Thread: The Ukraine situation

Originally Posted by RezDog

Yup Canada is going to send our SeaKings over there.

or Maple Syrup and Beer!

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Once again you are interpreting US history incorrectly, isolationism is our history, only since WW2 have we become embroiled in world affairs...

US soldiers did fight in WWI. That said US history doesn't go very far back. The desk that this computer sits on and the house that it is in both pre-date the USA's existence as an independent nation by more than a hundred years. The British joke is that we ran the world before you did.

Originally Posted by welshwizard

US soldiers did fight in WWI. That said US history doesn't go very far back. The desk that this computer sits on and the house that it is in both pre-date the USA's existence as an independent nation by more than a hundred years. The British joke is that we ran the world before you did.

From the link I posted above, contained in the WW1 section




"Germany's unfettered submarine warfare against American ships during World War I provoked the U.S. into abandoning the neutrality it had upheld for so many years. The country's resultant participation in World War I against the Central Powers marked its first major departure from isolationist policy. When the war ended, however, the United States was quick to leave behind its European commitment. Regardless of President Woodrow Wilson's efforts, the Senate repudiated the Treaty of Versailles that ended the war, and the United States failed to become a member of the League of Nations.

German sub sinks US ship Indeed, isolationism would persist for a few more decades. During the 1920s, American foreign affairs took a back seat. In addition, America tended to insulate itself in terms of trade. Tariffs were imposed on foreign goods to shield U.S. manufacturers.

America turned its back on Europe by restricting the number of immigrants permitted into the country. Until World War I, millions of people, mostly from Europe, had come to America to seek their fortune and perhaps flee poverty and persecution. Britons and Irishmen, Germans and Jews constituted the biggest groups. In 1921 the relatively liberal policy ended and quotas were introduced. By 1929 only 150,000 immigrants per year were allowed in.

During the 1920s and 1930s, the preponderance of Americans remained opposed to enmeshment in Europe's alliances and wars. Isolationism was solid in hinterland and small-town America in the Midwest and Great Plains states, and among Republicans. It claimed numerous sympathizers among Irish- and German-Americans. William Jennings Bryan of Nebraska, Robert M. La Follette of Wisconsin, and George W. Norris of Nebraska were among western agrarian progressives who argued fervently against involvement. Assuming an us-versus-them stance, they castigated various eastern, urban elites for their engagement in European affairs"

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I see a future more like our past, with the US slowly dis-entangling from the world other then for trade, perhaps a US more concerned with only her problems rather then the rest of the world...

From reading your posts, Those of you that are "Not American" it seems that Ivan's remark about "American's having an all in or all out attitude", might also apply around the world

Note that I being President Glen, did not say "all out", you guys did ,,,


It seems that most of you are wanting American involvement in Ukraine and Crimea yet castigate what the US has done in the past, ie: Hep us, hep us, now go away and leave us alone"

The EU has still not made a move other than to say it would welcome Ukrainian trade and recognize a legitimate Government... (That I have seen so far) Looks like once again the UN will resolute themselves into doing nothing... Time will of course tell, but Putin's speech yesterday seemed to calm the region, if stocks are an indicator anyway...

I guess we shall wait and see

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Yet without the US military the UN would have probably become irrelevant long ago in fact many argue that they already are..

I disagree that the UN is irrelevant. I think the UN is a noble concept. I think at some basic level it is a great thing for countries to recognize that we're all in this together, so to speak. As long as individual countries think only of themselves, they will think of conquest. The UN is limited by what it can enforce. However, it provides an international forum for diplomacy. And while that is far, far from perfect, it is better than the olden days when every country with a bit of power was actively plotting to take over the world.

Time for a comical note

Thanks Bruno, the IT department will send you a bill for the computer I just spit coffee all over....LOL

Originally Posted by Bruno

I disagree that the UN is irrelevant. I think the UN is a noble concept. I think at some basic level it is a great thing for countries to recognize that we're all in this together, so to speak. As long as individual countries think only of themselves, they will think of conquest. The UN is limited by what it can enforce. However, it provides an international forum for diplomacy. And while that is far, far from perfect, it is better than the olden days when every country with a bit of power was actively plotting to take over the world.

I would like to think the UN is a noble concept - at least it is in theory. I know it was an American President's pet project bla, bla, bla, and that the US resisted for a long time bla, bla, bla, BUT... I think what many forget (or I am just making this up), is that when the US decided they could use the UN to stop communist spread and peruse it's economic agenda with it, the U.S. went gangbusters with it. Of course, when the "big dog" sells the world on an idea, the rest follow.

It might sound bitter - and don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the UN, but lets call a spade a spade, the UN has been a tool utilized by the west to get what they want. America has benefited HUGE!

Originally Posted by earcutter

I would like to think the UN is a noble concept - at least it is in theory. I know it was an American President's pet project bla, bla, bla, and that the US resisted for a long time bla, bla, bla, BUT... I think what many forget (or I am just making this up), is that when the US decided they could use the UN to stop communist spread and peruse it's economic agenda with it, the U.S. went gangbusters with it. Of course, when the "big dog" sells the world on an idea, the rest follow.

It might sound bitter - and don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the UN, but lets call a spade a spade, the UN has been a tool utilized by the west to get what they want. America has benefited HUGE!

I actually agree, but let's also add that America has paid HUGE too - in Gold and Blood, let's finish the sentence if we are calling a spade a spade shall we...

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I actually agree, but let's also add that America has paid HUGE too - in Gold and Blood, let's finish the sentence if we are calling a spade a spade shall we...

No question about it. In the end we always try to turn things to our benefit. The US has benefited and still does, but also paid huge.