• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Would a non interventionist U.S. foreign policy be good for the world?

Liberty Defender

Well-Known Member
I'll make a point later, but non-intervention does not equal isolation. non-intervention just means no allies. The president would still hold meetings with other countries.

Again, we are giving the president way to much power. The president needs legislature to mold the country, not the other way around.

That too is false. Non-intervention does not necessarily mean no allies whatsoever.
 

miles0624

Wrath of Fire
That too is false. Non-intervention does not necessarily mean no allies whatsoever.

In order for non-intervention to work, one must abstain from allies, i.e. have no allies. That is to to say that they can't, but having an ally who goes to way kinda of stretches the policy. In my opinion, I think you can't truly be a non-interventionalist and still have allies. With Allies, you will always try to be forced into doing something. But, I am wrong in saying that it means no allies, but it just seems ludicurous for one to have this policy, and still be supporting allies.
 

BigLutz

Banned
That too is false. Non-intervention does not necessarily mean no allies whatsoever.

You would think being a follower of Ron Paul you would know this is false. Having a ally means a endorsement of that country's actions or at least favoring one nation over others in a region.
 

Bill Nye the Sneasel Guy

Well-Known Member
I think that there are some places where we could maybe tone down on what we have; troops still in Germany, for example. Those, I think we don't so much need...

However, there are certainly still places that need US attention. It doesn't take a genius to tell why allowing South Korea to be gobbled up by Kim Jong-Un's totalitarian dictatorship would be a bad idea.

I think that American policy needs to be focused more around strengthening ties in South America, Asia and Africa than with Europe.
 
Top