Israel, and Gaza.

[JediMasterChief2]

Honestly, I say the world just stay out of it and let them fend for themselves. The problem would eventually sort itself out (whether it be one side it destoryed, they somehow come to an agreement, one side leaves the area, or some other scenario I can't come up with). I'm an isolationist at heart, so, my opinion is most likely biased. I would like there to be a peaceful agreement, but, thats likely not going to happen.

[Stronglav]

Funny thing.Some germans in 1939 thought the same.

"I don't care about the politics,leave me alone"

 

Shall I remind you how that turned out?

[JediMasterChief2]

Funny thing.Some germans in 1939 thought the same.

"I don't care about the politics,leave me alone"

 

Shall I remind you how that turned out?

I just said for the world to stay out of this situation. I hate the idea of countries snooping in eachother's business. It only leads to trouble, because people overreact, sometimes violently, to cultures which are different to there own. The only politices people should get involved in is domestic affairs. International affairs only cause war, at some point or another, because people have not reached a point where they can seamlessly accept other cultures.

 

Edit: I think you misunderstood what I meant by "Isolationist". What I mean is something like the Isolationist policies the United States had for a long time until WWII. I didn't mean completely stay out of politics. I mean just stay out of foreign affairs. In an ideal world, if every country kept to themselves for the most part, besides fighting in self-defense, then the amount of war would be reduced (some dictator may still want to conquer the world every now and them).

Edited September 11, 2014 by austen1000

[Aurielius]

It would be convenient if foreign affairs did not eventually have consequences that reach our shores but that is not the world we live in. Either we hang together with our allies or hang separately.

[JediMasterChief2]

It would be convenient if foreign affairs did not eventually have consequences that reach our shores but that is not the world we live in. Either we hang together with our allies or hang separately.

The solution to that is to deal with it when we become directly threatened. Otherwise, becoming involved too soon will drag us into conflicts that we could of avoided altogether. Sometimes, getting involved from the get-go isn't the best idea.

[Stronglav]

You are.HAMAS has openly declared that they will not stop at Israel.

They want Shari law all over the world.Untill that happens there will be war.

[HeyYou]

You are.HAMAS has openly declared that they will not stop at Israel.

They want Shari law all over the world.Untill that happens there will be war.

They aren't the only ones with that goal in mind. What's the solution? Kill all the muslims??

[Stronglav]

U don't wanna hear my opinion on that.

[Aurielius]

 

It would be convenient if foreign affairs did not eventually have consequences that reach our shores but that is not the world we live in. Either we hang together with our allies or hang separately.

The solution to that is to deal with it when we become directly threatened. Otherwise, becoming involved too soon will drag us into conflicts that we could of avoided altogether. Sometimes, getting involved from the get-go isn't the best idea.

 

That solution was tried before in Munich in 1938 by Chamberlain and Deladier when they hoped if they ignored a difficult decision the problem it might be become manageable. When a country stalls until a problem reaches their shores / borders it's already too late.

 

 

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. " - Churchill

[HeyYou]

 

 

It would be convenient if foreign affairs did not eventually have consequences that reach our shores but that is not the world we live in. Either we hang together with our allies or hang separately.

The solution to that is to deal with it when we become directly threatened. Otherwise, becoming involved too soon will drag us into conflicts that we could of avoided altogether. Sometimes, getting involved from the get-go isn't the best idea.

 

That solution was tried before in Munich in 1938 by Chamberlain and Deladier when they hoped if they ignored a difficult decision the problem it might be become manageable. When a country stalls until a problem reaches their shores / borders it's already too late.

 

 

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. " - Churchill

 

So what about when you meet the danger with half-measures? Or when there are so many problems to face, that you haven't the resources to meet them all? Let's toss in a government that can't decide who it hates more, the Russians, ISIS, Assad, or itself, or even the people they were elected to rule.......

 

Quite frankly, if our government did ANYTHING promptly, and without flinching, I would probably drop over dead from a heart attack, I would be so surprised.