|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisements has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Should the United States take an isolationism approach to world affairs?
So many question on why the United States does and does not take action in various areas. The US was isolated from world affairs at some point. Should they take that stance again? Why or why not?
More than a question of intervening or not, I would say it's a question of purposes and consistency. What's the purpose of the US intervening in this or that? More often than not, the answer is money, strategy, and geopolitical power, instead of a true desire to help or solve a crisis. Which takes me to the issue of consistency. Because of the above, there is no consistency in where or why the US intervenes. Sadly, since many times the purpose is economic, they intervene only when and where it's convenient for them and not when or where it's really needed.
But to answer the question, no, I don't think the US - or any country - should be isolated from the world community, but the interventions and/or help should come out of goodwill and for the right reasons, while also giving each country enough space and free will to be themselves and solve their own issues the way they see fit.
The US tried isolationism in the 20th century. The result was two world wars that we couldn't avoid becoming involved in. The fact is the US is the 800-lb gorilla on the world stage, and it cannot isolate itself from what happens in the rest of the world, however much it might try. And after the experiences of the last century, we no longer try. In a world where terrorists and rogue states have the capacity and the desire to visit destruction on us right here in this country, there are few voices today crying out for a head-in-the-sand approach to foreign policy.
BTW, I very much disagree with those who claim the US intervenes in other countries in order to profit financially. As huge as the US economy is, the contribution of the resources of any country the US might be tempted to intervene in would literally hardly be noticed. We are even close to being net exporters of petroleum, which many claim as the motive behind US activities in the Middle East.
Much more than money, what the US seeks through its foreign policy is stability rather than political upheaval. That has sometimes put us in the position of supporting repressive regimes when it seemed the alternative would foment greater instability or uncertainty. On the other hand, as our current policy toward Syria shows, when it's clear that the policies of the regime in power will in themselves cause political instability, the US may support dissident political movements or even armed rebels.
Bottom line: at this point in history US isolationism is simply not an option.
According to EIA, US is #1 in oil prod (with 13 million bpd), but not even in the Top 40 in exporters. Plus they are #1 in oil consumption (with close to 20 million bpd), so they use most of the oil they produce and still fall short.
Really? Are you that naive? Stability? How's that worked for you so far? LOL
No, but the US should carefully evaluate their reasons for their involvement in foreign matters, and once a decision is made to get involved they must make a commitment.to succeeding in their mission.
This has not been the case for most of the involvements in foreign matters for the US in the last one hundred years.
by WindMaestro7 years ago
Should the United States resort to isolationism?Before it becomes stretched too thin?
by Yves20 months ago
Would a Trump Presidency Be an Embarrassment for the United States and the Republican Party?Trump has been a Democrat most of his life. He brags that he can buy politicians, having given millions to Hillary's campaign...
by Person of Interest6 years ago
Our United States of America is the only First World Country in the world where people are afraid to call medical 911.
by Alexander A. Villarasa4 years ago
In an OP-ed piece on The New York Times, the Russian ad infinitum president Vladimir Putin, slammed the concept of American Exceptionalism, saying that it is extremely dangerrous to tell people that they are...
by SportsBetter5 years ago
Is the United States a Republic or a Democracy?So most people believe the United States is a Democracy. The US was actually founded as a Republic. Some of the founders had put much thought in what they...
by RobertoPortales6 years ago
Do you think that the United States is still the world's most powerful nation?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.