The price of perpetual war

[Peter1469]

The price of perpetual war (http://warontherocks.com/2016/05/the-price-of-perpetual-war/)

The US has fought wars before. But never so long as what we see since 9-11. It is a state of perpetual war. What does this do to our military and society? War on the Rocks discusses:



The United States has entered an era of perpetual war. The U.S. military has been at war for 15 straight years with no end in sight, and President Obama will soon have the dubious distinction of being the only American president to have been at war for all eight years (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/politics/obama-as-wartime-president-has-wrestled-with-protecting-nation-and-troops.html?_r=0) of a two-term presidency. The traditional logic of American wars — that the United States would mobilize, fight, win, and end its wars through overwhelming force of arms — no longer seems to apply. Today’s wars can be characterized more as conflicts in the gray zone (http://warontherocks.com/2015/05/fighting-and-winning-in-the-gray-zone/), ambiguous battles with less-defined shapes and even less-clear outcomes. This increasingly blurred line between peace and war is posing a range of new challenges for the U.S. military, for elected officials, and for the nation as a whole.

The United States did not choose this era of perpetual war. It is the price of living in a world where, for the first time, terrorist groups and malevolent individuals can reach the United States and wreak havoc from virtually any corner of the world. That threat was literally brought home by al Qaeda on 9/11 and reinforced all too recently by the terror attacks in Paris, Brussels, and San Bernardino.


Helping to prevent and disrupt further attacks from such groups also largely explains why the United States still has troops in Afghanistan and has redeployed troops to Iraq. The United States also now faces other far-flung threats abroad that include dangers from the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Al-Shabaab in Somalia, and Boko Haram in Nigeria. These groups have conducted attacks across Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Southeast Asia. Recent (http://www.gallup.com/poll/181553/isis-terrorism-seen-graver-threats-russia-ukraine.aspx) surveys (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/05/key-findings-on-how-americans-view-the-u-s-role-in-the-world/) show that more than 80 percent of Americans believe that ISIL and international terrorism are the biggest threat to the United States. While these worries may be overstated (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/23/youre-more-likely-to-be-fatally-crushed-by-furniture-than-killed-by-a-terrorist/), they nevertheless drive policymakers to action. The United States has responded by deploying small teams of U.S. special operations forces to a range of countries — from Syria to Yemen to Libya to the Central African Republic — to help support local governments and their militaries in countering these malign actors.

What does this era of perpetual war mean for the U.S. military? First, “war” and “peace” are no longer binary conditions, as they had been for much of the nation’s history. This is one of the few times that the U.S. military has had to undertake the demands of continuous warfare while at the same time rigorously preparing for a wide range of potential future threats. Even the limited conflicts in Korea and Vietnam were fought within the context of a possible global war against the Soviet Union, and each had a relatively clear end. Today’s military must think in unconstrained ways about what could be the much different wars of the future, while simultaneously conducting wars with no prospective end points.


In the past, the periods of peace that followed periods of war gave the U.S. military time and space to prepare for the next war — to devote serious intellectual energy to thinking about scenarios for a range of these future challenges and to develop the doctrine, force structure, technologies, and capabilities to meet them. Even though the military often did not predict the next war correctly, that period of time, reflection, and investment helped make it more ready to adapt to the next set of challenges it faced. But that protected time and space no longer exist in this era of perpetual warfare, since the military will inevitably have to focus on fighting current battles and preventing them from worsening or expanding. Neither military nor civilian leaders can think deeply about the wars of 2030 when the roiling conflicts of today dominate the headlines and have immediate political and international impact.


Read more at the link.

[Ethereal]

Sooner or later, people will have to come to the realization that military force alone cannot solve this problem.

A multifaceted problem like terrorism requires a multifaceted approach, and part of that means reassessing the role western interventionism has played in perpetuating terrorism, to say nothing of the dubious activities various intelligence agencies engage in behind a veil of complete secrecy.

[MMC]

Does that include reassessing when those of the Mid East call for Western Assistance, Western help, Western Aid, and Western Intervention?

But you are correct that Military force cannot solve the problem alone. Nor can some Judicial Code of Law and Ethics.

[Peter1469]

I am not an isolationist by any means. But we used up too much of our resources for the Middle East. We could have done more for much less.

[Ethereal]

Does that include reassessing when those of the Mid East call for Western Assistance, Western help, Western Aid, and Western Intervention?

But you are correct that Military force cannot solve the problem alone. Nor can some Judicial Code of Law and Ethics.

Of course.

I'm sick of sending our money to foreign countries when it could be used to improve America.

Let them take care of themselves.

[donttread]

The price of perpetual war (http://warontherocks.com/2016/05/the-price-of-perpetual-war/)

The US has fought wars before. But never so long as what we see since 9-11. It is a state of perpetual war. What does this do to our military and society? War on the Rocks discusses:





Read more at the link.

Hell of a way to keep people employed though. As are our prison systems. Biddaddy.gov has painted itself into an economic corner they can't escape with their jobs so they just keep painting.

[donttread]

Of course.

I'm sick of sending our money to foreign countries when it could be used to improve America.

Let them take care of themselves.

And when they move to take care of themselves let them .

[MMC]

Of course.

I'm sick of sending our money to foreign countries when it could be used to improve America.

Let them take care of themselves.

Well I don't think we should be sharing our military tech going into the future. Not even the old and outdated.

What should take place, when they prove they can't take care of themselves?

Oh and the War on Terror.....shouldn't just be our War. Others need to carry their own weight.

[Ethereal]

Well I don't think we should be sharing our military tech going into the future. Not even the old and outdated.

What should take place, when they prove they can't take of themselves?

Oh and the War on Terror.....shouldn't just be our War. Others need to carry their own weight.

People use the term "fortress America" as a pejorative.

But I rather like the sound of it.

Let the rest of the world fend for themselves. It's not our responsibility to provide them with security.

[MMC]

People use the term "fortress America" as a pejorative.

But I rather like the sound of it.

Let the rest of the world fend for themselves. It's not our responsibility to provide them with security.

Its not security when one is dealing with those who are the problem. Especially when they are left as the only answer as to the root of the problem, Right?

[donttread]

People use the term "fortress America" as a pejorative.

But I rather like the sound of it.

Let the rest of the world fend for themselves. It's not our responsibility to provide them with security.

1) It's not our responsibility
2) The motives are rarely pure and
3) The outcomes are almost never good.

But other than that hey, it works

[Peter1469]

1) It's not our responsibility
2) The motives are rarely pure and
3) The outcomes are almost never good.

But other than that hey, it works

Tens of millions trapped behind the Iron Curtain were happy for the US post-war leadership that lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

[donttread]

Tens of millions trapped behind the Iron Curtain were happy for the US post-war leadership that lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Russia's economy would have dictated political change to produce growth anyway, with or without us. Communism can only tale you so far economically

[Peter1469]

Russia's economy would have dictated political change to produce growth anyway, with or without us. Communism can only tale you so far economically
They were seeking to expand. If there had been isolationist leaders in the West during the Cold War it would have been moral and just to remove them from office at any cost.

[The Sage of Main Street]

The price of perpetual war (http://warontherocks.com/2016/05/the-price-of-perpetual-war/)The US has fought wars before. But never so long as what we see since 9-11. It is a state of perpetual war. What does this do to our military and society? War on the Rocks discusses:Read more at the link. Seizing our enemies' natural resources will make this war profitable and also end their ability to finance the jihad.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Tens of millions trapped behind the Iron Curtain were happy for the US post-war leadership that lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union. It's not our duty to spend blood and treasure to make those disorganized cowards happy. It's their own fault that they are doormats. Small countries have no right to exist unless they become totally militarized.

[Peter1469]

Seizing our enemies' natural resources will make this war profitable and also end their ability to finance the jihad.

We don't need their oil. The US is not the #1 oil producer in the world- again.

Frack.

[The Sage of Main Street]

We don't need their oil. The US is not the #1 oil producer in the world- again.

Frack. First, the purpose of taking the contraband is to bankrupt the enemy, not to fulfill the Isos' version of our economic needs. Second, the production costs of the Nazislamis' oil are 10% of what it costs to frack. We need to further decrease costs to make the economy even better.

[Peter1469]

First, the purpose of taking the contraband is to bankrupt the enemy, not to fulfill the Isos' version of our economic needs. Second, the production costs of the Nazislamis' oil are 10% of what it costs to frack. We need to further decrease costs to make the economy even better.

Solid points.

[donttread]

They were seeking to expand. If there had been isolationist leaders in the West during the Cold War it would have been moral and just to remove them from office at any cost.

Again the world's keeper Peter.? When will you see that such well intentioned emotions lead to harm more often than they don't. How far could Russia really have expanded with their economics? Do you really believe that Regan's words alone are the sole reason the wall came down. Your the first to admit that our government lies . Yet you put so much faith in there words in history. Why?

[donttread]

Seizing our enemies' natural resources will make this war profitable and also end their ability to finance the jihad.

And make us hated imperialist with a a target on the back of another generation. You forgot that part.

[Peter1469]

Again the world's keeper Peter.? When will you see that such well intentioned emotions lead to harm more often than they don't. How far could Russia really have expanded with their economics? Do you really believe that Regan's words alone are the sole reason the wall came down. Your the first to admit that our government lies . Yet you put so much faith in there words in history. Why?

That is a lot of straw men.

[donttread]

That is a lot of straw men.

And that is one very telling non answer

[Peter1469]

And that is one very telling non answer

Telling? Responding to strawmen is pointless.

[donttread]

Telling? Responding to strawmen is pointless.


Especially when you can define "straw men" as anything you wish because you have no factual response because you have been proven wrong

[Peter1469]

Especially when you can define "straw men" as anything you wish because you have no factual response because you have been proven wrong
Incorrect. Isolationism is largely theory. I posted a link about Pax Americana.

[donttread]

Incorrect. Isolationism is largely theory. I posted a link about Pax Americana.

Well it's a theory we should try because whatever the hell we're doing now ain't workin

[Peter1469]

Well it's a theory we should try because whatever the hell we're doing now ain't workin

I agree that the Neocon agenda does not work. Isolationism would be worse for the world. Perhaps better for the US.

[donttread]

I agree that the Neocon agenda does not work. Isolationism would be worse for the world. Perhaps better for the US.

That assertion is also a theory. Without our interference the world will establish a pecking order and trade will continue. Civilization maintained long before the former USA exisisted and it can function long after we isolate or get taken down by all those we keep fucking with.

[Peter1469]

That assertion is also a theory. Without our interference the world will establish a pecking order and trade will continue. Civilization maintained long before the former USA exisisted and it can function long after we isolate or get taken down by all those we keep fucking with.

If you bothered to read up on the topic, many scholars believe that wars and chaos would have been much worse had the US not been a stabilizing force. (or another nation doing the same role)

[donttread]

If you bothered to read up on the topic, many scholars believe that wars and chaos would have been much worse had the US not been a stabilizing force. (or another nation doing the same role)

It's an impossible comparison and extremely subjective. Did the world implode prior to WW 1? No? So it probably wouldn't of imploded since then either. I think part of the fallacy in these models is they assume that without "world police" war would be constant. They ignore the likely hood that a pecking order would of been established early on leading to less war than our interventionism has. They also ignore the fact that as I said above the world functioned without our "help" before so it would follow that the nations of earth would continue to function without our help again.
Your scholars simply suffer from "nationism narcissism" . Or "we are God " syndrome. To borrow a Joe Walsh lead in "But seriously folks" if we were really capable of fixing the world's problems let alone our own they wouldn't always be the same problems.

[donttread]

If you bothered to read up on the topic, many scholars believe that wars and chaos would have been much worse had the US not been a stabilizing force. (or another nation doing the same role)


Also in the human mind the "road not traveled" is always perfect.

[Peter1469]

The Brits were the "world cops" prior to WWI.


It's an impossible comparison and extremely subjective. Did the world implode prior to WW 1? No? So it probably wouldn't of imploded since then either. I think part of the fallacy in these models is they assume that without "world police" war would be constant. They ignore the likely hood that a pecking order would of been established early on leading to less war than our interventionism has. They also ignore the fact that as I said above the world functioned without our "help" before so it would follow that the nations of earth would continue to function without our help again.
Your scholars simply suffer from "nationism narcissism" . Or "we are God " syndrome. To borrow a Joe Walsh lead in "But seriously folks" if we were really capable of fixing the world's problems let alone our own they wouldn't always be the same problems.

[donttread]

Sooner or later, people will have to come to the realization that military force alone cannot solve this problem.

A multifaceted problem like terrorism requires a multifaceted approach, and part of that means reassessing the role western interventionism has played in perpetuating terrorism, to say nothing of the dubious activities various intelligence agencies engage in behind a veil of complete secrecy.

The real world evidence over the past decade or two points to the conclusion that if we continue to practice interventionism it will become less selective and more wide spread .
In other words any interventionism is leading to total interventionism and endless multi-front wars and arms deals.

[Peter1469]

The real world evidence over the past decade or two points to the conclusion that if we continue to practice interventionism it will become less selective and more wide spread .
In other words any interventionism is leading to total interventionism and endless multi-front wars and arms deals.

Silly.

You are complaining about the Neocon fetish with spreading democracy with the gun.

You can't logically toss all policies that are not isolationism into the Neocon pot.

[donttread]

The Brits were the "world cops" prior to WWI.

And they imperialized the planet. At any rate , at some point the nations of earth functioned without a world police. Especially a world police that was up to their eyeballs in self interest, warfare and imperialism in conflict with the very values they were supposed to police?

[Peter1469]

And they imperialized the planet. At any rate , at some point the nations of earth functioned without a world police. Especially a world police that was up to their eyeballs in self interest, warfare and imperialism in conflict with the very values they were supposed to police?

When?

[The Sage of Main Street]

And make us hated imperialist with a a target on the back of another generation. You forgot that part. You think that those jealous savages hate us for what we do, rather than for what we are? They need no excuse; it is in their nature to prey on us. Those beasts see appeasement as a sign of weakness and a signal to attack.

[Cigar]

Time to Pack Up Our Sh!t and bring out the Big Expensive Toys

[The Sage of Main Street]

That assertion is also a theory. Without our interference the world will establish a pecking order and trade will continue. Civilization maintained long before the former USA exisisted and it can function long after we isolate or get taken down by all those we keep $#@!ing with.
The ancient Romans kept fucking with the barbarians until this battle settled things for almost 600 years:

BATTLE OF VERCELLAE (Northern Italy, 101 BC)

Romans: 50,000
Barbarians: 210,000

Roman dead: 1,000
Barbarian dead: 140,000

[valley ranch]

Until the the Lombards.



I Longobardi erano germatic , si stabilirono e non quella parte d'Italia si chiama Lombardi

[The Sage of Main Street]

Until the the Lombards.



I Longobardi erano germatic , si stabilirono e non quella parte d'Italia si chiama Lombardi Under the Empire, Rome had a population of 1,000,000. During the Dark Ages, its population dwindled to 20,000. Our fate will be a caliphate; that is the price we will pay if we don't destroy all Islam by taking its oilfields away from them and nuking any residual resistance. No nation-building, no outsourcing, no appeasement. No mercy.

[Peter1469]

Under the Empire, Rome had a population of 1,000,000. During the Dark Ages, its population dwindled to 20,000. Our fate will be a caliphate; that is the price we will pay if we don't destroy all Islam by taking its oilfields away from them and nuking any residual resistance. No nation-building, no outsourcing, no appeasement. No mercy.Islam doesn't have the ability to conquer the West.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Islam doesn't have the ability to conquer the West. The Romans had the same suicidal smugness.

[Peter1469]

The Romans had the same suicidal smugness.

The Muslims had armies that were peers of Western armies when the Eastern Roman Empire fell to them. The Muslims do not have that today.

[The Sage of Main Street]

The Muslims had armies that were peers of Western armies when the Eastern Roman Empire fell to them. The Muslims do not have that today. They have different weapons, such as sleeper-cell immigration and OPEC price-gouging. They take advantage of our false sense of security and suicidal ignorance of what kind of beasts we are up against.

[donttread]

Under the Empire, Rome had a population of 1,000,000. During the Dark Ages, its population dwindled to 20,000. Our fate will be a caliphate; that is the price we will pay if we don't destroy all Islam by taking its oilfields away from them and nuking any residual resistance. No nation-building, no outsourcing, no appeasement. No mercy.

If you really are intent on destroying radical islam, develop the alternate fuels. Then with the possible exception of the Saudis they are fucked. Unless the price of sand sky rockets

[Peter1469]

They have different weapons, such as sleeper-cell immigration and OPEC price-gouging. They take advantage of our false sense of security and suicidal ignorance of what kind of beasts we are up against.

Neither of which can take and hold territory.

[Truth Detector]

You have to really DUMB down the definition of war to swallow this false narrative. The casualties for the entire Iraq and Afghanistan were the equivalent of one day in WWI and WWII, one hour in the Civil War and one year in Vietnam.

We really are turning into a nation of low information pussies.

Had Obama not unilaterally pulled out of Iraq and disengaged in Afghanistan based on LIES, Isis wouldn't be controlling half the region.

[Peter1469]

You have to really DUMB down the definition of war to swallow this false narrative. The casualties for the entire Iraq and Afghanistan were the equivalent of one day in WWI and WWII, one hour in the Civil War and one year in Vietnam.

We really are turning into a nation of low information pussies.

Had Obama not unilaterally pulled out of Iraq and disengaged in Afghanistan based on LIES, Isis wouldn't be controlling half the region.

The Iraqis and Afghans don't want US occupation.

[donttread]

Well I don't think we should be sharing our military tech going into the future. Not even the old and outdated.

What should take place, when they prove they can't take care of themselves?

Oh and the War on Terror.....shouldn't just be our War. Others need to carry their own weight.

Do you think the "war on terror has increased or decreased the number of terrorist?

[Peter1469]

Do you think the "war on terror has increased or decreased the number of terrorist?

Decrease of skilled operatives.
Increase of cannon fodder.

[FindersKeepers]

Do you think the "war on terror has increased or decreased the number of terrorist?

Probably decreased.

[donttread]

Probably decreased.

Really, they have gathered almost military like strength and defeated Army's and your guess is "probably decreased? LOL

[The Sage of Main Street]

If you really are intent on destroying radical islam, develop the alternate fuels. Then with the possible exception of the Saudis they are $#@!ed. Unless the price of sand sky rockets
Fantasizing about futuristic Hollywood science has come to be a New Age cowardly escapist excuse for not taking practical, immediate, and effective action.

[The Sage of Main Street]

The Iraqis and Afghans don't want US occupation. Self-determination for psycho savages determined to destroy us has been a failed policy. The transnationalist traitors in power have brainwashed us into believing this suicide pact is humanitarian.

[Peter1469]

Self-determination for psycho savages determined to destroy us has been a failed policy. The transnationalist traitors in power have brainwashed us into believing this suicide pact is humanitarian.


The solution is isolation of the region. Not occupation and the fools errand of training tribes in Jeffersonian democracy.

[texan]

Sooner or later, people will have to come to the realization that military force alone cannot solve this problem.

A multifaceted problem like terrorism requires a multifaceted approach, and part of that means reassessing the role western interventionism has played in perpetuating terrorism, to say nothing of the dubious activities various intelligence agencies engage in behind a veil of complete secrecy.

Step out of your lecture room test lab in college and into reality and the 2 that thanked him.............geez................I wish the world were this simple.

[texan]

Decrease of skilled operatives.
Increase of cannon fodder.

It has absolutely increased. Not one group has ever has so many fighters and no country..............Really this is a question? BTW I posted a link from CNN that confirms they are larger everywhere.

[Peter1469]

It has absolutely increased. Not one group has ever has so many fighters and no country..............Really this is a question? BTW I posted a link from CNN that confirms they are larger everywhere.

Decrease in skilled operatives. Innovative bomb makers v. follow-the-book bomb maker- way down. Skills with terrorist / intell trade-craft way down.

Low skilled thugs- up.

[donttread]

Fantasizing about futuristic Hollywood science has come to be a New Age cowardly escapist excuse for not taking practical, immediate, and effective action.

You mean a cowardly excuse for not just taking what we want and wonder why people hate us? Just imagine if our national plan had focused on alternate energy sources , instead of keeping the ME unstable enough for Exxon and BP to get rich via war and covert ops. Just imagine where we would be if we had collaborated as a nation worked towards alternate fuels since the first "oil crisis" in 79? You wouldn't even know OBL's name or about any occupation of Iraq , rich oil barons , including ours, would be much less rich and GWB may have never come to power. We would likely have many smaller community, or single dwelling grids much less fragile to attack because there would be so many.
But to envision all that would of required true foresight, something the American government has been in short supply of for decades.

[The Sage of Main Street]

The solution is isolation of the region. Not occupation and the fools errand of training tribes in Jeffersonian democracy. We need the type of imperialism that the White conquest of the Indians represented.

[The Sage of Main Street]

You mean a cowardly excuse for not just taking what we want and wonder why people hate us? Just imagine if our national plan had focused on alternate energy sources , instead of keeping the ME unstable enough for Exxon and BP to get rich via war and covert ops. Just imagine where we would be if we had collaborated as a nation worked towards alternate fuels since the first "oil crisis" in 79? You wouldn't even know OBL's name or about any occupation of Iraq , rich oil barons , including ours, would be much less rich and GWB may have never come to power. We would likely have many smaller community, or single dwelling grids much less fragile to attack because there would be so many.
But to envision all that would of required true foresight, something the American government has been in short supply of for decades. The unproductive savages don't hate us; they think we are weakling fools for letting them keep the resources we developed for them. Those are our intellectual property. The backward parasites see us as suckers and pushovers. The only era the Stone Age can defeat is the New Age, which is sewage.

[Peter1469]

We need the type of imperialism that the White conquest of the Indians represented.

Why. We have plenty of quality land here. And we are protected by two large oceans and two weak neighbors

[The Sage of Main Street]

Why. We have plenty of quality land here. And we are protected by two large oceans and two weak neighbors You would have told our Pilgrim Fathers to stay in England.

[Peter1469]

You would have told our Pilgrim Fathers to stay in England.

Absolutely not. I would have told the Pilgrims to go to the New World and stay the heck out of the Middle East. :wink:

[Ethereal]

We need the type of imperialism that the White conquest of the Indians represented.

Yea, look at how well imperialism worked for the Romans.

[Peter1469]

Yea, look at how well imperialism worked for the Romans.

Rome was founded in the 6th century BC and lasted until 476 AD. The Eastern Empire lasted another 1000 years.

Imperialism worked well for them. And helped to civilize the West.

[Ethereal]

You would have told our Pilgrim Fathers to stay in England.

My fathers weren't pilgrims, they were Scotch-Irish Presbyterians who immigrated to Virginia in the late 1600's.

And unlike the puritan northerners, they knew how to mind their own business.

In any case, the pilgrims weren't sanctioned by the English state, so your attempt to compare US government imperialism with privately organized immigration the new world falls flat on its face.

[Ethereal]

Rome was founded in the 6th century BC and lasted until 476 AD. The Eastern Empire lasted another 1000 years.

Imperialism worked well for them. And helped to civilize the West.

And where are they now?

Defeated by the superior Germanic culture which emphasized decentralization.

And to the extent that the eastern Empire lasted longer, this was almost certainly due to their reliance on economics as opposed to military imperialism.

[Peter1469]

And where are they now?

Defeated by the superior Germanic culture which emphasized decentralization.

And to the extent that the eastern Empire lasted longer, this was almost certainly due to their reliance on economics as opposed to military imperialism.

I don't think the German culture was superior. And they took a lot from the Romans that they conquered.

When I was in Edinburgh I was talking with a guy about history and he told me that people died from disease in massive numbers in the city well into the 1800s. Why? Because the Romans didn't make it that far north and teach them about urban sanitation.

[texan]

Decrease in skilled operatives. Innovative bomb makers v. follow-the-book bomb maker- way down. Skills with terrorist / intell trade-craft way down.

Low skilled thugs- up.

Oh okay!

[texan]

Just a word of caution Peter. This administration has been proven to be doctoring information that many of these articles are based on but you are so sure the information you get is correct? Their army has grown, their network of involved stateside jihadists have grown therefore larger. Their reach across the globe has grown. This all makes them bigger. People can be trained to make bombs my man, not that hard.

Your stance of weakness is contrary to the facts. Obama's strategy hasn't worked. We were told it worked and now we find out we stepped up airpower and manpower in the fight. The San Bernardino thugs got financing from overseas, that is direct involvement and not the act of a detached lone wolf.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Rome was founded in the 6th century BC and lasted until 476 AD. The Eastern Empire lasted another 1000 years.

Imperialism worked well for them. And helped to civilize the West. One of the signs that a civilization is about to fall comes to light when it starts claiming that Roman Civilization was a failure from the get-go.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Oh okay! The Pentagony continually returns to 9/10 thinking.

[Peter1469]

Just a word of caution Peter. This administration has been proven to be doctoring information that many of these articles are based on but you are so sure the information you get is correct? Their army has grown, their network of involved stateside jihadists have grown therefore larger. Their reach across the globe has grown. This all makes them bigger. People can be trained to make bombs my man, not that hard.

Your stance of weakness is contrary to the facts. Obama's strategy hasn't worked. We were told it worked and now we find out we stepped up airpower and manpower in the fight. The San Bernardino thugs got financing from overseas, that is direct involvement and not the act of a detached lone wolf.

I am not supporting Obama's policies. I am stating that the Islamic State so far does not represent a very serious threat to the US. The San Bernardino attack is a minor attack. We stop most of them. We can stop more of them.

A talented bomb maker is very rare.

[Peter1469]

One of the signs that a civilization is about to fall comes to light when it starts claiming that Roman Civilization was a failure from the get-go.

The earth is a failure. Because in another 4.5 billion years it will be eaten by the sun....

[donttread]

Sooner or later, people will have to come to the realization that military force alone cannot solve this problem.

A multifaceted problem like terrorism requires a multifaceted approach, and part of that means reassessing the role western interventionism has played in perpetuating terrorism, to say nothing of the dubious activities various intelligence agencies engage in behind a veil of complete secrecy.

Terrorism is a strange word. Had ALQ been a country at war with America their actions on 9/11 would have deemed a legal act of war, or so I gather from those who defend the deliberate targeting of civilians. I choose to call 9/11 terrorism. But how many actions that are really more like guerillia warfare do we assisgn the terrorism tag to? Is an IUD targeted at military in a nation we are occupying by force really terrorism? Or is it more like fighting back the only way they can?
I guess the point is that much of what we lump in as terrorism will end the minute we leave the ME. Terrorist organizations and hard core fundamentalist clearly are stronger and control more of the region than they were prior to our "war on terror". Much like the "war on drugs" seemed to increase the availability of drugs, the war on terror has rocketed 14th century zealots to power and created at least one "terrorist group" powerful enough to take and occupy land like a standing army.

[Peter1469]

Terrorism is a strange word. Had ALQ been a country at war with America their actions on 9/11 would have deemed a legal act of war, or so I gather from those who defend the deliberate targeting of civilians. I choose to call 9/11 terrorism. But how many actions that are really more like guerillia warfare do we assisgn the terrorism tag to? Is an IUD targeted at military in a nation we are occupying by force really terrorism? Or is it more like fighting back the only way they can?
I guess the point is that much of what we lump in as terrorism will end the minute we leave the ME. Terrorist organizations and hard core fundamentalist clearly are stronger and control more of the region than they were prior to our "war on terror". Much like the "war on drugs" seemed to increase the availability of drugs, the war on terror has rocketed 14th century zealots to power and created at least one "terrorist group" powerful enough to take and occupy land like a standing army.

Under the current international laws of war, had al Qaeda been a nation at war with the US the actions on 9-11 would not have been legal acts of war. An attack on the Pentagon- oh sure. But using civilian airliners against the civilian targets? Absolutely not.

I know much of the third world is upset at the international laws of war. Several conventions were proposed to "even" the playing field between the great powers and the weak nations. But great powers either didn't sign up for them or they signed up and ignored them.

I keep telling you people that international organizations and treaties are tools for nation-states. And it will stay that way until nation-states can no longer protect their citizens.

[donttread]

Under the current international laws of war, had al Qaeda been a nation at war with the US the actions on 9-11 would not have been legal acts of war. An attack on the Pentagon- oh sure. But using civilian airliners against the civilian targets? Absolutely not.

I know much of the third world is upset at the international laws of war. Several conventions were proposed to "even" the playing field between the great powers and the weak nations. But great powers either didn't sign up for them or they signed up and ignored them.

I keep telling you people that international organizations and treaties are tools for nation-states. And it will stay that way until nation-states can no longer protect their citizens.

OK, so let me get this straight. When open war is declared using a civilian airliner to kill 3,000 civillians would be a war crime. But, nuking 1000,000 or more civilians would be an act of war?
If that is true that is the mother of all self serving definitions

[Peter1469]

OK, so let me get this straight. When open war is declared using a civilian airliner to kill 3,000 civillians would be a war crime. But, nuking 1000,000 or more civilians would be an act of war?
If that is true that is the mother of all self serving definitions

Under the law of war as it stands today nuking civilians would be illegal. However, if there is a nuclear exchange nation-states are not going to be worrying about what international law says.

Sovereign nation-states matter. International organizations and their laws matter only insofar as nation-states care and / or have use for them.

[Ransom]

Under the law of war as it stands today nuking civilians would be illegal. However, if there is a nuclear exchange nation-states are not going to be worrying about what international law says.

Sovereign nation-states matter. International organizations and their laws matter only insofar as nation-states care and / or have use for them.

Did not you call for a battlefield or tactical nuke in Syria should extremists obtain WMDs?

[The Sage of Main Street]

The earth is a failure. Because in another 4.5 billion years it will be eaten by the sun.... Using a billion-year advancement in science, we will be able to prevent that by feeding the sun more fuel, starting with Mercury and Venus. We could prevent the decay of Western Civilization if independent creative voices weren't smothered by the parasites in power.

[The Sage of Main Street]

OK, so let me get this straight. When open war is declared using a civilian airliner to kill 3,000 civillians would be a war crime. But, nuking 1000,000 or more civilians would be an act of war?
If that is true that is the mother of all self serving definitions Giving a million Muslime a free magic carpet trip to live with Allah would be financing a religious pilgrimage and be ruled unconstitutional.

[donttread]

Under the law of war as it stands today nuking civilians would be illegal. However, if there is a nuclear exchange nation-states are not going to be worrying about what international law says.

Sovereign nation-states matter. International organizations and their laws matter only insofar as nation-states care and / or have use for them.

Words to justify atrocity are still just words

[Peter1469]

Did not you call for a battlefield or tactical nuke in Syria should extremists obtain WMDs?

Wasn't that Pakistan?

[Peter1469]

Words to justify atrocity are still just words

Sovereigns are sovereign.

You are just a citizen.

[donttread]

Sovereigns are sovereign.

You are just a citizen.

But Sovereigns have rules of war and dictate that certain things are war crimes and with the exception of mei lai and possibly a couple of other incidents those war crimes are never applied to us.

[Peter1469]

But Sovereigns have rules of war and dictate that certain things are war crimes and with the exception of mei lai and possibly a couple of other incidents those war crimes are never applied to us.

I explained that to you. International law is for the convenience of nation-states. International organizations do not have power over sovereigns.

In your state you can get a speeding ticket for driving above the posted limit.

In the world of international law and nation-states, a nation-state doesn't get a ticket for driving above the posted limit. They get nagged by the international community and other nation-states. Then the sovereign decides on how to respond. Or not.

[texan]

Looking for a report released today that talks about how ISIS has grown.................I will locate it tomorrow, it was reported on teh news earlier when I was driving. If you can find it anyone post it....

[Peter1469]

Grown? They lost almost 40% of their land in Iraq over the last year.

[donttread]

I explained that to you. International law is for the convenience of nation-states. International organizations do not have power over sovereigns.

In your state you can get a speeding ticket for driving above the posted limit.

In the world of international law and nation-states, a nation-state doesn't get a ticket for driving above the posted limit. They get nagged by the international community and other nation-states. Then the sovereign decides on how to respond. Or not.

What of war criminals then?

[donttread]

Using a billion-year advancement in science, we will be able to prevent that by feeding the sun more fuel, starting with Mercury and Venus. We could prevent the decay of Western Civilization if independent creative voices weren't smothered by the parasites in power.

No way humans can survive a billion years of themselves. Some other creature will be the domonate species when the lights go out

[The Sage of Main Street]

Did not you call for a battlefield or tactical nuke in Syria should extremists obtain WMDs? As we have seen, boxcutters are weapons of mass destruction. It is a typical nonsense term by the thought-controllers who invent language.

[The Sage of Main Street]

I explained that to you. International law is for the convenience of nation-states. International organizations do not have power over sovereigns.

In your state you can get a speeding ticket for driving above the posted limit.

In the world of international law and nation-states, a nation-state doesn't get a ticket for driving above the posted limit. They get nagged by the international community and other nation-states. Then the sovereign decides on how to respond. Or not. Exactly. When the President claims he can't fight a certain way because of GC or ROE, he's lying.

[Ransom]

Grown? They lost almost 40% of their land in Iraq over the last year.

Following western intervention. Let us be quite clear and accurate here....let us tell the truth........this loss of land began shortly after western intervention to include support for the Iraq government, tribal factions, militias involved in Fallujah for example.

Pete won't always tell the whole story, I will.

[Ransom]

As we have seen, boxcutters are weapons of mass destruction. It is a typical nonsense term by the thought-controllers who invent language.

You can actually see video archive of the wmd dropped on Nagasaki. Wasn't a box cutter.

We're speaking to a weapon like the Sarin gas used in the 1995 Japanese subway attack. Killed 13 people and sickened hundreds.

13 Sage. You couldn't kill me with a box cutter if I was asleep.

Yuo've been doing well lately, don't start fckn up. ok?

[AZ Jim]

We spend too much for military toys. One F-35 costs 148 million dollars. 'nuff said.

[Peter1469]

What of war criminals then?

What of them? Expand on that thought.

[Peter1469]

Following western intervention. Let us be quite clear and accurate here....let us tell the truth........this loss of land began shortly after western intervention to include support for the Iraq government, tribal factions, militias involved in Fallujah for example.

Pete won't always tell the whole story, I will.

Without an invasion from Western forces.

[Ransom]

Without an invasion from Western forces.

In other words, I was correct. And more than likely, will remain dead on balls accurate.

[Ransom]

We spend too much for military toys. One F-35 costs 148 million dollars. 'nuff said.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2016/06/09/Danish-parliament-approves-F-35-buy/9801465481588/

Then I say we sell em for 150.

AZ......the price of the jet includes the manufacture, research, and study done for stealth technology, they have multiple roles....yes?

The price is given just in case someone would like to buy one. And the Danes obviously do.

[Peter1469]

In other words, I was correct. And more than likely, will remain dead on balls accurate.

You were not correct. I was the one that said the Arabs had to do the heavy lifting.

[The Sage of Main Street]

You can actually see video archive of the wmd dropped on Nagasaki. Wasn't a box cutter.

We're speaking about a weapon like the Sarin gas used in the 1995 Japanese subway attack. Killed 13 people and sickened hundreds.

13 Sage. You couldn't kill me with a box cutter if I was asleep.

You've been doing well lately Did Al Qaida (Arabic for "Royal Saudi Special Ops") own the airplanes it used? And killing 13 is hardly mass destruction, so Sarin isn't a WMD.

[The Sage of Main Street]

In other words, I was correct. And more than likely, will remain dead on balls accurate. It depends on what the meaning of ISIS is.

[Ransom]

You were not correct. I was the one that said the Arabs had to do the heavy lifting.

Today is Sunday, Pete. Hearing confessions no doubt, 'Bless me Father for I have lied to Ransom.'

[Ransom]

Peter. Your 'ISIS has lost 40% of it's land' comes after western intervention whether you'd like to agree with it or not. It's just a fact. They had also begun to transform into an international threat long before their 'lands' began to shrink two examples being their bringing down a Russian airliner and their international recruitment tactics spoken to endlessly on these pages.

I simply reminded the forum you're statement while true, has context. ISIS began to lose land after.... not before western intervention. Just fact Pete, your nuance and game don't change reality. I am here, as per usual, dead on balls accurate. And of course, correcting error(you).

[donttread]

In other words, I was correct. And more than likely, will remain dead on balls accurate.

Well how much has ISIS shrunk since our 2003 invasionof Iraq?

[donttread]

Peter. Your 'ISIS has lost 40% of it's land' comes after western intervention whether you'd like to agree with it or not. It's just a fact. They had also begun to transform into an international threat long before their 'lands' began to shrink two examples being their bringing down a Russian airliner and their international recruitment tactics spoken to endlessly on these pages.

I simply reminded the forum you're statement while true, has context. ISIS began to lose land after.... not before western intervention. Just fact Pete, your nuance and game don't change reality. I am here, as per usual, dead on balls accurate. And of course, correcting error(you).

Iterventionism also lead to their growth and poer to begin with

[Ransom]

Well how much has ISIS shrunk since our 2003 invasionof Iraq?

Had been forced into the shadows actually, its' ancestors receiving a stinging defeat in Anbar and then nearly wiped from the map by the US surge. In fact, prior to US withdrawal violence in Iraq had ebbed, it was their economy that was expanding. Another query from donttread answered. Another void in his awareness filled, more of his colossal ignorance exposed. Carry on, D

[Ransom]

Iterventionism also lead to their growth and poer to begin with

Intervention against an evil killing 10,000 times more Muslims, was a terrorist that had few equals, a man who torched off several wars and facilitated international terrorism. Much like your lost at times friend Peter, you who is lost at all times need reference and context given to your arguments. You see, left all by themselves, they have neither.

[Mini Me]

Seizing our enemies' natural resources will make this war profitable and also end their ability to finance the jihad.

Possibly, But is it worth the tremendous cost in $$ , lives, and there is serious doubt we could actually accomplish this! And factor in, a negative world opinion. Islam is all over the globe!

[Mini Me]

It's not our duty to spend blood and treasure to make those disorganized cowards happy. It's their own fault that they are doormats. Small countries have no right to exist unless they become totally militarized.

Ya mean like Izrahell?

[Mini Me]

Solid points.

I agree with Sage. We should have seized all the oil assets of Iraq when we had the chance, and charged protection $ to Saudi Arabia, and blockaded the Gulf. It takes balls to have an effective foreign policy. Teddy Roosevelt had it right. Pop Bush choked during the first Gulf War!

[Mini Me]

That is a lot of straw men.

You really should look at this more carefully. Buying into Reagan mythology is not what the smart folks do!
In fact, you should know better, being a student of these things!

[Mini Me]

Also in the human mind the "road not traveled" is always perfect.

Wasn't John Wayne right? Aren't we God, and always win the wars with Jeebus marching at our side?

[Mini Me]

The Brits were the "world cops" prior to WWI.

Yes, and they made a bloody mess out of the ME and everywhere they went. And it led us into WW One, then WW Two! Colonialism is a massive failure!
We cannot police the world anymore!!!!

[Mini Me]

And they imperialized the planet. At any rate , at some point the nations of earth functioned without a world police. Especially a world police that was up to their eyeballs in self interest, warfare and imperialism in conflict with the very values they were supposed to police?

Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations failure! "Lets make the world safe for democracy" In other words, lets fight those dirty Ottoman Turks and Kaiser Wilhelms pointy helmet headed barbarians. Lets punish Germany forever, and cripple them with the Versaiiles Treaty! That will teach those bastids!

And then the Federal Reserve illegal cartel and World Bank took over promoting endless warfare! The money is just too good!

[Mini Me]

When?

"None are so blind as those who cannot see!"

[Mini Me]

You think that those jealous savages hate us for what we do, rather than for what we are? They need no excuse; it is in their nature to prey on us. Those beasts see appeasement as a sign of weakness and a signal to attack.

"They stab it with their steely knives, but they just can't kill the beast" Eagles

[Mini Me]

The ancient Romans kept fucking with the barbarians until this battle settled things for almost 600 years:

BATTLE OF VERCELLAE (Northern Italy, 101 BC)

And then Rome died thru the expansion of Empire they could not manage. And so we will also go the same fate if we continue our ways. All empires die off!

Romans: 50,000
Barbarians: 210,000

Roman dead: 1,000
Barbarian dead: 140,000

[Mini Me]

The Muslims had armies that were peers of Western armies when the Eastern Roman Empire fell to them. The Muslims do not have that today.

But it all starts with Paris and London. Its the "boiling frog in a pot analogy" They may not beat us militarilly, but may beat us with FEAR!

[Mini Me]

Neither of which can take and hold territory.

And neither can we!!!!

[Mini Me]

You have to really DUMB down the definition of war to swallow this false narrative. The casualties for the entire Iraq and Afghanistan were the equivalent of one day in WWI and WWII, one hour in the Civil War and one year in Vietnam.

We really are turning into a nation of low information pussies.

Had Obama not unilaterally pulled out of Iraq and disengaged in Afghanistan based on LIES, Isis wouldn't be controlling half the region.

y!
Had not Bush lied us into a protracted war in Berserkistan and Iraq, we would not have the problems we have toda

[Ethereal]

The ancient Romans kept $#@!ing with the barbarians until this battle settled things for almost 600 years:

BATTLE OF VERCELLAE (Northern Italy, 101 BC)

Romans: 50,000
Barbarians: 210,000

Roman dead: 1,000
Barbarian dead: 140,000

It settled nothing.

And those "barbarians" went on to conquer Rome and become the dominate culture for the next 1,600 years.

[Mini Me]

The Iraqis and Afghans don't want US occupation.

The Greeks don't want no freaks, and the freaks don't want no Geeks!

But they got em anyway! hehe

[Ethereal]

Under the Empire, Rome had a population of 1,000,000. During the Dark Ages, its population dwindled to 20,000. Our fate will be a caliphate; that is the price we will pay if we don't destroy all Islam by taking its oilfields away from them and nuking any residual resistance. No nation-building, no outsourcing, no appeasement. No mercy.

The "dark ages", otherwise known as "freedom from Roman tyranny".

What unimaginable horror.

[Ethereal]

Step out of your lecture room test lab in college and into reality and the 2 that thanked him.............geez................I wish the world were this simple.

We've been trying your belligerent militarism for over a decade and its a complete failure.

How much longer do you need before you will admit your imperialist strategy does not work?

[Ethereal]

I don't think the German culture was superior.

Then how did they conquer western Rome and become the leaders of virtually every dominant nation-state in the following 1,600 years?

France, Germany, England, America, and the Nordic countries are all part of the Germanic family.

The American revolution and the US Constitution were defined largely by Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) cultural norms


And they took a lot from the Romans that they conquered.

Much of it bad.


When I was in Edinburgh I was talking with a guy about history and he told me that people died from disease in massive numbers in the city well into the 1800s. Why? Because the Romans didn't make it that far north and teach them about urban sanitation.

Yes, cities had sanitation problems.

But decentralized cultures didn't primarily reside in cities, so it wasn't a big problem for them.

They lived off the land in the open air, like God intended.

[Ethereal]

One of the signs that a civilization is about to fall comes to light when it starts claiming that Roman Civilization was a failure from the get-go.

Rome started as a republic and morphed into an empire.

And the empire was characterized by a degradation in the rule of law, sound monetary practices, and military prudence.

So it's no wonder they imploded and were conquered by the Germans.

[Ethereal]

Terrorism is a strange word. Had ALQ been a country at war with America their actions on 9/11 would have deemed a legal act of war, or so I gather from those who defend the deliberate targeting of civilians. I choose to call 9/11 terrorism. But how many actions that are really more like guerillia warfare do we assisgn the terrorism tag to? Is an IUD targeted at military in a nation we are occupying by force really terrorism? Or is it more like fighting back the only way they can?
I guess the point is that much of what we lump in as terrorism will end the minute we leave the ME. Terrorist organizations and hard core fundamentalist clearly are stronger and control more of the region than they were prior to our "war on terror". Much like the "war on drugs" seemed to increase the availability of drugs, the war on terror has rocketed 14th century zealots to power and created at least one "terrorist group" powerful enough to take and occupy land like a standing army.

I used to think terrorism meant "intentional attacks on civilians and other non-combatants".

But now it just means "anything the US government does not like".

It's a worthless piece of jargon at this point, trotted out to frighten people into forfeiting their liberty and their morality.

[Ethereal]

Following western intervention. Let us be quite clear and accurate here....let us tell the truth........this loss of land began shortly after western intervention to include support for the Iraq government, tribal factions, militias involved in Fallujah for example.

Pete won't always tell the whole story, I will.

Iran, Hezbollah, the Kurds, Syrian nationalists, and Russians are doing all the heavy lifting in the fight against ISIS.

Western governments, meanwhile, are funneling arms to Salafi rebels who then turn the arms over to ISIS and AQ.

So if ISIS is receding, it's largely in spite of western intervention.

[Peter1469]

The Germanic tribes didn't conquer Rome so much as just walk in after it collapsed.
Then how did they conquer western Rome and become the leaders of virtually every dominant nation-state in the following 1,600 years?

France, Germany, England, America, and the Nordic countries are all part of the Germanic family.

The American revolution and the US Constitution were defined largely by Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) cultural norms



Much of it bad.



Yes, cities had sanitation problems.

But decentralized cultures didn't primarily reside in cities, so it wasn't a big problem for them.

They lived off the land in the open air, like God intended.

[donttread]

I agree that the Neocon agenda does not work. Isolationism would be worse for the world. Perhaps better for the US.

You don't KNOW that isolationism would be worse for the world. It's simply theory. The data, being the ravaged remains and chaos in the places we have intervened with, would contradict your theory though.

[donttread]

I used to think terrorism meant "intentional attacks on civilians and other non-combatants".

But now it just means "anything the US government does not like".

It's a worthless piece of jargon at this point, trotted out to frighten people into forfeiting their liberty and their morality.

Exactly we can take the same exact action that ISIS does in a particular situation and their action was "terrorism" while ours was "a necessary act of war".
All of which draws attention away from the true vile acts of terrorism and their victims.
However, it's easier to ask for more money to combat terrorism than it is to ask for more money to "shoot the people we've been shooting at because the bastards have the nerve to shoot back"

[donttread]

If you bothered to read up on the topic, many scholars believe that wars and chaos would have been much worse had the US not been a stabilizing force. (or another nation doing the same role)

Yeah,but many don't. Besides didn't "many scolars" support all of our failures in the region? It's hard to find good scholars anymore because they are politicized too.

[Peter1469]

You don't KNOW that isolationism would be worse for the world. It's simply theory. The data, being the ravaged remains and chaos in the places we have intervened with, would contradict your theory though.

Realism works when it is tried.

Isolationists get treated like American Indians.

[donttread]

Realism works when it is tried.

Isolationists get treated like American Indians.

American Indians didn't have our weaponry. Apples to organges a gun powder culture vs. a stone age culture.
What do you mean by "realism"? I mean we discuss this a lot but the real world evidence since WW 2 and especially in the ME seems to suggest that our interventions in general make things worse not better.
Are we to simply chased failed foreign policy forever as the social cons would have us pursue failed drug policy with more of the same?

[Ransom]

American Indians didn't have our weaponry. Apples to organges a gun powder culture vs. a stone age culture.
What do you mean by "realism"? I mean we discuss this a lot but the real world evidence since WW 2 and especially in the ME seems to suggest that our interventions in general make things worse not better.
Are we to simply chased failed foreign policy forever as the social cons would have us pursue failed drug policy with more of the same?

You understand their isolationism is why they were in that stone age culture.....yes donttread?

[donttread]

You understand their isolationism is why they were in that stone age culture.....yes donttread?

Actually many tribal cultures kept to themselves until well into the last couple of centuries. You would think someone who brags so much about historical knowledge would have known that.
Anyway, what I support isn't total isolationism in that our citizens would travel to other countries and their's travel here. There would be trade and sharing of ideas. Just not the glaring ironic stupidity of a culture fighting war over oil shipping daily staples hundreds even thousands of miles using a polluting non renewable resourse .
So we would not be technologically cut off. We would not be culturally cut off. We just wouldn't fuck with other countries or factions unless they fucked with us and we would produce and process our own daily staples as close to home as possible as any sane culture should do in such a hostile world.

[Ransom]

Actually many tribal cultures kept to themselves until well into the last couple of centuries. You would think someone who brags so much about historical knowledge would have known that.

What isn't understood here, donttread, is that keeping to themselves was their undoing. You aren't aware of that and thus....promote the same isolationism and why many here take such humor from your ignorance on these topics. I know I do.


Anyway, what I support isn't total isolationism in that our citizens would travel to other countries and their's travel here. There would be trade and sharing of ideas. Just not the glaring ironic stupidity of a culture fighting war over oil shipping daily staples hundreds even thousands of miles using a polluting non renewable resourse .

So this travel....and trade....and exchanges of ideas....would all occur void of trouble if we'd just stay to our own business, trade and exchange with countries who like us?


So we would not be technologically cut off. We would not be culturally cut off. We just wouldn't $#@! with other countries or factions unless they $#@!ed with us and we would produce and process our own daily staples as close to home as possible as any sane culture should do in such a hostile world.

You wouldn't be technology starved...but you certainly wouldn't be the world's superpower. Given your tactics here, there would be today no United States of America. And you'll notice today.......other countries' citizens are traveling out of their country and into say Europe....and the US.....with no intention of trade or assimilation.......but with every intent to kill and destroy. All our fault of course.