We do not have to leave tomorrow. We can allow those countries to build up there own military and slowly withdraw. Of course, with a country like Japan it could take a long time. I would love to see America to stop spending so much defending other countries and being the world's police force. Unfortunately, whatever we save by making those changes will probably be foolishly spent somewhere else.
Which we have been doing for the last 200 years. What makes taking in the immigrants of other countries weak again?
Legal immigrants are welcome as they always have been. Their contributions have made America. The illegal immigrants are my complaint.
You seriously don't think America has utilized and benefitted off of illegal immigrants? I'd venture to say they are almost necessary in our country now to even function.
Those regions do not necessarily have anything at all to do with our national security. The biggest problem with our "empire" is that it extends the scope of our military dramatically. It is not America's place to make the whole world stable. We simply don't have the resources to do that anymore.
If the illegals were not exploited by the sanctimonious conservative business community and our sanctimonious liberal bring-em-all-in politicians who want more votes, I would agree. Because illegals will work for substandard wages under substandard conditions, we can get a nickel off the menu price or our grass cut for a cut-rate. But is that fair to the illegals? Is that fair to the U.S. worker who is displaced because he or she won't work for substandard wages under substandard conditions. Then the displaced U.S. worker has to pay more in taxes for the added burden to the education, health and infrastructure systems.
......And once again we see that no matter what, people will never, ever understand that economics is not a zero-sum game. And define fair and substandard anyways while you're at it and understand that if a Mexican laborer can do a job for cheaper and just as effective as an American one, you should use the Mexican one. Let me guess. You're going to argue that the new immigrants don't pay any taxes at all, correct?
Bumper sticker conservatism can seem so natural if you don't think since it is everywhere. However, proper government spending can be some of the most valuable spending imaginable. Repairing the interstate highway system or building bullet trains where feasible creates a much higher return and leads to much more wealth than speculation on Wall Street, tens of millions in executive bonuses, or bidding up the price of condos in Las Vegas and the coasts. That is just the way it is according to non-idological economists.
Well maybe so, but that is no reason to continue the certainty of foolishly spending it on golf courses for generals, advanced weaponry to defend against possible future Russian weapons that will never be built and the rest of the "defense" boondoggles. See above for a comment on the canard that all government spending is bad.
This view is incredibly slanted, as was the article. It is so slanted that it reeks of being the basso of the left.
Well you could try some arguments. For instance, please provide some cites to the effect that the massive deployment of technical talent to the military is as productive for the civil economy as say civilian R and D? Perhaps some evidence that our soldiers treat the women well in the w**** houses and establishments surrounding our bases in the Philippines or Okinawa?
There would have to be a profit motive for private companies to fund R&D. Then when they try to reap the profits, people such as the author of the article you posted will show outrage about that. I have no idea about the behavior of out men in w**** houses. I suspect it is about the same as any other men treat their whores. It isn't right, but it isn't unique to military personnel. The simple fact is that when a person abhors all things having to do with the military, you end up with the article that you originally posted. Personally, I am pretty glad that we have a military presence in Korea right now. Without that, South Korea would be measurably more vulnerable than it presently is.
Do you honestly think S. Korea would immediately fall if the US withdrew its prescence? That China and Japan would just sit there twiddling their fingers if N. Korea makes a major move? It's not like without US bases in Asia, the whole region will just start beating each other up.
No...but think about it a little more critically. N. Korea knows that they would have to attack a US military base in order to roll into S. Korea. That means the US military gets involved in a major way. It is a deterrent to know that you would immediately bring another military power into the mix - and not on your side.
Perhaps you should use wikipedia or some source to get some info on Chalmer's Johnson before painting with such a broad brush.
I suspect that if N. Korea attacked S. Korea that there would be a massive defection of the N. Koreans trying to get access to some good food and some good old fashioned freedom. Freedom!! shouldn't underestimate the attraction of it.