I am deleting this policy because of the large quantity of foul, offensive, derogatory and harassing emails and comments I have gotten.
2 Likes
Do you think that America should refrain from any kind of commerce with foreign nations?
Are you familiar with the Barbary Wars?
In the Barbary wars, the congress was well involved.
Do you think that America should be required to allow its foreign commerce to be attacked by foreign entities unless there is a declaration of war?
If America conducts trade with a foreign country and pirates are attacking those trade routes, you would demand that America allow the pirates to attack those trade routes - including attacking Americans that are part of those trade routes - unless there’s an official declaration of war?
So you would insist that even an act of self-defense be directly approved by congress?
I agree in principle, yet leave it open to resolve conflicts outside our borders when in defense of life, liberty, and property.
I believe that when our Founding Fathers referenced “no foreign entanglements”, they meant extended conflict in other lands (like we now have in the Middle East and elsewhere). It does not prohibit defending ships and property attacked in international waters, since the ship being attacked is not “foreign” but rather, our own lives and property. It is possible that we defend ourselves and ensure that we protect our own property (ie: foreign embassies and military bases without getting “entangled” in the political and military affairs of foregin nations – politically or otherwise.
We should not have to rely on a the Corrupt And Zionist/AIPAC-Owned Clowns of Capital Hill to fly in from their home states and vote on a situation being classified as a “War” before we can radio a ship that is being attacked and give it the right to defend itself and its lives and cargo. I do not believe that this was the intention of the Founding Fathers, or even a sane suggestion to be applied today. The moment we have our hands tied behind our backs (as seen by the rest of the world’s military powers), that we need permission from our Congress of Zionist-Baboons, there would be worldwide auction in less than six months, auctioning our congressional clowns off to the highest bidder nations, and the pirates of every country on earth will be sailing full steam ahead, for every busy U.S. shipping lane on the planet. You want to shut down Middle-Eastern “entaglements”? Hold AIPAC criminally responsible for staging an insurrection via the commandeering and corruption of our congressional officials, coporate CEOS, top-level industry officials, government regulators and agency heads, and under these charges of high treason and sedition, designate it as a political-terrorist organization, and bar it from the United States. That will shut down said ME “entanglements” overnight.
You see, we are currently “foreign-entangled” largely because we have since been “domestically-entangled” by Zionist, Chinese, and British infiltration and commandeering. We are fighting other wars and causes for the benefit other countries (at our own expense) because we lost control of steering our own ship. Said simply: In our complacency and ongoing ignorance, we have been silently and stealthily commandeered by multiple countries. After several failed decades of traitorous presidential administrations, the United States is seen by the rest of the world as a massive rudderless ship, adrift, loaded with cargo, and ripe for pillage and plunder. Hopefully Trump has retaken command of the ship’s wheel and is steering us away from further harm. My two cents. Thx.
So if you found yourself being held hostage by terrorists in a foreign country, you would insist that the United States Government not make any attempt to rescue you unless such action was explicitly approved by Congress?
I’m not saying starting a war, I’m saying something as simple as a rescue raid.
Go in, kill the terrorists, rescue the hostages, get out.
Which brings me back to my original question:
Do you think that America should refrain from any kind of commerce with foreign nations?
Do you think that America should go full isolationist? Should all Americans refrain from any movement outside America, because there can be no assurance of anyone’s safety outside the United States?
And if you think that Congress should have full approval over any and all US military action, what is the purpose of the President being Constitutionally established as the nations Commander-in-Chief?
Just because you don’t value your life, doesn’t mean others don’t. And secondly, Egypt asked for America’s help on the matter. It was a mutual operation.
1 Like
So it is your opinion that America should go full, 100% isolationist with no more contact or interaction with other nations than is absolutely, strictly necessary?
With no expectation that America would do anything to protect its citizens outside its borders, creating open season on any US Citizens across the entire rest of the world.
US Shipping would be the most appealing possible targets for pirates, who would know that odds of facing punishment for their actions would be minimal.
And, to reiterate a previously ignored important question: If you think that Congress should have full approval over any and all US military action, what is the purpose of the President being Constitutionally established as the nations Commander-in-Chief?
You don’t think there are people in the world who would openly go after US Citizens if they knew they didn’t have to worry about the US protecting those Citizens?
You’ve made quite clear this isn’t just about war, this is about any and all military actions of any kind.
Not just war, any military action.
You’ve made it abundantly clear that you want the US to be a pacifist nation by default unless Congress explicitly says otherwise, and that the President should have no power to do anything militarily unless that action is explicitly approved by Congress.
Then why aren’t you outright selling your policy as “America should be a pacifist nation”?
Why aren’t you outright selling your policy as “America should be a pacifist nation unless Congress says otherwise”?
Sir, why do you think that the act of debating or questioning your policy proposal is forbidden?
How am I harassing you?
Personally, I don’t think Congress should be giving any sort of decision on whether we go to war or even if we should tie our shoe strings or not until the Israeli AIPAC is no longer in control of it. You might as well be saying that we should send our children and grand children off to war whenever AIPAC deems it necessary. My two cents. 
Our lives have been effected for fighting other countries wars, we do not need to be the world’s police and create more corruption by doing so