DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - US plans to arm Libyan rebels through Saudi Arabia

**Greapyjeory** · 11-03-2011, 11:56 PM

You must be blind sir.. NO one wants the US to intervene.. Europe doesn't, Italy doesn't, China doesn't, Russia doesn't, the Arab league(which should have the ultimate decision point) doesn't, and several other countries don't want a US led military action.

It's a valid point when applied to a lot of other situations. For example, the world expected us to help out with the tsunami victims a few years back, and the current tsunami situation in Japan is similar.

France asked the US not to act militarily, and demanded to be the only country to strike an attack in Libya. As did the United Kingdom.

Everyone is pressuring to avoid US intervention... no one here is getting "mad" about you not pursuing this type of strategy and intervene.. So where are you getting this impression? Most Americans live with the concept that the US = Awesome, and that because of their economic/financial power, they can afford to stick their noses everywhere. Most of you believe the whole world supports America, but never before has there ever been a radical increase in anti-Americanism.

A lot of the most vocal Americans can be characterized that way, but I would say that there is a growing interest in isolationism here right now. We've learned a hard lesson from Iraq and Afghanistan, and so a lot of us are reluctant to support more interventionism.

The article you listed, only describes the overtake of China in terms of largest economy and Population number, but nothing new or predicted about military technology, or military politics. How can you say that China will adopt the exact same expansion tactic the US has been doing ever since the end of WWII?

I can't speak for him, but personally, history suggests that, as China grows more prosperous, they will intervene in more conflicts. They've already done this some in Africa -- in Sudan in particular.

China already plays the economic imperialism game quite well by investing heavily in a lot of power players like the U.S., Australia, Brazil, and various parts of Africa.

This is usually the first step towards more military interventionism, since economic investments abroad can lead to vested interests in conflicts that might affect them.

11-03-2011, 11:56 PM	#22
Greapyjeory Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 405 Senior Member	You must be blind sir.. NO one wants the US to intervene.. Europe doesn't, Italy doesn't, China doesn't, Russia doesn't, the Arab league(which should have the ultimate decision point) doesn't, and several other countries don't want a US led military action. It's a valid point when applied to a lot of other situations. For example, the world expected us to help out with the tsunami victims a few years back, and the current tsunami situation in Japan is similar. France asked the US not to act militarily, and demanded to be the only country to strike an attack in Libya. As did the United Kingdom. Everyone is pressuring to avoid US intervention... no one here is getting "mad" about you not pursuing this type of strategy and intervene.. So where are you getting this impression? Most Americans live with the concept that the US = Awesome, and that because of their economic/financial power, they can afford to stick their noses everywhere. Most of you believe the whole world supports America, but never before has there ever been a radical increase in anti-Americanism. A lot of the most vocal Americans can be characterized that way, but I would say that there is a growing interest in isolationism here right now. We've learned a hard lesson from Iraq and Afghanistan, and so a lot of us are reluctant to support more interventionism. The article you listed, only describes the overtake of China in terms of largest economy and Population number, but nothing new or predicted about military technology, or military politics. How can you say that China will adopt the exact same expansion tactic the US has been doing ever since the end of WWII? I can't speak for him, but personally, history suggests that, as China grows more prosperous, they will intervene in more conflicts. They've already done this some in Africa -- in Sudan in particular. China already plays the economic imperialism game quite well by investing heavily in a lot of power players like the U.S., Australia, Brazil, and various parts of Africa. This is usually the first step towards more military interventionism, since economic investments abroad can lead to vested interests in conflicts that might affect them.
	Quote