What are some historical examples of US disengagement in foreign policy?
Responses
Cougarfan47
The United States failed to intervene in the 1994 Rwandan Genocide.
Posted
Sep 24, 2021
ark200
the US withdrawal from Afghanistan post cold war and the US withdrawal from vietnam are two disengagement policy of US in history. former leads to Taliban regime in Afghanistan and eventual attack on 9/11. the later has consequence that vietnam is now an ally of china. both are not ok for world.
Posted
Oct 18, 2021
Don Gaetano
First: No scholar, high school ed life long carpenter.
Reaching back to the 1950's, my opinion is we should have not let the fear of nuclear proliferation with Russia back us down from removing Castro as soon as we realized he was a Communist totalitarian.
What were the consequences of that fear and inaction?
A communist government 90 miles off our Florida coast.
Untold suffering for the Cuban people.
Spread of Socialism/Communism light through S and Central America, a tragedy for the entire continent and years of oppression of the peaceable people in all those countries.
S and Central America even today, with the open border policy of the Biden Admin now cause great strain on our country.
The consequences of this current surge of illegal immigrants is not yet fully known, what we do know is not good:
Human trafficking, rapes, murders, funding the cartels, flooding our border cities, spread of drugs and crime into our country, etc.
My Supposition: Cuba becoming Democratic in the 50's if not eliminating all this suffering of 70 years, at least mitigates it dramatically.
Posted
Aug 27, 2022
mvillant_435354
The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan- paved the way for Taliban control, which has led to a human rights crisis. Further, the withdrawal has strained some U.S. relationships with allies and splintered the domestic U.S.
Posted
Jan 25, 2023
jjk062355_436256
U.S engagement is necessary as evidenced by Russia's action in the Ukraine. It illustrates the constant adversarial contest between authoritarian regimes and freedom. Putin could not have a market economy with a democratically elected government right next door. The city of Kharkiv had a 40 percent Russian population before the war. Home to artist , play rights , and supporting arts individuals, families had relatives across the borders between Russia and the Ukraine. The natural contrasting between the countries would obviously be discussed among the population. Ideas of free expression, questioning of government policies, expanded opportunities, would be an anathema to an authoritarian regime. Taking the Crimea and additional territory up to the 2014 cease fire line just gave Putin time to mobilize for a total take over. Now the cost to repel Russian aggression are catastrophic, in terms of lives lost whole cities destroyed, fighting the the continent has not scene since World War 2. The only deterrence to date has been a massive amount of American equipment and arms along with all of the available NATO arms member countries could afford to send and still not enough. The Biden administration had badly misunderstood Putin intentions , and Putin additionally has been rattling his nuclear options. Should we have let Putin take control over all of Ukraine? Would that have satisfied his desire to reconstitute the Russian empire? In my opinion the answer is no, no it would not have satisfied his territorial ambitions. It also gave other regimes the green light for the own ambitions, most notably Iran in the middle east. To contrast Israels actions to date verses the actions of the west in East Europe is telling. And who suffers, the ordinary Palestinian the ordinary Ukrainian the ordinary Russian. Engagement is less costly in terms of lives lost which is the only thing that truly matters. .." the world suffers a lot, Not because the violence of bad people. But the silence of good people" Napolean Bonaparte
Responses
The United States failed to intervene in the 1994 Rwandan Genocide.
the US withdrawal from Afghanistan post cold war and the US withdrawal from vietnam are two disengagement policy of US in history. former leads to Taliban regime in Afghanistan and eventual attack on 9/11. the later has consequence that vietnam is now an ally of china. both are not ok for world.
First: No scholar, high school ed life long carpenter.
Reaching back to the 1950's, my opinion is we should have not let the fear of nuclear proliferation with Russia back us down from removing Castro as soon as we realized he was a Communist totalitarian.
What were the consequences of that fear and inaction?
A communist government 90 miles off our Florida coast.
Untold suffering for the Cuban people.
Spread of Socialism/Communism light through S and Central America, a tragedy for the entire continent and years of oppression of the peaceable people in all those countries.
S and Central America even today, with the open border policy of the Biden Admin now cause great strain on our country.
The consequences of this current surge of illegal immigrants is not yet fully known, what we do know is not good:
Human trafficking, rapes, murders, funding the cartels, flooding our border cities, spread of drugs and crime into our country, etc.
My Supposition: Cuba becoming Democratic in the 50's if not eliminating all this suffering of 70 years, at least mitigates it dramatically.
The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan- paved the way for Taliban control, which has led to a human rights crisis. Further, the withdrawal has strained some U.S. relationships with allies and splintered the domestic U.S.
U.S engagement is necessary as evidenced by Russia's action in the Ukraine. It illustrates the constant adversarial contest between authoritarian regimes and freedom. Putin could not have a market economy with a democratically elected government right next door. The city of Kharkiv had a 40 percent Russian population before the war. Home to artist , play rights , and supporting arts individuals, families had relatives across the borders between Russia and the Ukraine. The natural contrasting between the countries would obviously be discussed among the population. Ideas of free expression, questioning of government policies, expanded opportunities, would be an anathema to an authoritarian regime. Taking the Crimea and additional territory up to the 2014 cease fire line just gave Putin time to mobilize for a total take over. Now the cost to repel Russian aggression are catastrophic, in terms of lives lost whole cities destroyed, fighting the the continent has not scene since World War 2. The only deterrence to date has been a massive amount of American equipment and arms along with all of the available NATO arms member countries could afford to send and still not enough. The Biden administration had badly misunderstood Putin intentions , and Putin additionally has been rattling his nuclear options. Should we have let Putin take control over all of Ukraine? Would that have satisfied his desire to reconstitute the Russian empire? In my opinion the answer is no, no it would not have satisfied his territorial ambitions. It also gave other regimes the green light for the own ambitions, most notably Iran in the middle east. To contrast Israels actions to date verses the actions of the west in East Europe is telling. And who suffers, the ordinary Palestinian the ordinary Ukrainian the ordinary Russian. Engagement is less costly in terms of lives lost which is the only thing that truly matters. .." the world suffers a lot, Not because the violence of bad people. But the silence of good people" Napolean Bonaparte