DBWI:American Intervention in South East Asia

Well looking at the situation o nthe ground the then-President decided that AMerica didn't want a piece of that on either end.

Thats correct. That's why we're paying $20 a gallon. If USA intervened on northern side we would've won the war & continuted to create an idology of American invincibility, keeping Iran on side preventing the middle-eastern nuclear war. If on the southern side.... well that's already been pointed out by other posters.
 
Thats correct. That's why we're paying $20 a gallon. If USA intervened on northern side we would've won the war & continuted to create an idology of American invincibility, keeping Iran on side preventing the middle-eastern nuclear war. If on the southern side.... well that's already been pointed out by other posters.
Al lthe more reason to reduce carbon emissions and invest in alternate fuels.

OOC: where the heck do you get a nuclear war i nthe middle East, not that I don't buy it, I'm just asking you to show your work.
 
With the collapse of the Soviet sphere of influence in the middle east following their Invasion of Afghanistan and soviet nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the various factions, Kurds, Sunnies, Shites etc and their sectarian/ ethnic wars, no-one really knows who was responsible for the first bomb, conspiracy theories still abound, Israel, the KGB even the CIA were blamed. What we do know that following the US decision not to intervene in Veitnam, thier policy became isolationist again. Maybe if they still had influence all this could've been prevented.
 
With the collapse of the Soviet sphere of influence in the middle east following their Invasion of Afghanistan and soviet nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the various factions, Kurds, Sunnies, Shites etc and their sectarian/ ethnic wars, no-one really knows who was responsible for the first bomb, conspiracy theories still abound, Israel, the KGB even the CIA were blamed. What we do know that following the US decision not to intervene in Veitnam, thier policy became isolationist again. Maybe if they still had influence all this could've been prevented.
OOC:Why would a single case of refusing interventionism lead to neo isolationism?
 
OOC:Why would a single case of refusing interventionism lead to neo isolationism?

Why not?

Rest of the world could view:
Using example of Veitnam - USA not interested in them so why would they be interested in us so whats the point of asking.
Other Alternatives - UK willing but can't affored to intervene. Other 'older' European powers, more interested in self preservation from Soviets. Growing powers - India & China, not yet ready to play a global role.
USA as not wanted, yea like we freed the world from tyrany in WW2 & now you don't want us? OK bye! Simple enough?
 
Why not?

Rest of the world could view:
Using example of Veitnam - USA not interested in them so why would they be interested in us so whats the point of asking.
Other Alternatives - UK willing but can't affored to intervene. Other 'older' European powers, more interested in self preservation from Soviets. Growing powers - India & China, not yet ready to play a global role.
USA as not wanted, yea like we freed the world from tyrany in WW2 & now you don't want us? OK bye! Simple enough?
No, it's not simple at all the U.S. A. rebuilt West Germany, Japan, South Korea and a raft of other countries and contiued to invest heavily both militarily and economically in those countries.

Right up to Vietnam in 1962, we were helping and arming quite a few countries.

In the case of Vietnam we have a country transparently uninterested in it's own defense and corrupt to an absurd extent, they were also comivally inept and stupid.

SO we take the money and time and troops we would have used to hel them and help everyone else, the allies that are willing to meet us at least halfway and give a crap about themselves, ALlies like,

South Korea
Japan
The Federal Republic of West Germany
Britian
France
Spain
Italy
Turkey
And a literal host of other allies in Nato.

You are arguing that that whole thing fals apart because we turn down a single ludicoursly corroupt absurdly inept pack of loser?

And when I ask why you asnwer, "Why not"

That's not an answer, fellah.
 
Top