quote:

USA lived in ISOLATIONISM FOR ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE UP UNTIL WW1. And you are saying they were like North Korea during that time?

I said, "in an age of globalization". Obviously globalization wasn't around that time unless you include the most broad definition of the term imaginable. And if you do, you also have to acknowledge the fact that U.S. wasn't practicing isolationism per se even since it's inception.

To further demonstrate my point, here is a list of major extraterritorial and domestic deployments (you can disregard the domestic deployments since they are irrelevant to the discussion):


From Wikipedia:

quote:

1800-1809 1801-05 -- Tripoli. The First Barbary War included the USS George Washington and USS Philadelphia affairs and the Eaton expedition, during which a few marines landed with United States Agent William Eaton to raise a force against Tripoli in an effort to free the crew of the Philadelphia from the Barbary pirates. Tripoli declared war but not the United States, although Congress authorized US military action by statute. 1806 -- Mexico (Spanish territory). Captain Zebulon M. Pike, with a platoon of troops, invaded Spanish territory at the headwaters of the Rio Grande on orders from General James Wilkinson. He was made prisoner without resistance at a fort he constructed in present day Colorado, taken to Mexico, and later released after seizure of his papers. 1806-10 -- Gulf of Mexico. American gunboats operated from New Orleans against Spanish and French privateers off the Mississippi Delta, chiefly under Captain John Shaw and Master Commandant David Porter. [edit] 1810-1819 1810 -- West Florida (Spanish territory). Governor William C.C. Claiborne of Louisiana, on orders of the President, occupied with troops territory in dispute east of the Mississippi as far as the Pearl River, later the eastern boundary of Louisiana. He was authorized to seize as far east as the Perdido River. 1812 – Amelia Island and other parts of east Florida, then under Spain. Temporary possession was authorized by President James Madison and by Congress, to prevent occupation by any other power; but possession was obtained by General George Mathews in so irregular a manner that his measures were disavowed by the President. 1812-15 – War of 1812. On June 18, 1812, the United States declared war against the United Kingdom. Among the issues leading to the war were British interception of neutral ships and blockades of the United States during British hostilities with France. 1813 -- West Florida (Spanish territory). On authority given by Congress, General Wilkinson seized Mobile Bay in April with 600 soldiers. A small Spanish garrison gave way. Thus U.S. troops advanced into disputed territory to the Perdido River, as projected in 1810. No fighting. 1813-14 – Marquesas Islands. (French Polynesia) US forces built a fort on the island of Nukahiva to protect three prize ships which had been captured from the British. 1814 -- Spanish Florida. General Andrew Jackson took Pensacola and drove out the British forces. 1814-25 -- Caribbean. Engagements between pirates and American ships or squadrons took place repeatedly especially ashore and offshore about Cuba, Puerto Rico, Santo Domingo, and Yucatan. Three thousand pirate attacks on merchantmen were reported between 1815 and 1823. In 1822, Commodore James Biddle employed a squadron of two frigates, four sloops of war, two brigs, four schooners, and two gunboats in the West Indies. 1815 -- Algiers. The second Barbary War was declared against the United States by the Dey of Algiers of the Barbary states, an act not reciprocated by the United States. Congress did authorize a military expedition by statutes. A large fleet under Captain Stephen Decatur attacked Algiers and obtained indemnities. 1815 -- Tripoli. After securing an agreement from Algiers, Captain Decatur demonstrated with his squadron at Tunis and Tripoli, where he secured indemnities for offenses during the War of 1812. 1816 -- Spanish Florida. United States forces destroyed Negro Fort, which harbored fugitive slaves making raids across the Georgia border. 1816-18 -- Spanish Florida - First Seminole War. The Seminole Indians, whose area was a haven for escaped slaves and border ruffians, were attacked by troops under General Jackson and General Edmond P. Gaines and pursued into northern Florida. Spanish posts were attacked and occupied, British citizens executed. In 1819 the Floridas were ceded to the United States. 1817 – Amelia Island(Spanish territory off Florida). Under orders of President James Monroe, United States forces landed and expelled a group of smugglers, adventurers, and freebooters. 1818 -- Oregon. The USS Ontario dispatched from Washington, which made a landing at the mouth of the Columbia River to assert US claims. Spain and Russia had conceded sovereignty to the area but the British Empire had a parallel claim. Subsequent to this confrontation the two powers agreed to a joint occupancy of the region, which was finally resolved with the Oregon Treaty of 1846. [edit] 1820-1829 1820-23 -- Africa. Naval units raided the slave traffic pursuant to the 1819 act of Congress. [1] 1822 -- Cuba. United States naval forces suppressing piracy landed on the northwest coast of Cuba and burned a pirate station. 1823 -- Cuba. Brief landings in pursuit of pirates occurred April 8 near Escondido; April 16 near Cayo Blanco; July 11 at Siquapa Bay; July 21 at Cape Cruz; and October 23 at Camrioca. 1824 -- Cuba. In October the USS Porpoise landed bluejackets near Matanzas in pursuit of pirates. This was during the cruise authorized in 1822. 1824 -- Puerto Rico (Spanish territory). Commodore David Porter with a landing party attacked the town of Fajardo which had sheltered pirates and insulted American naval officers. He landed with 200 men in November and forced an apology. Commodore Porter was later court-martialed for overstepping his powers. 1825 -- Cuba. In March cooperating American and British forces landed at Sagua La Grande to capture pirates. 1827 -- Greece. In October and November landing parties hunted pirates on the Mediterranean islands of Argenteire, Miconi, and Androse. [edit] 1830-1839 1831-32 – Falkland Islands. Captain Duncan of the USS Lexington investigated the capture of three American sealing vessels and sought to protect American interests. 1832 – Sumatra. (Indonesia) - February 6 to 9. A naval force landed and stormed a fort to punish natives of the town of Quallah Battoo for plundering the American ship Friendship. 1833 -- Argentina. - October 31 to November 15. A force was sent ashore at Buenos Aires to protect the interests of the United States and other countries during an insurrection. 1835-36 -- Peru. - December 10, 1835, to January 24, 1836, and August 31 to December 7, 1836. Marines protected American interests in Callao and Lima during an attempted revolution. 1836 -- Mexico. General Gaines occupied Nacogdoches (Texas), disputed territory, from July to December during the Texan war for independence, under orders to cross the "imaginary boundary line" if an Indian outbreak threatened. 1838 - The Caroline Affair on Navy Island, Canada. After the failure of the Upper Canada Rebellion of 1837 favoring Canadian democracy and independence from the British Empire; William Lyon Mackenzie and his rebels fled to Navy Island where they declared the Republic of Canada. American sympathizers sent supplies on the S.S. Caroline, which was intercepted by the British and set ablaze, creating an incident. 1838-39 – Sumatra (Indonesia). - December 24, 1838, to January 4, 1839. A naval force landed to punish natives of the towns of Quallah Battoo and Muckie (Mukki) for depredations on American shipping. [edit] 1840-1849 1840 -- Fiji Islands. - July. Naval forces landed to punish natives for attacking American exploring and surveying parties. 1841 -- Drummond Island, Kingsmill Group (Pacific Ocean). A naval party landed to avenge the murder of a seaman by the natives. 1841 – Samoa. - February 24. A naval party landed and burned towns after the murder of an American seaman on Upolu Island. 1842 -- Mexico. Commodore T.A.C. Jones, in command of a squadron long cruising off California, occupied Monterey, Calif., on October 19, believing war had come. He discovered peace, withdrew, and saluted. A similar incident occurred a week later at San Diego. 1843 -- China. Sailors and marines from the St. Louis were landed after a clash between Americans and Chinese at the trading post in Canton. 1843 -- Africa. - November 29 to December 16. Four United States vessels demonstrated and landed various parties (one of 200 marines and sailors) to discourage piracy and the slave trade along the Ivory Coast, and to punish attacks by the natives on American seamen and shipping. 1844 -- Mexico. President Tyler deployed US forces to protect Texas against Mexico, pending Senate approval of a treaty of annexation. (Later rejected.) He defended his action against a Senate resolution of inquiry. 1846 -- Bear Flag Revolt. 1846-48 -- Mexican-American War After the annexation of Texas in 1845, the United States and Mexico failed to resolve a boundary dispute and President Polk said that it was necessary to deploy forces in Mexico to meet a threatened invasion. On May 13,1846, declared war with Mexico. 1849 – Smyrna (Izmir, Turkey). In July a naval force gained release of an American seized by Austrian officials. [edit] 1850-1859 1851 -- Turkey. After a massacre of foreigners (including Americans) at Jaffa in January, a demonstration by the Mediterranean Squadron was ordered along the Turkish (Levant) coast. 1851 -- Johanns Island (east of Africa). - August. Forces from the US sloop of war Dale exacted redress for the unlawful imprisonment of the captain of an American whaling brig. 1852-53 -- Argentina. - February 3 to 12, 1852; September 17, 1852 to April 1853. Marines were landed and maintained in Buenos Aires to protect American interests during a revolution. 1853 -- Nicaragua. - March 11 to 13. US forces landed to protect American lives and interests during political disturbances. 1853-54 -- Japan. Commodore Matthew Perry and his expedition made a display of force leading to the "opening of Japan." 1853-54 -- Ryūkyū and Bonin Islands (Japan). Commodore Matthew Perry on three visits before going to Japan and while waiting for a reply from Japan made a naval demonstration, landing marines twice, and secured a coaling concession from the ruler of Naha on Okinawa; he also demonstrated in the Bonin Islands with the purpose of securing facilities for commerce. 1854 -- China. - April 4 to June 15 to 17. American and English ships landed forces to protect American interests in and near Shanghai during Chinese civil strife. 1854-58 -- Nicaragua Naval Battles 1854 -- Nicaragua. - July 9 to 15. Naval forces bombarded and burned San Juan del Norte (Greytown) to avenge an insult to the American Minister to Nicaragua. 1855 -- China. - May 19 to 21. US forces protected American interests in Shanghai and, from August 3 to 5 fought pirates near Hong Kong. 1855 -- Fiji Islands. - September 12 to November 4. An American naval force landed to seek reparations for attacks on American residents and seamen. 1855 -- Uruguay. - November 25 to 29. United States and European naval forces landed to protect American interests during an attempted revolution in Montevideo. 1856 -- Panama, Republic of New Grenada. - September 19 to 22. US forces landed to protect American interests during an insurrection. 1856 -- China. - October 22 to December 6. US forces landed to protect American interests at Canton during hostilities between the British and the Chinese, and to avenge an assault upon an unarmed boat displaying the United States flag. 1857-58 -- Utah War. 1857 -- Nicaragua. - April to May, November to December. In May Commander Charles H. Davis of the United States Navy, with some marines, received the surrender of William Walker, self proclaimed president of Nicaragua, who was losing control of the country to forces financed by his former business partner, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and protected his men from the retaliation of native allies who had been fighting Walker. In November and December of the same year United States vessels USS Saratoga, USS Wabash, and Fulton opposed another attempt of William Walker on Nicaragua. Commodore Hiram Paulding's act of landing marines and compelling the removal of Walker to the United States, was tacitly disavowed by Secretary of State Lewis Cass, and Paulding was forced into retirement. 1858 -- Uruguay. - January 2 to 27. Forces from two United States warships landed to protect American property during a revolution in Montevideo. 1858 -- Fiji Islands. - October 6 to 16. A marine expedition with the USS Vandalia enacted revenge on natives for the murder of two American citizens at Waya. [2] [3] 1858-59 -- Turkey. The Secretary of State requested a display of naval force along the Levant after a massacre of Americans at Jaffa and mistreatment elsewhere "to remind the authorities (of Turkey) of the power of the United States." 1859 -- Paraguay. Congress authorized a naval squadron to seek redress for an attack on a naval vessel in the Parana River during 1855. Apologies were made after a large display of force. 1859 -- Mexico. Two hundred United States soldiers crossed the Rio Grande in pursuit of the Mexican bandit Juan Cortina.[4] 1859 -- China. - July 31 to August 2. A naval force landed to protect American interests in Shanghai. [edit] 1860-1869 1860 -- Angola, Portuguese West Africa. - March 1. American residents at Kissembo called upon American and British ships to protect lives and property during problems with natives. 1860 -- Colombia, Bay of Panama. - September 27 to October 8. Naval forces landed to protect American interests during a revolution. 1861-65 -- American Civil War 1863 -- Japan. - July 16. The USS Wyoming retaliated against a firing on the American vessel Pembroke at Shimonoseki. 1864 -- Japan.- July 14 to August 3. Naval forces protected the United States Minister to Japan when he visited Yedo to negotiate concerning some American claims against Japan, and to make his negotiations easier by impressing the Japanese with American power. 1864 -- Japan. - September 4 to 14. Naval forces of the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands compelled Japan and the Prince of Nagato in particular to permit the Straits of Shimonoseki to be used by foreign shipping in accordance with treaties already signed. 1865-77 -- Post Civil War Reconstruction 1865 -- Panama. - March 9 and 10. US forces protected the lives and property of American residents during a revolution. 1866 -- Mexico. To protect American residents, General Sedgwick and 100 men in November obtained surrender of Matamoros, on the border State of Tamaulipas. After three days he was ordered by US Government to withdraw. His act was repudiated by the President. 1866 -- China. From June 20 to July 7, US forces punished an assault on the American consul at Newchwang. 1867 -- Nicaragua. Marines occupied Managua and Leon. 1867 -- Formosa (island of Taiwan) - June 13. A naval force landed and burned a number of huts to punish the murder of the crew of a wrecked American vessel. 1868 -- Japan (Osaka, Hiolo, Nagasaki, Yokohama, and Negata). - February 4 to 8, April 4 to May 12, June 12 and 13. US forces were landed to protect American interests during the civil war in Japan. 1868 -- Uruguay. - February 7 and 8, 19 to 26. US forces protected foreign residents and the customhouse during an insurrection at Montevideo. 1868 -- Colombia. - April. US forces protected passengers and treasure in transit at Aspinwall during the absence of local police or troops on the occasion of the death of the President of Colombia. [edit] 1870-1879 1870 -- Mexico. - June 17 and 18. US forces destroyed the pirate ship Forward, which had been run aground about 40 miles up the Rio Tecapan. 1870 -- Hawaiian Islands. - September 21. US forces placed the American flag at half mast upon the death of Queen Kalama, when the American consul at Honolulu would not assume responsibility for so doing. 1871 -- Korea. Shinmiyangyo Battle in Korea - June 10 to 12. A US naval force attacked and captured five forts to punish natives for depredations on Americans, particularly for murdering the crew of the General Sherman and burning the schooner, and for later firing on other American small boats taking soundings up the Salee River. 1873 -- Colombia (Bay of Panama). - May 7 to 22, September 23 to October 9. U.S. forces protected American interests during hostilities between local groups over control of the government of the State of Panama. 1873-96 -- Mexico. United States troops crossed the Mexican border repeatedly in pursuit of cattle and other thieves and other brigands. There were some reciprocal pursuits by Mexican troops into border territory. Mexico protested frequently. Notable cases were at Remolina in May 1873 and at Las Cuevas in 1875. Washington orders often supported these excursions. Agreements between Mexico and the United States, the first in 1882, finally legitimized such raids. They continued intermittently, with minor disputes, until 1896. 1874 -- Hawaiian Islands. - February 12 to 20. Detachments from American vessels were landed to preserve order and protect American lives and interests during the coronation of a new king. 1876 -- Mexico. - May 18. An American force was landed to police the town of Matamoros, Tamaulipas State, temporarily while it was without other government. [edit] 1880-1889 1882 -- Egypt. - July 14 to 18. American forces landed to protect American interests during warfare between British and Egyptians and looting of the city of Alexandria by Arabs. 1885 -- Panama (Colon). - January 18 and 19. US forces were used to guard the valuables in transit over the Panama Railroad, and the safes and vaults of the company during revolutionary activity. In March, April, and May in the cities of Colon and Panama, the forces helped reestablish freedom of transit during revolutionary activity. 1888 -- Korea. - June. A naval force was sent ashore to protect American residents in Seoul during unsettled political conditions, when an outbreak of the populace was expected. 1888 -- Haiti. - December 20. A display of force persuaded the Haitian Government to give up an American steamer which had been seized on the charge of breach of blockade. 1888-89 -- Samoa. - November 14, 1888, to March 20, 1889. US forces were landed to protect American citizens and the consulate during a native civil war. 1889 -- Hawaiian Islands. - July 30 and 31. US forces protected American interests at Honolulu during a revolution. [edit] 1890-1899 1890 -- Argentina. A naval party landed to protect US consulate and legation in Buenos Aires. 1891 -- Haiti. US forces sought to protect American lives and property on Navassa Island. 1891 -- Bering Strait. - July 2 to October 5. Naval forces sought to stop seal poaching. 1891 -- Chile. - August 28 to 30. US forces protected the American consulate and the women and children who had taken refuge in it during a revolution in Valparaiso. 1893 -- Hawaii. - January 16 to April 1. Marines were landed ostensibly to protect American lives and property, but many believed actually to promote a provisional government under Sanford B. Dole. This action was disavowed by the United States. 1894 -- Brazil. - January. A display of naval force sought to protect American commerce and shipping at Rio de Janeiro during a Brazilian civil war. 1894 -- Nicaragua. - July 6 to August 7. US forces sought to protect American interests at Bluefields following a revolution. 1894-95 -- China. Marines were stationed at Tientsin and penetrated to Peking for protection purposes during the First Sino-Japanese War. 1894-95 -- China. A naval vessel was beached and used as a fort at Newchwang for protection of American nationals. 1894-96 -- Korea. - July 24, 1894 to April 3, 1896. A guard of marines was sent to protect the American legation and American lives and interests at Seoul during and following the Sino-Japanese War. 1895 -- Colombia. - March 8 to 9. US forces protected American interests during an attack on the town of Bocas del Toro by a bandit chieftain. 1895-96 -- Venezuela. - Settlement of boundary dispute. 1896 -- Nicaragua. - May 2 to 4. US forces protected American interests in Corinto during political unrest. 1898 -- Nicaragua. - February 7 and 8. US forces protected American lives and property at San Juan del Sur. 1898 -- Spanish-American War On April 25, 1898, the United States declared war with Spain. The war followed a Cuban insurrection, the Cuban War of Independence against Spanish rule and the sinking of the USS Maine in the harbor at Havana. 1898-99 -- Samoa. Second Samoan Civil War February-May 15, 1899. American and British naval forces landed to protect national interests and to take part in a bloody contention over the succession to the throne. 1898-99 -- China. - November 5, 1898 to March 15, 1899. US forces provided a guard for the legation at Peking and the consulate at Tientsin during contest between the Dowager Empress and her son. 1899 -- Nicaragua. American and British naval forces were landed to protect national interests at San Juan del Norte, February 22 to March 5, and at Bluefields a few weeks later in connection with the insurrection of Gen. Juan P. Reyes. 1899-1913 -- Philippine Islands. Philippine-American War US forces protected American interests following the war with Spain and conquered the islands by defeating the Filipinos in their war for independence during the Philippine-American War. [edit] 1900-1909 1900 -- China. - May 24 to September 28. Boxer Rebellion American troops participated in operations to protect foreign lives during the Boxer rising, particularly at Peking. For many years after this experience a permanent legation guard was maintained in Peking, and was strengthened at times as trouble threatened. 1901 -- Colombia (State of Panama). - November 20 to December 4. Panamanian Revolution US forces protected American property on the Isthmus and kept transit lines open during serious revolutionary disturbances. 1902 -- Colombia. - April 16 to 23. US forces protected American lives and property at Bocas del Toro during a civil war. 1902 -- Colombia (State of Panama). - September 17 to November 18. The United States placed armed guards on all trains crossing the Isthmus to keep the railroad line open, and stationed ships on both sides of Panama to prevent the landing of Colombian troops. 1903 -- Honduras. - March 23 to 30 or 31. US forces protected the American consulate and the steamship wharf at Puerto Cortez during a period of revolutionary activity. 1903 -- Dominican Republic. - March 30 to April 21. A detachment of marines was landed to protect American interests in the city of Santo Domingo during a revolutionary outbreak. 1903 -- Syria. - September 7 to 12. US forces protected the American consulate in Beirut when a local Moslem uprising was feared. 1903-04 -- Abyssinia (Ethiopia). Twenty-five marines were sent to Abyssinia to protect the US Consul General while he negotiated a treaty. 1903-14 -- Panama. US forces sought to protect American interests and lives during and following the revolution for independence from Colombia over construction of the Isthmian Canal. With brief intermissions, United States Marines were stationed on the Isthmus from November 4, 1903, to January 21, 1914 to guard American interests. 1904 -- Dominican Republic. - January 2 to February 11. American and British naval forces established an area in which no fighting would be allowed and protected American interests in Puerto Plata and Sosua and Santo Domingo City during revolutionary fighting. 1904 -- Tangier, Morocco. "We want either Perdicaris alive or Raisula dead." A squadron demonstrated to force release of a kidnapped American. Marines were landed to protect the consul general. 1904 -- Panama. - November 17 to 24. US forces protected American lives and property at Ancon at the time of a threatened insurrection. 1904-05 -- Korea. - January 5, 1904, to November 11, 1905. A guard of Marines was sent to protect the American legation in Seoul during the Russo-Japanese War. 1906-09 -- Cuba. - September 1906 to January 23, 1909. US forces sought to protect interests and re-establish a government after revolutionary activity. 1907 -- Honduras. - March 18 to June 8. To protect American interests during a war between Honduras and Nicaragua, troops were stationed in Trujillo, Ceiba, Puerto Cortez, San Pedro, Laguna and Choloma. 1909-33 -- Nicaragua. - May 19 to September 4, 1910. Occupation of Nicaragua US forces protected American interests at Bluefields. [edit] 1910-1919 1911 -- Honduras. - January 26. American naval detachments were landed to protect American lives and interests during a civil war in Honduras. 1911 -- China. As the nationalist revolution approached, in October an ensign and 10 men tried to enter Wuchang to rescue missionaries but retired on being warned away, and a small landing force guarded American private property and consulate at Hankow. Marines were deployed in November to guard the cable stations at Shanghai; landing forces were sent for protection in Nanking, Chinkiang, Taku and elsewhere. 1912 -- Honduras. A small force landed to prevent seizure by the government of an American-owned railroad at Puerto Cortes. The forces were withdrawn after the United States disapproved the action. 1912 -- Panama. Troops, on request of both political parties, supervised elections outside the Canal Zone. 1912 -- Cuba. - June 5 to August 5. US forces protected American interests on the Province of Oriente, and in Havana. 1912 -- China. - August 24 to 26, on Kentucky Island, and August 26 to 30 at Camp Nicholson. US forces protected Americans and American interests during revolutionary activity. 1912 -- Turkey. - November 18 to December 3. US forces guarded the American legation at Constantinople during a Balkan War. 1912-25 -- Nicaragua. - August to November 1912. US forces protected American interests during an attempted revolution. A small force, serving as a legation guard and seeking to promote peace and stability, remained until August 5, 1925. 1912-41 -- China. The disorders which began with the overthrow of the dynasty during Kuomintang rebellion in 1912, which were redirected by the invasion of China by Japan, led to demonstrations and landing parties for the protection of US interests in China continuously and at many points from 1912 on to 1941. The guard at Peking and along the route to the sea was maintained until 1941. In 1927, the United States had 5,670 troops ashore in China and 44 naval vessels in its waters. In 1933 the United States had 3,027 armed men ashore. The protective action was generally based on treaties with China concluded from 1858 to 1901. 1913 -- Mexico. - September 5 to 7. A few marines landed at Ciaris Estero to aid in evacuating American citizens and others from the Yaqui Valley, made dangerous for foreigners by civil strife. 1914 -- Haiti.- January 29 to February 9, February 20 to 21, October 19. Intermittently US naval forces protected American nationals in a time of rioting and revolution. 1914 -- Dominican Republic. - June and July. During a revolutionary movement, United States naval forces by gunfire stopped the bombardment of Puerto Plata, and by threat of force maintained Santo Domingo City as a neutral zone. 1914-17 -- Mexico. Tampico Affair & Occupation of Veracruz, Mexico Undeclared Mexican--American hostilities followed the Dolphin affair and Villa's raids (See Pancho Villa Expedition) and included capture of Vera Cruz and later Pershing's expedition into northern Mexico. 1915-34 -- Haiti. - July 28, 1915, to August 15, 1934. United States occupation of Haiti 1915-1934 US forces maintained order during a period of chronic political instability. 1916 -- China. American forces landed to quell a riot taking place on American property in Nanking. 1916-24 -- Dominican Republic. - May 1916 to September 1924. Occupation of the Dominican Republic American naval forces maintained order during a period of chronic and threatened insurrection. 1917 -- China. American troops were landed at Chungking to protect American lives during a political crisis.

As we can see, US has not been isolationist at all.

quote:

America was loved, adored, looked up to all that time. AMERICA FRIGGIN' WAS THE PEACE DEAL BROKER BETWEEN RUSSIA AND JAPAN IN RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR OF 1905!!! Man, you are gold.

Loved and adored? Oooookaaaay.

quote:

I am not saying Russia should isolate itself. There's a difference between sending your aircraft carriers, battleships and troops abroad to suppose instead sending oil/gas, knowledge, economy and political influence. You think people like it when you bomb the fock out of you? Aircraft carriers carry weapons, bombs, missiles for a reason, and its not to keep them forever sealed to their barrels,

Yes, you are referring to the phenomenon of "soft power". And "soft power" nowadays is a much more pervasive and effective way of projecting influence. However, soft power needs to be backed up by hard power. No one is saying that the weapons should be used, but the threat of hard power is significant leverage that no nuclear weapon could provide. Furthermore, soft power takes decades to develop and it is a phenomenon unique to every state/culture.

quote:

Well, Russia I think is learning its lesson. Russia's political think-tanks are not dumb, they have more experience and knowledge than you to decide what works for their own country. They dont want to waste money on dumb aggression that Americans are stuck in Iraq right now. They're smarter than you. They want to be neutral for you until its the right time for them to expand militarily at a better time. Right now there are too many countries trying to be cocky on the world stage. Russia is playing smart and concentrating on rebuilding itself, its pride, its image, its people. Bingo!

Sounds like you're trying to convince yourself rather than me.

As far as "dumb aggression" goes, that is an aberration of think tanks and individuals. Conventional military is simply a tool, it is up to individuals and states to utilize it properly. Sometimes they employ that tool prudently and judiciously and sometimes they don't. That is like saying that making knives or guns is a bad idea because people get stabbed and shot.

A good example is China, a country that has been aggressively building up its military forces. Even now they are feared, even though they do not even deploy outside of their own borders and have no force projection tools (i.e. blue water navy, inter-continental aircraft) - nonetheless they are feared and respected.

At this point, you're just grabbing on to straws.

quote:

Originally posted by Aquadyne As we can see, US has not been isolationist at all.

Point taken. Actually, after I posted it and immediately left for work, I realized that I definitely made a mistake in my statement, but I never thought it went back that long ago, I remembered the Japanese thing in 1860s. I stand corrected. Though I doubt that being isolated is a bad thing for a country. Sticking your nose in politics where you shouldn't be on the world scene is only a recipe for a problem especially if you lose your grasp on power.

quote:

Loved and adored? Oooookaaaay.

quote:

Yes, you are referring to the phenomenon of "soft power". And "soft power" nowadays is a much more pervasive and effective way of projecting influence. However, soft power needs to be backed up by hard power. No one is saying that the weapons should be used, but the threat of hard power is significant leverage that no nuclear weapon could provide. Furthermore, soft power takes decades to develop and it is a phenomenon unique to every state/culture.

Yes, lets use the soft power of hundreds of aircraft, missiles and other machines to "softly put to sleep" anyone who is willing to resist our advances. Soft power reminds me of some other silly words like replacing suicide bombings with "homicide bombings". I cant imagine how softly can these powerful tools of war can be used. LOL @ "phenomenon unique to every state/culture". You are just blabbering here, you know that aircraft carriers are military weapons designed to kill people, whether you are right on wrong in the situation at hand. And if Russia goes abroad to push its policy as you wish it to do, it will lose support with either Americans, Arabs or both. There is nothing for Russia to gain, other to lose money. Russia will need thousands of troops, lots of money, strategic planning, and many years to achieve even a foothold in Middle East like that of America, and at cost of many lives. You are dreaming, Aquadyne!

quote:

A good example is China, a country that has been aggressively building up its military forces. Even now they are feared, even though they do not even deploy outside of their own borders and have no force projection tools (i.e. blue water navy, inter-continental aircraft) - nonetheless they are feared and respected. At this point, you're just grabbing on to straws.

China is feared because its the world's largest economy and its army is the largest in the world and has the capability to inflict serious damage on anyone. China has a lot of money and influence in the region because of its sheer size.

Basically, you dont have anything strong to add to support your policy that Russia should start pushing its foreign policy by aicraft carriers. The costs, the achievements, the losses will overshadow any gains because a) Russia has all the resources it needs, b) it is too weak right now to counter America or Arab states, c) it has vast internal issues that need to be tackled, d) its foreign policy within C.I.S. has failed, and its not working with USA, Iran, EU - and you expect then that Russia will succeed ALONE with its aircraft carriers trying to push someone around.

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium You are basing your entire argument around that straight 15,000 km line from Iran to USA through Eastern Europe, which I give you a credit for.

No I didn't base my entire argument around a straight 15,000km line from Iran to the USA. You solely based your criticism on the erroneous assumption that ABM bases in Poland cannot possibly be in response to an Iranian missile launch against western Europe or the US due to geographical location ... a specific contention that I responded to.

quote:

Then, since you fit North Korea in here, you remember their missile tests AND HOW FAR THEY WENT??? Haha, those missiles barely outreached Japan. So much for the claim that they can hit the States.

Well now this is just specious reasoning here. North Korea has built a 3 stage missile that theoretically has the range to strike the US. The fact that they are having hangups on implementation does not mean that they do not have the capability or imminent capability of striking the US. You think they're all sitting around twiddling their thumbs after the first missile launch? The European Ariane 5 rocket failed on its first launch ... does this mean that Europe does not have nor will it imminently have the capability of launching satellites in space with the Ariane 5 rocket? C'mon let's use some common sense here. The Taepodong 2 rocket test fired in July was configured to deliver a satellite into orbit rather than a flight test for a ballistic missile as it was designed for. Furthermore, to respond to the distance argument of Iran, Iran would definitly have the range to strike western europe if it gained missile technology from N. Korea:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21008&d=1169458435

quote:

Then, Iran is DOESNT HAVE and not planning to build nukes (despite media reports, and despite talk there's no evidence they've started on developing nuclear weapons),

Yes they do not have nukes but they're blatantly trying to develop them. You don't need enriched fuel for peaceful nuclear energy, so why build the high speed centrifuges to develop highly enriched uranium? Why make the uranium hexaflouride used for enrichment purposes if they're not trying to enrich uranium? Look even Russia and China cast their vote in the Security Council to ORDER Iran to suspend nuclear activities in resolution 1737. So are you saying Russia is retarded for casting their vote in such a resolution with no basis to support it?

http://www.economist.com/world/afri...y_id=E1_RGGJTGD

quote:

and long-flight missile technoology with all the accurate navigation, satellite system, etc. etc. And they have to test it before anything!!! What if the missile does veer off course and hit Russia because of low fuel, mechanical problem, etc? What kind of an idiot would spend huge amounts of money for preparing against a possible enemy that might never become so powerful?When oil prices will go down, Iran will weaken.

Since when do you need accurate navigation when it comes to nuclear weapons? Since when do you need satellite systems? You do know that there weren't any satellites around when the Germans launched V-2 rockets during WW2 right? They seemed to hit London well enough without them. Come on, it's just physics and mechanical engineering.

quote:

But wait - why is NATO EXPANDING IN EASTERN EUROPE? IS IT TO PROTECT AGAINST IRAN? WHY IS USA MISSILE MISSILE DEFENSE EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS IN ALASKA? TO SHOOT DOWN NORRTH KOREAN NON-EXISTING FAILED MISSILES (that will fly on a trajectory much more to the south)?

NATO is a separate discussion altogether, I don't know why you're bringing it into this argument ... particularly since you brought it up on a point of conjecture rather than to support a thesis. As for Alaska ... sigh, do I have to do all the investigative work? Why don't you do a little bit of research and respond to your own questions?



Hmmm Alaska seems pretty well position for an attack on a major american city from N. Korea. But here's a far more simpler reason to base an ABM system in Alaska ... Alaska itself is a likely target to be attacked. Particularly since it has numerous military bases.

quote:

You did make a good point that Poland is somewhere in line through to USA on a long long journey that requires a very sophisticated missile. But then you claim that USA is building these bases to fight against the enemny, when you know that they dont have the technology to shoot down the missiles? Dont you think it will be cheaper to just make a terrorist attack claim and attack those countries? Or is there oil involved - how come NK is considered too be a terrorist threat (to global security), they have tested nuclear devices, they have threatened America, they have tested missiles, and YET America says that Iran is a threat, and refuses to "liberate" NK and instead feeds that regime with money and food for G-d knows how long? WHERE'S THE RATIONALE?

Huh? I have trouble following your train of thought. It's almost like stream of consciousness sometimes. No offense, but do you write your academic papers this way?

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Well now this is just specious reasoning here. North Korea has built a 3 stage missile that theoretically has the range to strike the US. The fact that they are having hangups on implementation does not mean that they do not have the capability or imminent capability of striking the US. You think they're all sitting around twiddling their thumbs after the first missile launch? The European Ariane 5 rocket failed on its first launch ... does this mean that Europe does not have nor will it imminently have the capability of launching satellites in space with the Ariane 5 rocket? C'mon let's use some common sense here. The Taepodong 2 rocket test fired in July was configured to deliver a satellite into orbit rather than a flight test for a ballistic missile as it was designed for. Furthermore, to respond to the distance argument of Iran, Iran would definitly have the range to strike western europe if it gained missile technology from N. Korea: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21008&d=1169458435

Let me make it simple for you: NK/Iran doesnt have the capability or the technology right now to deliver accurately a precise missile attack on American cities. Theories are theories. Its actually more evident that NK is willing to drop its nuclear aspirations for very little price. You haven't noticed that the reason these rogue states are threatening/developing these technologies is because of American global expansion that is aimed at these states. No rogue state would sit there and pray and hope that USA will not do something about it.

The only thing that would result in USA's military buildup, Star Wars development, is a whole new arms race because Russia sees American hostility and criticism.

I respect your research and your opinion, and I have my own view here. But what you fail to notice is that the ballistic missile is actually the lowest elevation and speed at take-off, and it has the highest, fastest speeds when its half-way through to its target (over Alaska, Poland). So technically it would be smarter to build the base in Japan, Turkey, Iraq! This way it would not only be more effective to defend better against these rogue states agressions, but keep Russia happy too. Russian politicians are no idiots - they see NATO's expansion, American military bases in Central Asia, American military advisers in Georgia, American in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. No brainer they see American encroachment around it. And its only dumb to conclude that this has peaceful means.

quote:

Yes they do not have nukes but they're blatantly trying to develop them. You don't need enriched fuel for peaceful nuclear energy, so why build the high speed centrifuges to develop highly enriched uranium? Why make the uranium hexaflouride used for enrichment purposes if they're not trying to enrich uranium? Look even Russia and China cast their vote in the Security Council to ORDER Iran to suspend nuclear activities in resolution 1737. So are you saying Russia is retarded for casting their vote in such a resolution with no basis to support it?

Well, duh, Russia is against it because a) it doesnt want nuclear Holocaust, b) it doesnt want to look like it is giving Iran nuclear weapons technology. But at the same time, it wants Iran to be able to defend against an American aggression. One thing for sure, what you're not taking about here, is that Russia and China ARE ABSOLUTELY against any military measures against Iran, to protect their interests.

quote:

Since when do you need accurate navigation when it comes to nuclear weapons? Since when do you need satellite systems? You do know that there weren't any satellites around when the Germans launched V-2 rockets during WW2 right? They seemed to hit London well enough without them. Come on, it's just physics and mechanical engineering.

You fail to notice the distance between Germany and England, comparing the distance between Iran and USA for example. And V-2 missiles weren't all that accurate, and the larger the distance, the more it will veer off target. Some of these V-2 missiles crashed in the sea, others failed to reach the target. And because of their simplicity and low altitudes, British managed to develop ways to shoot these down.

quote:

Hmmm Alaska seems pretty well position for an attack on a major american city from N. Korea. But here's a far more simpler reason to base an ABM system in Alaska ... Alaska itself is a likely target to be attacked. Particularly since it has numerous military bases.

How about building a base like that in Japan to protect Japan and USA? Ideal and best chance to shoot down missiles in their first/early stages, when they're slowest and easy to target.

quote:

Huh? I have trouble following your train of thought. It's almost like stream of consciousness sometimes. No offense, but do you write your academic papers this way?

I dont spend an hour on a post. I actually spent about 10 minutes writing my reply to you. I have many other important things to do other than chit-chatting here. So I am not writing an academic paper here, so no need to get cocky.




Tell me this - these bases right now, they are not defending against Iran/NK because they dont have the technology. What ARE they monitoring then, whose military movements and activities? You think they're just sitting there playing solitaire?

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

Dude Russia should dismantle their nucleur arsenal. That country will be muslim in less than 50yrs. Can you picture a Muslim country with thousands of nukes?

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid Dude Russia should dismantle their nucleur arsenal. That country will be muslim in less than 50yrs. Can you picture a Muslim country with thousands of nukes?

Yes. The first ass they will pin down with those nukes is yours.

quote:

U.S. Should Have Informed Russia about Stationing Missile Defense Sites in Europe The United States should have discussed with Russia stationing its anti-missile defense systems in Czechia and Poland, said German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the media worldwide reported. ”Because the sites for the stationing are quite near Russia, one should have talked about it with Russia beforehand,” Steinmeier said as quoted by The Washington Post. On January 31, 2007, the United States urged Poland and Czechia to host elements of the U.S. missile defense system. This offer outraged Russia and divided Poland. But Polish Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski obviously favors the shield and President Lech Kaczynski equally backs up the idea. Poland is expected to come up with an official answer within two weeks. The delay has been caused by an abrupt retirement of Defense Minister Radoslav Sikorski. New Minister Aleksander Szczyglo will personally reply to Washington.

U.S. Should Have Informed Russia about Stationing Missile Defense Sites in Europe

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid Dude Russia should dismantle their nucleur arsenal. That country will be muslim in less than 50yrs. Can you picture a Muslim country with thousands of nukes?

Ummmm ... Russia is a nation of 145 million people. There are 20 million Muslims. Yes, I can CLEARLY see in 50 years it will be a Muslim-dominated country!

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Ummmm ... Russia is a nation of 145 million people. There are 20 million Muslims. Yes, I can CLEARLY see in 50 years it will be a Muslim-dominated country!

Dude its fact. Russians don't have that many babies(slavic). The ones who do have babies are mostly Muslims or people of Asian descent. It is a fact.

Im sorry that you still are use to not believing facts, must be the effect of soviet rule for 75yrs-

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Let me make it simple for you: NK/Iran doesnt have the capability or the technology right now to deliver accurately a precise missile attack on American cities. Theories are theories. Its actually more evident that NK is willing to drop its nuclear aspirations for very little price. You haven't noticed that the reason these rogue states are threatening/developing these technologies is because of American global expansion that is aimed at these states. No rogue state would sit there and pray and hope that USA will not do something about it.

Iran does not have the capability to deliver a precise missile attack on an American city yet. North Korea might be able to strike the US with its Taepodong missile. They definitely have a 3 stage missile that should have the range of being able to hit the US. Yes it’s reliability is questionable, however, given that the test of the missile was for a satellite launch orbit, rather than a ballistic missile delivery trajectory it could very well be capable of traveling its suspected 4000-6000km. Even if it’s not operationally active, it would be shortsighted to create a defensive shield after these countries develop nuclear weapons or after they create a capable ICBM. It’s not like the ABM system is going to be built in Poland overnight … it will probably be some years before it will be operationally active. Common sense dictates taking the precautionary measure of beginning the installation today so that when Iran or N. Korea do have the ability to strike the US several years from now the system is in place. But this thread topic isn’t about justification for countering Iranian or N. Korean threats, the thread was about the risks posed to Russia by the ABM shield, to which I still strongly contend as being extremely minimal.

quote:

The only thing that would result in USA's military buildup, Star Wars development, is a whole new arms race because Russia sees American hostility and criticism.

I would agree … if the ABM system could counter Russia’s nuclear deterrence. But it can’t and nor will it ever. Not with the cost or quantity of interceptors.

quote:

I respect your research and your opinion, and I have my own view here. But what you fail to notice is that the ballistic missile is actually the lowest elevation and speed at take-off, and it has the highest, fastest speeds when its half-way through to its target (over Alaska, Poland). So technically it would be smarter to build the base in Japan, Turkey, Iraq! This way it would not only be more effective to defend better against these rogue states agressions, but keep Russia happy too. Russian politicians are no idiots - they see NATO's expansion, American military bases in Central Asia, American military advisers in Georgia, American in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. No brainer they see American encroachment around it. And its only dumb to conclude that this has peaceful means.

Actually I did not fail to notice the positioning of the ABM bases. If you refer back to my earlier post I mentioned that these are THAAD missiles as opposed to Boost Phase Intercept missiles. THAAD is a terminal phase interceptor designed to intercept the missile as it reenters the atmosphere.

http://www.fas.org/ssp/bmd/guide/terminal.htm

That’s another reason why Russia is completely unaffected by THAAD being in Poland. They are nowhere near the trajectory of Russian ICBMs to effectively intercept them.

quote:

Well, duh, Russia is against it because a) it doesnt want nuclear Holocaust, b) it doesnt want to look like it is giving Iran nuclear weapons technology. But at the same time, it wants Iran to be able to defend against an American aggression. One thing for sure, what you're not taking about here, is that Russia and China ARE ABSOLUTELY against any military measures against Iran, to protect their interests.

Well wait you just said Iran was not seeking to develop nuclear weapons. Yet you’re justifying Russia’s security council vote condemning Iran for something they’re not doing? There’s some incongruency here.

quote:

You fail to notice the distance between Germany and England, comparing the distance between Iran and USA for example. And V-2 missiles weren't all that accurate, and the larger the distance, the more it will veer off target. Some of these V-2 missiles crashed in the sea, others failed to reach the target. And because of their simplicity and low altitudes, British managed to develop ways to shoot these down.

Merely pointing out that you don’t need accuracy when you put a nuclear warhead on top of a missile and nor do you need satellite systems for a ballistic missile.

quote:

How about building a base like that in Japan to protect Japan and USA? Ideal and best chance to shoot down missiles in their first/early stages, when they're slowest and easy to target.

There are Aegis missile cruisers with boost phase interceptors around Japan. The point is to develop a layered defense so if the Aegis missile cruisers fail to intercept the missiles (a very likely proposition when you consider the number of failed tests) the terminal phase defense system has a chance of shooting it down.

quote:

I dont spend an hour on a post. I actually spent about 10 minutes writing my reply to you. I have many other important things to do other than chit-chatting here. So I am not writing an academic paper here, so no need to get cocky.

Yea neither do I, but sometimes you seem to stray off on tangential topics … it makes it difficult to know whether you’re posing rhetorical questions or genuinely expecting a response.

quote:

Tell me this - these bases right now, they are not defending against Iran/NK because they dont have the technology. What ARE they monitoring then, whose military movements and activities? You think they're just sitting there playing solitaire?

As I said, there are no bases defending against Iran right now. Right now they’re engaged in talks to set them up. As for the interceptor bases in Alaska and California, well since N. Korea has the technology to attack the US they’re presumably monitoring N. Korea. They’re going to need to build a couple hundred more interceptor bases and a few thousand interceptors if they hope to counter Russia. Something the US doesn’t have the money or the willpower to do.

___________________
Retro ...

I am saying that Iran appears to be interested in military applications of uranium, but some countries like Russia/China have interests in Iran they want to protect.

I think USA/NATO should build bases to counter the Iranian missile threat, but I believe that building bases in Poland/Czech Republic are a threat. You did manage to downplay the threat of these to Russia with your information, as I am not worried about that much, for the time being. However, Russia has every right to take this situation in its own rightful approach - they should monitor and missile-target the bases in case of any aggression. Also, there's NATO bases in Eastern Europe, expanding close to Russian borders at the same time ;-) its no coincidence along with the Poland/Czech bases to me. Russia should build whatever defense measures necessary to counter any possible plans undertaken that undermine its security and influence in the region.

I always thought and still do so that it would more accurate to target missiles when they're launching, then when they re-enter the atmosphere. Also, I dont think the missiles would re-enter the atmosphere so early in their flights over Poland, near Alaska, thats almost half-way through their trip in the case of Poland ;-). Do you have evidence to prove your point here?

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture