Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel W. Koehler who wrote (2839)	5/14/1999 2:36:00 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 13060

Post 2791:Actually, it is not true that we were non- interventionists for the first 150 years. We just avoided intervening in things like dynastic quarrels, since we didn't care, and things beyond our capacity as an infant nation. We sustained the Monroe doctrine, which involved sticking our nose into the business of others in the hemisphere because we considered it our sphere of influence. Let's see, the first 150 years encompasses everything from the Declaration of Independence until 1926, at least. Not only were there various Mexican interventions, but there was the Spanish- American War and World War I, not to mention interventions in Haiti, Panama, and other Latin American countries. (You may dispute the inclusion of WWI, but it is clear that we could have avoided involvement if we were not by that time itching for an excuse). Perhaps we would have intervened in the Franco- Prussian War had it not come so soon after the Civil War, and national exhaustion, I don't know. Perhaps not. I have no reason to support such a thing off hand...Anyway, changing conditions, changing policy...