A world without the US

U.S. Foreign Policy Forum

Honestly. Just truly imagine for a moment that America didn't become a nation of war in the middle of WW2 to where we are in todays world.

Where would the world be and what would it be like? Who would be the superpower and what would their influence be like, good or bad, in the world?

I'd hate to imagine the results if some evils weren't defeated and checked all those years.

Fred Hooper

1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah as dictator.

1954: U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala. 200,000 civilians killed.


1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem.

1963-1975: American military kills 4 million civilians in Southeast Asia.


September 11, 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically elected president Salvador Allende assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.

1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns killed.


1980's: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets. CIA gives them $3 billion.

1981: Reagan administration trains and funds "contras". 30,000 Nicaraguans die.

1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians.

1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to help them kill Iraqis.

1989: CIA agent Manuel Noriega (also serving as President of Panama) disobeys orders from Washington. U.S. invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian casualties

1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from U.S.

1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates dictator of Kuwait.

1998: Clinton bombs "weapons factory" in Sudan. Factory turns out to be making aspirin.

1991 to present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. estimates 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.


2000-01: U.S. gives Taliban-ruled Afghanistan $245 million in "aid".

September 11, 2001: Osama Bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to murder 3,000 people.

Hmmm.... No U.S.

The entire world be be under the Nazi regime or the planet would be a wasteland.

Here's why:

For one simple reason: Near the end of WWII, the Nazis were very far along in their development of atomic weapons. Even given the premise that Hitler could be defeated by Russia and Europe, it would have taken at least another year or so, giving Germany ample time to complete development of an atomic bomb.

I'll think you can figure out the rest of this scenario.

So-called "US imperialism" doesn't sound that bad now, does it?

Oh yeah. And the Internet would not have been developed by the US military so you wouldn't be able to leave stupid posts about how screwed up America is. You'd still be stuck writing letters to the editor which would probably never get printed.

NAZI.....Godwin's Law is invoked

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/...tml?pg=1&topic=

The native American Indians were not a country or coutnries and that whole issue has really has nothing to do with American foreign policy - nice try. (By the way, if you're going to bring this one up, be sure to include Canada/UK.) This one also applies to numerous Central and South America countries so it's really a bigger can of worms than you want to open.

Iran, Chile, Nicaraqua, Philipines: Get real, we never took over or annexed any of these. Granted, we did, at times, support some rather nasty regimes (you should have included South Vietnam and some other central american nations, you missed some if you are naming dictatorships we've admittedly supported IN THE PAST). However, we never formally annexed them or made them part of the US. And, you'll also notice that our support for these dictatorship's eventually waned.

Aghanistan - Yeah, right. In conjunction with a myriad of other countries, we evicted a really nasty regime and are still in the process of providing security for a new government that we let tham select themselves and are trying to help them build a better nation and government for their people. Be sure to note all of the resources we're draining from the country to fill America's coffers. (Sarcasm)

Iraq: Please refer to numerous statements and actions by our government indicating that our intent is to help stay as short a time as is necessary to provide a free nation for all Iraqis.

Similar, but not identical to Iraq, you could also say that we "took over" Germany and Japan but that doesn't help your imperialism case very much, now does it?

While you're on the Indian/indigenous people kick - be sure to inlcude the follwing:
Dutch
Potugese
French
British
Spanish

All of these countries were wiping out and conquering indigenous populations around the globe while the US was expanding.

But again, how does the US expansion across the West have any remote relationship to deposing Saddam over a hundered years later. Let me answer the question. IT DOESN'T.

Yes, as I admitted, in the past, decades ago under different adminstrations and different geopolitical realities, the US did support dictators, but so did many other countries, many of them European.

By the way, do you know what US troops (and troops from many other countries) are doing in Afghanistan:

1) Aiding in the removal of land mines.

2) Rebuilding roads.

3) Building schools and clinics.

4) Providing security for the new government.

5) Tracking down remaining elements of the Taliban.

You suggest that we are there under the guise of expansionism - totally false.

We cannot win with people of your ilk. If we remove an evil government, we are wrong. If we do not remove an evil government, we are wrong.

Here's a few more questions for you:

When there is a major catastrophe anywhere on the planet such as an earhtquake, volcanic eruption or flood ocuurs, What country is generally the first to react and the country that provides the most aid, asking nothing in return? (What is the expansionist, imperialist motive?)

Which world leader has asked congress to allocate $15 BILLION to help stem aids in Africa? (What is the expansionist, imperialist motive?)

Which country plans to help Iraq build a secular, or at least representative, government so that Sunnis, Kurds and other minroities will not be oppressed and butchered in the new Iraq? (What would happen if the US pulled out tomorrow? Chaos would ensue and you'd blame the US for that.)

Make all the accusations you want about US intent. But, if we do as we have promised, please be sure to exert the same amount of energy you now have in letting people know that you were wrong about the intentions of the US.

Any reasonable person, wanting peace and freedom for all, would support America's intentions in Iraq. Instead, out of anti-Americanism, anti-Bushism and whatever motive, you seek to tear us down at every turn, secretly wishing that we fail, merely so that you can say I told you so.

Recently, Chirac has said that it is time to move forward contstructively so that the people of Iraq have the greatest chance of a bright future. You might want to consider the same approach if you do, in fact, actually give a rip about the people in Iraq.

It has been stated that winning the peace will be much more difficult than winning the war. I believe this is true and have great concerns about the future of Iraq. There will be many potholes over the next few years. Please have the maturity to understand that these are inevtiable in a situation such as this.
Or, continue on your current approach, exploiting every glitch as a foreboding of eminent failure and evidence of US imperialism.

To put it simply, who else would have stopped the big three. Japan would have had all of Asia if not for the US, the Nazis Western Europe to elsewhere and Soviet Communism well, the entire world in the end.

Not sure how some Europeans think but Australia just doesn't support the US for how they helped save us in WW2. We've always fought in every war together since then and they're our most important ally to part of our national defence policy. I don't mind joining any good free nation like the US that gets rid of someone like the Taliban to Milosevic to Iraq recently.

Fred Hooper

Well said ickle!

frenchfries,
Do I detect a change in attitude?
History will tell us how this will end. You can't impose speculation to how this war will end.
Opinions are just that. Opinions.
I am positive that most, if not all Iraqis will be better off 6 months from now than they have been for the last 30 years despite the fact that civilians lost their lives many more will live.

The terrorism will not disappear until governments stop supporting it. Someone in the Saudi security tipped off the Al Qaeda operatives last week so they could escape and execute the attack in Rhiahd. What kind of support is that?
Said What? That Saddam has been stopped from producing WMD that you don't think he has?

We supply money to Egypt - how's that one?
The Soviet Cold War started because they had Nukes pointed at us - and threated the US. they could have hit as far north as Washington or New york.

I do not believe in selling weapons to other countries unless it was say - to britain during WWI and WWII and such.
They were defending themselves at the time and are a reliable country - Present military action - such as Iraq - Needed to be done. I wanted Saddam removed for personal reseasons. There are people here who try to say "don't follow Bush so blindly."
Who said i was following Bush?

Also, my friends are over their and you bet i'm going to support them - not stand against them.
Even if I didn't support this war - i would support them.

People say "you do not know what war is like"
My family does as we have been in EVERY war America has been in.
I haven't myself - but my family in general has been.

About Afghanistan, you should document yourself a little bit more to know what is happening there .....

Truly horrific atrocities were perpetrated on the indians by first Europeans, and their American decendants. I believe it was in 1643 when the Dutch governor of New Amsterdam ordered the slaughter of 80 Wappingers Indians after a Dutch farmer was killed. They were decapitated while they slept. the governor actually looked on and laughed as on captive was castrated, skined alive, and was forced to eat his own flesh. Also it was the Europeans who started the practice of scalping, paying bounties for the scalps of Indians. But something I fail to understand is how the atrocities against the Indians have anything to do with the current policy of the United States, or how the fact that we took the land is any worse than the land wars that have happened throughout all of history, and in all countries. Rowdy as I am sure that you are aware Canada was not always in European hands, there were Indians in Canda that had to be pushed off there land as well. I do not dismiss the cruelty and torture that was inflicted on the Indians, it is horrible. However one party taking over the land of another party has gone on for centuries, how is this case different? I believe to single out the US for taking land by force, while dismissing it in other instances is dishonest, and a cheap shot aimed at nothing more than to perpetuate anti-US sentiment.

Did you know that the ex-dictator's palaces in Iraq are now occupied by soldiers of the U.S. Army's 4th Infantry Division? Ahhhh, living well is the BEST revenge....


REMEBER, JUST A THANK YOU WILL DO.

[VOTE BUSH IN 2004]

TO MYSTIC, 1YOUNG11 ETC.

MY QUOTE, YOU GUYS ARE REFERRING TO, IN CONTEXT!!!!!!

RESPONDING TO THE QUERY " NAME ONE COUNTRY THE USA HAS ANNEXED....."

I said:

"All of the lands of the Native Americans. Hawaii. Philippines. Iran. Chile. Nicaragua. Afghanistan. Iraq. I am sure there are many that I have missed, only so much research a layman can do after all."

I was not making a direct argument about the degrees of guilt the USA shares with European settlers { the first "Americans" since each Native tribe had its own identity and certainly did not recognize such a thing as a USA... which would not exist for many years yet}... I was merely pointing that it is not that hard to find countries, nations, peoples... that the USA { a powerful expansionist empire} has played a significant part in annexing, deposing, absorbing ... whatever euphemism you are most comfortable with!!!

It is logically impossible to argue with the fact... FACT of 2 centuries worth of War and the aggressive use of economics on smaller, weaker nations/peoples to further the interests of USA supremacy!!!

In no way does this infer that the USA is the ONLY nation guilty of such acts..... My country Canada has certainly made MORE than its share of mistakes when dealing with natives and their culture....

But the question was DIRECT... IT asked about USA and ITS policies!!!!!! I RESPONDED TO THAT.... SO... WHERE IS THE CHEAP SHOT??????????

Did you all know that the ex-dictator's palaces in Iraq are now occupied by soldiers of the U.S. Army's 4th Infantry Division? Ahhhh, living well is the BEST revenge....


REMEMBER, JUST A THANK YOU WILL DO.

[VOTE BUSH IN 2004]

Too bad you're not a U.S. citizen. Then you could follow up your useless rhetoric and have a say in U.S. policies by voting and it would mean something.

REMEMBER, JUST A THANK YOU WILL DO.

are you so afraid CJ that you copy/paste the same post everywhere you can't argue with something intelligent ?

This is a rather interesting string of thoughts. Two separate and rather related points:

First. I spent 7 months in Afghanistan and there is an equal number of Russian and Iranian "Supporters" of the Afghanistan government (Just different factions) to the United States forces, which actually is a coalition consisting of over fifteen countries.

Second, why dont we go back even further when considering the affect of "No USA". We will look mainly at war/politics with some other issues.

1776-1789 the US defeated in its bid for revolution

England's agreement with western Indians results in limited expansion of European Colonists.

1812 No war, US does not invade Canada.

1830 Slavery abolished in new world without Civil War

1836 No Texas war of independence. Emperor De Santa Anna remains undefested. No Mexican Republic.

1836 - 1900 Mexican Expansion from Texas, California, and other territories results in massive oppression: See Southern Mexico and Chiapas.

NO MONROE DOCTRINE... Continued European Colonization of South America... crushed independence of the south.

1898 No Spanish American War. Philipinnes and Cuba remain under Spanish Power.

No Airplane

1917 US does not enter WWI

Germany defeats Russia and occupies Europe from Urals to French Border. Probable outcome as follows:
French, British, Japanese, and Italian alliance fights Germans, Austrians, and Ottoman Empire to a standstill.

IF THIS HAPPENS: Russia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Albania, Romania, Baltic States, and Yougoslavia would not exist after 1918.

Turkish attempt at Genocide in Albania would have succeeded. ONLY US, FRENCH, and BRITISH intervention mitigated this genocide and only because they won the first world war.

Japanese, German, and British occupation of Siberia with German occupation of Eastern Russia (Eastern Europe) would have defeated the Bolshevik Revolution. NO COMMUNISM. Sorry. If Germany had won WWI there is no way that the European Nations and Empires would allowed Communism to occur.

No Nazis... that may not be bad....

Arab nationalism would have been crushed under British and Ottoman Empirial Rule.

Even if Germans-Austrian-Ottomans were defeated:

There would have been NO WILSONIAN 14 points, which was the foundation of independence movements all over the world.

No cure for polio, or it would have taken much longer.

No League of Nations AT ALL. And with it the modern United Nations which came out of it.

No arms agreements between the wars... for instance the Washington Conference which forced the limitations of Sea Power. EVEN MORE SPENT ON WEAPONS.

1936 Genocide in KOREA and CHINA. Japanese expansion almost unchecked in Asia. No Russia to defeat Japan in 1936-1939 leading to advances to the South Pacific. No US to threaten Japanese interests in Pacific. Britian and Germany unable to threaten Japan. From 1936 to 1942 Japan occupies all of South East Asia, South Pacific to include New Guinea and New Zealand. Australia coast occupied. India threatened.

If Germany had gone to war with the allies in 1939 (assumption: indiependent eastern europe and western russia on the basis of French, British, and German charity)

If Germans had been NAZIs.

The occupation of France and the elimination of the French Culture.

The eradication of Jews and Slavs in Eastern Europe and Western Russia.

Britain defends but cannot counter attack.

Without the US invasion of North Africa, the Germans would probably defest British in North Africa and occupy middle east.

Without US/British support in Russia, and STALIN'S industrialization.... remember no Russian Revolution or its defeat.
Germany wins in Russia again. Also remember that US provided over half of Russia's wheeled vehicles used in the war as well as other equipment and food.

Britain could never invade the continent on its own. Europe is under German control. Rockets, the nuclear bomb, jet aircraft, nuclear power, and medicine would flurish under the German Reich. 15 million die in concentration and extermination camps.
Arab Nationalism CRUSHED under German Tanks and Machine-guns.

German and Japanese occupation of India results in the death of Ghandi.

Japanese occupation of Asia kills millions.

The end of the war. No untouched economy of US to rebuild europe. But then I guess no need with German Nazis in control and rebuilding.

No United Nations in the 1940s. No cold war. Maybe a cold war between the two extermination societies... Japan and Germany. Maybe the Brits and Mexicans try something.

Africa, Middle East, South America, and Asia remain colonies and all independence movements are thoroughly crushed. After all, it was the United States in the 1960s and 1970s pushed its allies into granting MASSIVE independence to its colonies. AFTER ALL remember the SUEZ crisis... the US MADE the French, Israelis and British surrender the Suez canal.

Israel still is a country, but no Syria, Iraq, Iran, Lebonon, or Eqypt. Vichy France and Germany sees to that.

There is still a Vietnam, but half the population is eradicated by the Japanese and no Russia or China to provide arms.

No Chinese Communist Revolution. Communism never comes to be.

1960s No Civi Rights fight... or maybe the Indians vs. the Spanish...?

1970s. Cold War still happens.... Just not the US and Russia. Now its Britain-Spanish vs Germany's Europe vs Japan.

There are still nuclear weapons, Britain and Germany had the knowledge and technology.

Ok, so lets just assume that everything happened as it did and lets look at what the US has done in the last 50 or so years.

1. Showed the twisted unworkability of what was Stalinist Communism.

2. Protected and defended the right of colonies to be independent in Africa, Asia, and South America. We just have a bad habit of supporting the wring side in the nationalistic fight. Such as South Korea, Cuba, Hondorous, Nicarougua, Columbia, Vietnam, China, and others. We have always supported one side in the struggle for national self determination. Just as others supported the other side. We just believed so in the struggle that we sacrificed over 80,000 of our own soldiers to support those struggles. We lost many of them.

3. No liberation of Kuwait. No support of Afghanistan... would be a russian protectorate or under the taliban. No massive aid for African Aids Problems. NO END TO APARTHEID in South Africa. NO MASSIVE money to pay for the elimination of Nuclear Weapons in Russia. NO peace in Yougoslvia or the complete ethnic cleansing of the territories.

4. True it is possible that millions have died as a result of US policies, both economic and military. But how many would have died if there had been no USA. In Europe, Asia, and Africa in and after WWI. In Asia, Africa, and South America after WWII. And in the wars of Independence in Africa, Asia, and South America in the late 1900s and early 2000s?

You have valid feelings concerning the intense malfuction of US policy and the resulting carnage of the Cold War, the Global Economic System, and US Imperialistic-like actions since 1991. But is the world really a better place without us? Ever country makes bad policy at some time. Every people become blinded by their messianic ideology at some time. But at least we are honest enough to tell you why we do it. Because we beleive that people who agree with our way of governance and economy are not only right, but destined to prosper and others are wrong and destined to commit genocide, oppress their people, and oppress others. But be honest. Look at the world. Count the number of states that have not chosen our way and then determine how many have not Oppressed their own and others. Determine how many have a higher standard of living. How many live longer, eat better, feel that their children will have a better life than they will. After all, isnt that why we all fight and argue about these things. We want our children to be better off than we were. To live longer, happier, and more complete lives. I dont agree and I dont like all that America does. I do love what it stands for. WE STAND FOR ALL OF YOU. We stand for the right of those to hate us to say they do and to throw things at us and to do their best (in peace) to make us do or NOT do.

Its crazy and its insane and no one who has lived in the hells of the world can beleive it, but we not only want to help but we DO NOT want to CONQUERE, OCCUPY, ANNEX, or DESTROY. We want to LIBERATE, ASSIST, BUILD, and support all peoples. I am sorry, but the world cannot and should not trust us. I mean look at what the world has endured while we were busy fighting on the feilds of Europe and the Forests of Asia against German, Japanese and Russian Expansion. Look at the horrible things we did in the name of Democracy during the cold war. I cant blame them.

My only remedy is to ask: If you really are so honest and understanding of the world, think about what I have written here before you despise the US. Be as critical as you want. We were founded on that principle. But hate without understanding leads to meaningless death and waste. Understand and then hate if you want based on COMPLETE understanding.

What happens if the US suddenly disappears now and what will be the consequences in world policy?

I mean that
- population of the US will disappear,
- US citizens abroad will disappear (including ships' crews, personnel of foreign military bases, embassies, etc.,
- US property (including property of its citizens, companies, ets)will disappear.

What will happen to modern key players

- France
- UK
- Germany
- Japan
- China?
- someone else?

This thread has generated more fantasy than Tolkien.

It's a good exercise. The whole situation is unreal, but thinking in this way really helps to understand what is the US for your country.

So think before you say that the US is greedy or something else.
If all the countries allow the US to be what they are and have there problems solved on their account, why do they blame the US?

Originally posted by rowdyrjp

Ok here goes....After WWII { in an imaginary world where US never existed }.

1> The rest of the world's fight to stop the advance of the Nazis eventually bring about and end to the war.

And nazis full control over Europe and Russia, as well as Japan's occupation of asia. More mass murders, more famine, more occupations...

2> The lack of a US gov to push for the creation of atomic weapons delays the creation of them for years.

Yes, but not too long - 5-10 years.

3> The lack of a Cold War means that the idea of communism is not demonized

Communism is demon. With or without USA.

and any benefits and drawbacks of such systems can be discussed in democratic countries without fear of being blacklisted.

There are no benefits except for truly FREE healthcare and outstanding education. Again, both of those achieved thru fear and oppression not freedom.

4> Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not obliterated in the worst atrocity in the history of mankind.

Asia under Japan's control. Japan at the time was not a prosperous democracy like it is today rather an imperialistic monarchy with very wild culture.

5> Middle powers like Canada are not hindered from developing their own technologies like "the arrow" that could have led to their own space program.

Countries like Canada would be much poorer and technologically outdated than they are with USA support.

6> Vietnam would not have happened.

Yes.

7> If communists regimes still became expansionist { even without the Cold War} then the rest of the world would unite again { just like WWII} to stop them.

It did not. When USSR started expanding into west europe, nobody even tried to stop it. Again, except for USA.

8> The UN { or whatever representative body exists for ambassadors and diplomats from different nations to come together} leads the way in drafting a set of laws that hold every nation accountable for their actions.

The UN (or any other similar organization) did not, does not and will not be able to hold nations accountable for their actions, with or without USA in place.

9> Technologies are shared with 3rd world countries to help modernize them ... not too profit from their tribalization to further Cold War arms sales.

3rd world countries dont recieve financial, humanitarian, and technological aid that only USA provides them with. Civil wars and EU colonies would still be there.

10> The establishment of a representative governing body for affairs that effect the entire World. { distribution of food, medecine etc.} A United Earth approach to the future of mankind as we set forth to explore the stars.

Again 'share and distribute' approach. WRONG. Good that it's not there yet.

Originally posted by rowdyrjp

I was not making a direct argument about the degrees of guilt the USA shares with European settlers { the first "Americans" since each Native tribe had its own identity and certainly did not recognize such a thing as a USA... which would not exist for many years yet}... I was merely pointing that it is not that hard to find countries, nations, peoples... that the USA { a powerful expansionist empire} has played a significant part in annexing, deposing, absorbing ... whatever euphemism you are most comfortable with!!!

Name one country that USA, as a country, captured and turned into a US colony. Except for islands near american coasts. Same islands that are gold and platinum of today's tourism.

It is logically impossible to argue with the fact... FACT of 2 centuries worth of War and the aggressive use of economics on smaller, weaker nations/peoples to further the interests of USA supremacy!!!

USA did not use war and economics on smaller and weaker nations to further it's interests. That's complete BULLSH!T. Sorry Rowdy your point is dismissed due to it's lack of validity.

But the question was DIRECT... IT asked about USA and ITS policies!!!!!! I RESPONDED TO THAT.... SO... WHERE IS THE CHEAP SHOT??????????

The cheap shot was pointing at EUROPEANS capturing american continent and calling it US expansionism. That is really cheap. US emerged and declared itself free from being a UK colony at a later time.

tbbbttt!!!
thats what i say to that. Ill name one country that the US captured and turned into a us colony. In fact, Ill name five. Theyre now known as the five civilized tribes by popular historians. They were native american nations, recognized internationally by two large european powers of the time. Allow me to explain further: Back in the day (a saying, granted, colloquial, that pleases me to see in print), nations were only recgnized by the western powers (namely at that time, england and france) when they signed treaties or international agreements with another recognized nation. Therefore, when, for instance, the Nations of upstate new york (Mohawk, Onieda, Seneca, Cayuga, Onondage) signed a treaty with france, they became internationalyy recognized sovern nations by the whole of western society. The US, having had a revolution, was not considered a sovergn nation, because revolution was considered internationally illegal. I'm boring you. let me get back to the point. We used these native nations to gain legal international standing by: you guessed it, signing land treaties with them. Then, we pushed them onto smaller and smaller reservations, illegally by the land treaties we wrote and our government signed. Finally, most of the reservations in the east dissapeared completely, taken over by the US government (I love how that spells "us" ), and sold to its people for housing development. That was done, as a country. It required only meager military action, for the most part because the Natives actually trusted the US government. Suckers.

I know what youre going to say. Thats not the same. That wasnt a colony. Ok, ill give you this: it doesnt fit the dictionary defintion of colony. But then, niether does the standard use of the word. Here's how the dictionary (Webster)defines it: "a body of people living in a new territory but retaining ties with the parent state. the territory inhabited by such a body."

Most people think of a colony as a territory taken by a powerful nation, and exploited for wealth. Thats how most American school systems explain to little Americans what England did to the US, and hundreds of other smaller countries. Maybe, maybe not. I digress. Let me return to what I had (somwhere) been trying to say. We are guilty, past and present, of dominating and exploiting smaller, weaker nations for our own benefit. We have done it since our birth as a nation, and we are doing it still today. Think Iraq. Sigh. My fingers hurt.