MelonCollie on September 27, 2012 at 10:35 PM

As I was talking to Dante, I prefer to hear his answer.

Yo, Big D. Is Iran “intervening” in Syria? If not, why not. If so, what is “Her” national interest in doing so?

Ia Iran “intervening” in Iraq? Same same . . .

He is correct that a nuclear Iran will probably trigger a regional arms race, but this means those countries will be forced to live together or die together.

That was an Orwellian thing for him to say. There already is a regional arms race. Iran is surrounded by nukes and has two countries engaged in surreptitious warfare against her who also speak of openly attacking her. Of course they’re seeking a means to protect themselves.

and if they don’t? Then what?

None of his claims, which amount to “Deterrence won’t work with Iran” are just that — claims w/nothing backing them up. He is correct that a nuclear Iran will probably trigger a regional arms, but this means those countries will be forced to live together or die together. If a Iran crosses the red line, a strike against Iran will only delay them getting a weapon, and once they do, they’ll be 10x, at least, as likely to preemptively use it had the west not struck first.

Link 1

Link 2

You go right ahead and side with the progressives, Mr. Conservative. Link 3

My jaw is on the floor with the ignorance in these statements.

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2012 at 11:17 PM

I think you mean your jaw is on the ground due to your ignorance. Go right ahead and keep taking the side of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. Nothing like a conservative defending progressivism.

Tell me if this sounds familiar: “During his tenure as president, Woodrow Wilson encouraged Americans to look beyond their economic interests and to define and set foreign policy in terms of ideals, morality, and the spread of democracy abroad.”

That’s from the Dept of State’s website.

My jaw is on the floor with the ignorance in these statements.

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2012 at 11:17 PM

Yeah, we were being really interventionist in 1939, when the war began and we weren’t going to enter for over two years.

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2012 at 11:19 PM

Oh, my.

The cure for your ignorance is education and knowledge.

“During his tenure as president, Woodrow Wilson encouraged Americans to look beyond their economic interests and to define and set foreign policy in terms of ideals, morality, and the spread of democracy abroad.”

Gee, doesn’t “the spread of democracy abroad” sound familiar? It’s the foreign policy of progressivism.

You go right ahead and side with the progressives, Mr. Conservative. Stand your ground for Woodrow Wilson!

Tell ya what. Next time I’m having a conversation with Dante, I’ll be sure to keep in mind that I need to explain everything to you on a sidebar.

it was your interventionist thinking that gave us WW II.

Lew Rockwell Sub-Unit #9 on September 27, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Rainbow.

Actually it was your interventionist thinking that gave us WW II.

Dante on September 27, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Yeah, we were being really interventionist in 1939, when the war began and we weren’t going to enter for over two years.

Wilson wanted to enter war with Germany and goaded them into attacking us. WW I.

Roosevelt also desired war, believing and propgrogating the common economic fallacy that war would boost the economy, and so intervened and waged economic war against Japan. WW II.

Dante on September 27, 2012 at 7:57 PM

My jaw is on the floor with the ignorance in these statements.

Not sure about TR, but for Mr. Wilson it seems that WWI is an outstanding example; in fact, it’s probably the best example of a useless war (definitely a foreign intervention) that I can think of (and 116,000 Americans died in the conflict).

Then, of course, there’s FDR’s naval efforts to block oil supplies to Japan — blocking raw materials to a country via one’s navy certainly seems like a foreign intervention to me. And, of course, FDR’s invention of “leasing” ships to certain countries whilst still claiming to be neutral should of course be considered an intervention.

But, I thought you were a non-interventionist, so why would you care what other countries do with their people? It’s none of your business, right?

chelie on September 27, 2012 at 9:40 PM

You’re confusing using our nation’s military to forcibly intervene in a nation’s affairs with individually caring about the people of said nation.

For example, I can be concerned with the fate of Coptic Christians without demanding that we occupy Egypt.

My statement wasn’t specific to America.

Dante on September 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM

But, I thought you were a non-interventionist, so why would you care what other countries do with their people? It’s none of your business, right?

Yeah, I wouldn’t intervene either.

BigAlSouth on September 27, 2012 at 7:46 PM

So your question wasn’t snark, you’re just white trash scum.

Examples of foreign intervening by those three men, please.

listens2glenn on September 27, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Seriously?

“If a nation shows that it knows how to act with reasonable efficiency and decency in social and political matters; if it keeps order and pays its obligations, it need fear no interference from the United States. Chronic wrongdoing, or an impotence which results in a general loosening of the ties of civilized society, may in America as elsewhere ultimately require intervention by some civilized nation and in the Western Hemisphere the adherence of the United States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the United States, however reluctantly, in flagrant cases of such wrongdoing or impotence, exercise an international police power.” – Theodore Roosevelt

Commonly known as the Roosevelt Corollary.

You’re familiar with the big stick policy, right? Examples would be our interventionism in the Caribbean, such as the Dominican Republic. Teddy ignored the Constitiution with this, and issued a new monster for the 20th century – the executive order.

Wilson wanted to enter war with Germany and goaded them into attacking us. WW I.

Roosevelt also desired war, believing and propgrogating the common economic fallacy that war would boost the economy, and so intervened and waged economic war against Japan. WW II.

Yeah, I wouldn’t intervene either.

BigAlSouth on September 27, 2012 at 7:46 PM

I see you ignored my advice.

I would just like to point out that 99.9% of you in this thread are arguing FOR the foreign policy of progressivism. Interventionism is the foreign policy of Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt.

Dante on September 27, 2012 at 7:24 PM

.
Examples of foreign intervening by those three men, please.

Dante on September 27, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Yeah, I wouldn’t intervene either.

I would just like to point out that 99.9% of you in this thread are arguing FOR the foreign policy of progressivism. Interventionism is the foreign policy of Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt.

Dante on September 27, 2012 at 7:24 PM

It’s not a binary choice. There are reasons and means of taking action overseas that vary greatly. You are attempting to suggest that one intervenes, or one runs away. The real world doesn’t work that way.

The redline is a mushroom cloud.

logis on September 27, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Only if Barry’s favorite golf course is projected to lie within the blast footprint…

Hey Dante. Let’s say your baby sister is getting raped right in front of you.

Gonna intervene?

BigAlSouth on September 27, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Read the thread and understand the argument.

Hey Dante. Let’s say your baby sister is getting raped right in front of you.

Gonna intervene?

BigAlSouth on September 27, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Yeah, and that intervention is gonna require the American military to stop an entire nation at the cost of billions of dollars and hundreds in lives.

The only question is are you really that stupid to make such a comparison, or are you just a wingnut dirtbag?

Dante, I really think it’s best if you leave the thread quietly. Nothing short of divine intervention is gonna change these people’s minds and you’re just creating a flamefest.