagree you're blind to the international banking cabel that has guided the world into each major war thay is happened. If you don't believe me check out general wesley Clark's 7 nations in 5 years video.

Retard.

>That most of America's violence across the world has been perpetrated not by Republicans, or mutants like Trump, but by liberal Democrats, remains a taboo.
>Barack Obama provided the apotheosis, with seven simultaneous wars, a presidential record, including the destruction of Libya as a modern state. Obama's overthrow of Ukraine's elected government has had the desired effect: the massing of American-led Nato forces on Russia's western borderland through which the Nazis invaded in 1941.
>Obama's "pivot to Asia" in 2011 signalled the transfer of the majority of America's naval and air forces to Asia and the Pacific for no purpose other than to confront and provoke China. The Nobel Peace Laureate's worldwide campaign of assassinations is arguably the most extensive campaign of terrorism since 9/11.
>What is known in the US as "the left" has effectively allied with the darkest recesses of institutional power, notably the Pentagon and the CIA, to see off a peace deal between Trump and Vladimir Putin and to reinstate Russia as an enemy, on the basis of no evidence of its alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election.

This leftie journalist is saying the same thing as this Nazi

why is being realistic retarded? you think states get to just decide how big they want to be?