Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-22-2008, 02:15 AM
 
3,255 posts, read 5,079,060 times
Reputation: 547

Advertisements

Since this foreign policy change has been discussed during the campaigns, what do you think of the idea? What would we have to get in return?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-22-2008, 06:49 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,768,722 times
Reputation: 24863
We should disentangle ourselves from all the current alliances and refuse to form any more in the Middle East. Let them sort out their differences without our aid or hindrance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Sacramento
14,044 posts, read 27,213,099 times
Reputation: 7373
TIME magazine had a brief article about this type of alliance (non-nuclear) over a year ago, frankly I'm sceptical that it would work in this region:

A NATO for the Middle East - TIME
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 09:20 AM
 
Location: AZ
600 posts, read 1,083,704 times
Reputation: 81
no, the us needs to stay the hell out of other countries and their policies for a while. jesus, what happened to the "stay to yourself and carry a big stick" policy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,114,528 times
Reputation: 348
We need to remove ourselves from all alliances, including NATO...not create more of a mess for ourself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 09:45 AM
 
3,255 posts, read 5,079,060 times
Reputation: 547
As a liberal, I was totally taken aback by the entire pronouncement at the debate, but finally when asked to clarify, Sen Clinton did say that is her idea. While I am not into nuclear proliferation, once the genie was out of the bottle, it seems we need to assume it will occur and make plans for that, rather than promise to save the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC
540 posts, read 962,612 times
Reputation: 83
A nuclear arms race in the Middle East would be a disaster. The US has a strategic interest in the region, including, but not limited to oil. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, a pact with other countries in the region to provide them security in return for their not going after nuclear technology would be a smart move. I think Clinton is correct that this would make Iran think twice about using these weapons - in conventional warfare. What needs to be addressed next, is how we prevent them from using them via unconventional means (handing them off to Hezbollah in Latin America, which could get them into the US).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,114,528 times
Reputation: 348
It is not the USA's responsibility to ensure the safety of other nations, including NATO. Making a pact with other countries can come back to harm us later if we are obligated to enter into a war that has nothing to do with our national security.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 11:14 AM
 
Location: AZ
600 posts, read 1,083,704 times
Reputation: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaBee View Post
It is not the USA's responsibility to ensure the safety of other nations, including NATO. Making a pact with other countries can come back to harm us later if we are obligated to enter into a war that has nothing to do with our national security.
Thats exactly why ron paul wants out of nato.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC
540 posts, read 962,612 times
Reputation: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanslyke View Post
Thats exactly why ron paul wants out of nato.
The last time we turned our backs on the rest of the world, Nazi Germany came to power and WWII occured. The world is much smaller now than it was back then.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top