The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Current Events
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 02-17-2008, 08:04 PM   #10
piercehawkeye45
Franklin Pierce
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,695
I am anti-imperialistic but cutting military spending can be dangerous. If we are going to go back to a more anti-interventionist foreign policy, which I support, we have to know who is being cut, who is going to take over when America lowers from number one, and where our technology is going to go.

If we cut military spending, we can turn the military against the administration, which can be bad.

If we lower ourselves from number one, we need to know who, if there is going to be one, will take over our spot. Will they be more or less imperialistic, more or less brutal, etc? As of now, I would think that the EU would take over, meaning that not much would change in terms of imperialism.

Right now, some of the most advanced and dangerous technology is in the hands of the United States military and if we cut some funding, those scientist will go elsewhere and spread our technology. I don't like the people in charge of those weapons, but I can think of people that I would much less rather have their hands on it.


I do not like the American military running the world, but I do realize that taking it completely away could easily make the situation worse. I fully support cutting military spending, but we must know what we are cutting and how will that affect the world if we do first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aimeecc
We had a very limited presence in the 'holy land' (Saudi Arabia) prior to 9/11. Mostly a small squadron out of Prince Sultan Air Base. Very little interaction with local population. Although there was/is the presence of western businessmen and their families. Even if the US had removed the small military presence in Saudi, that would not have been enough. Furthermore, stated aims of al-Qaeda
I disagree with two parts. First, even though we did have little presence, I think that little presence is still really hated by Saudis and other Muslims.

95% of Saudis agree with al-Qaeda's views. That does not include extremity of those views and actions of al-Qaeda though.

Quote:
A classified American intelligence report taken from a Saudi intelligence survey in mid-October of educated Saudis between the ages of 25 and 41 concluded that 95 percent of them supported Mr. bin Laden's cause, according to a senior administration official with access to intelligence reports.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...=&pagewanted=1

Second, if al-Qaeda and other groups loses support of the local population, see al-Qaeda in Iraq, they become very ineffective. If we do take our presence out of Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda may not be satisfied, but the local population might.
__________________
I like my perspectives like I like my baseball caps: one size fits all.
piercehawkeye45 is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.