What if the US goes totally isolationist?

[MKSheppard]

A lot of the overseas opposition to NMD is not over whether it might NOT
work, but what if it DOES work.

Traditional American Allies fear this, that if NMD is deployed successfully,
America will become isolationist and leave them in the lurch, a remarkable
case of Mirror Imaging what they would do if they were in the USA's shoes.

This kind of Mirror Imaging is what caused France to split from NATO and
develep her own Nuclear force de frappe, because they did not believe that
the US would ever trade the US homeland for Europe's defense, mirror
imaging their own feelings over trading la belle france for Europe's
defense.

So...lets say that America builds a damn hard to penetrate defensive shield
(you can get through, but it will be fantastically costly to do so), and builds
up a massive fleet of B-3 bombers...and goes totally isolationist.

What happens in the world?

One Set of predictions by a friend is:

1.) The Middle East would spasm into a violent revolutionary chaos while Europe
would be powerless to intervene

2.) China would seek to create a new order in Asia as Japan develops nuclear
weapons and a powerful military

3.) India and Pakistan would get at each other's throats

[Robert Walper]

I think your custom title pretty much predicts the inevitable scenario.

[Admiral Valdemar]

The sky will fall.

[Xenophobe3691]

The sky will fall.

And for one brief, terrible, beautiful moment, the sun truly will rise over the whole of the Earth...

[Specialist]

If the US were to suddenly disappear of the earth, life would go on you know

[Beowulf]

If the US were to suddenly disappear of the earth, life would go on you know

Wow, you failed to read the question. It's not disappearing, which due to the U.S. economy, would cause massive problems all over the world, but the U.S. going isolationist, and deciding to stop playing Globalcop.

[Specialist]

Wow, you failed to read the question. It's not disappearing, which due to the U.S. economy, would cause massive problems all over the world, but the U.S. going isolationist, and deciding to stop playing Globalcop.

Disappearing or isolation.. all the same. In the long run the US will only stand to lose.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Wow, you failed to read the question. It's not disappearing, which due to the U.S. economy, would cause massive problems all over the world, but the U.S. going isolationist, and deciding to stop playing Globalcop.

Disappearing or isolation.. all the same. In the long run the US will only stand to lose.

Not the same thing. The economy exists still, something that would make a sizeable America sized hole in the global economy if removed.

[MKSheppard]

Disappearing or isolation.. all the same. In the long run the US will only stand to lose.

Actually no. Without paying billions and billions on defense to keep you
sons-of-a-bitches all over the world from having to face up the true costs
of your defense, we could pay off the National debt, and of course, we
would still be trading worldwide, we would just refuse to get involved in your
pissant little fighting matches.

[Specialist]

Not the same thing. The economy exists still, something that would make a sizeable America sized hole in the global economy if removed.

So is giving up trading with other countries or just keeping out of their business?

Anyway there is two outcomes if America goes into isolation. We either (a) have some evil empire rise and kill us like every American's wet dream or (b) the world will move on without them.

If (b) is true then the world loses nothing, but eventually America will have to rejoin the world and their business will be eaten up my multinational corporations.

If (a) is true then it's reasonably to assume they will eventually gain enough power (after all they did conquerered the world ) to conquerer America with the world's resource behind them.

[Rogue 9]

Not the same thing. The economy exists still, something that would make a sizeable America sized hole in the global economy if removed.

So is giving up trading with other countries or just keeping out of their business?

Anyway there is two outcomes if America goes into isolation. We either (a) have some evil empire rise and kill us like every American's wet dream or (b) the world will move on without them.

If (b) is true then the world loses nothing, but eventually America will have to rejoin the world and their business will be eaten up my multinational corporations.

If (a) is true then it's reasonably to assume they will eventually gain enough power (after all they did conquerered the world ) to conquerer America with the world's resource behind them.

If (a) is true then the rest of the world is screwed, but I don't think anyone's proposed empire except you. The more likely result is anarchy in some parts of the globe as North Korea tries to retake the South, Africa explodes like the time bomb it is, and the Middle East plunges straight to Hell in a handbasket. The UN cannot function without the United States; it'd go the way of the League of Nations.

Oh, and one more thing. The rest of the world combined could not successfully conquer the United States at this point. There would need to be a massive military buildup, one which would clearly be aimed at us, and we wouldn't sit still for that.

If (b) is true then it won't be true, because we're not talking about economic isolation, genius, just military noninterventionism. Get with the program.

[Beowulf]

Not the same thing. The economy exists still, something that would make a sizeable America sized hole in the global economy if removed.

So is giving up trading with other countries or just keeping out of their business?

Not playing Globalcop, and going into shithole places like Somalia and Bosnia.

[weemadando]

Shep, you somehow believe that the billions spent on foreign aid and military interventions outside your borders will more than make up for the loss in trade due to America becoming isolationist?

Someone - get that man a dunces cap and a corner!

[MKSheppard]

Shep, you somehow believe that the billions spent on foreign aid and military interventions outside your borders will more than make up for the loss in trade due to America becoming isolationist?

We were isolationist before WWII and yet we still traded freely
with the world.

[PainRack]

I understand MK is suggesting that America goes totally isolationist, in the sense that no military intervention, and of course, no billions of dollars in military aid. In that case.............

America economy goes into a new shithole as "disasters in the Middle East drives up oil prices", "unrest in Europe that resulted from the loss of security for Eastern Europe, Turkey, Africia and the Middle East derail Europe social insitutions", "trade disruptions with Africia depriving America of cheap natural resources, forcing her to develop her own, more expensive sources in US soil(not Canada or any other South American country)","inflation due to prices increases for cheap natural resources coming from South America, South Africia and Asia as a result of failed states emerging in those regions","Taiwan which supplies over 1/4 of the world HD is devastated by chinese attacks, or reintergrated into China which promptly drives up pricing","Japan needs to rearm diverts efforts from restarting her economic growth, thus isolating US as the only growth engine of the world and depriving US of vital export oppurtinities"...............(blah blah blah)

And that's just for starters! There is a reason why America must remain involved in the world for her own good.

[Enforcer Talen]

isolationism worked when we got all our resources from n america.

now, we dont.

[MKSheppard]

And that's just for starters! There is a reason why America must remain involved in the world for her own good.

Or more cold-bloodedly, we could just let the entire world collapse in on
itself, and let everyone and their single-source economic systems based
on a few commodities simply die off, while we're only merely wounded.

[Enforcer Talen]

but I like all my made in china gear.

[MKSheppard]

but I like all my made in china gear.

And how long does that made in china gear last?

[Guardsman Bass]

Some of those scenarios wouldn't need to be worried about if you went totally isolationistic, including trade.

1. China might get Taiwan, but they would also suffer an immediate economic depression, as the US Market and activitiy of American companies in China(along with the jobs they provide) just disappear. Odds are they'd be too busy trying to avoid civil war to become hegemon of the east.

2.South Korea's economy would be affected, but a lot of their exports are absorbed by China, so they'd be fairly alright(other than, of course, an immediate recession) unless China closed its borders. Also, don't they have their own military that is capable of driving the North back(plus, without the US protecting them, they'd probably make an all-out effort to acquire nuclear weaponry)?

3.Oil prices in America rise, but if there is no trade in or out, at least we'd be using a lot of natural gas.

4. Karachi would cease to exist, along with Calcutta and New Delhi, as Pakistan and India go all-out.

5. Israel, now totally paranoid and in an economic collapse following the loss of US aid, begins ethnically cleansing the West Bank, and ends up in a war of survival with other regimes of the area.

6. Re-militarization of Europe.

[frigidmagi]

Folks the US is still trading with other nations in the OP, it's just refusing to send it's military out. In other words it's a US miltiary withdrawl not a Japanese style closed door policy.

[Guardsman Bass]

Folks the US is still trading with other nations in the OP, it's just refusing to send it's military out. In other words it's a US miltiary withdrawl not a Japanese style closed door policy.

Oh. In that case, expect Chinese hegemony, except if the US decides to sell the Taiwanese significant amounts of arms beyond what they already receive. A remilitarized Europe would probably still happen.

[Falkenhayn]

Russia and the Ex-Soviet states are very rudely thrown to the wolves.

[Darth Wong]

One Set of predictions by a friend is:

1.) The Middle East would spasm into a violent revolutionary chaos while Europe
would be powerless to intervene

Why would this happen? Has the US been continually suppressing and preventing violent revolutions in Islamic countries through military intervention? If so, where and when?

2.) China would seek to create a new order in Asia as Japan develops nuclear
weapons and a powerful military

Again, how does US interference in the Middle East, Korea, and Europe prevent this right now? Is it not possible that there are other dynamics at play, and more complex global political machinations at work?

3.) India and Pakistan would get at each other's throats

Once more, how is US interventionism in the Middle East, Korea, and Europe preventing this right now? What reason is there to say that any of this will significantly worsen if the US stops getting involved?

PS. Why the false dilemma between total isolationism and interventionist unilateralism?

[Predator]

I dont think most people understand that the military interventions the US pulls every few years are insignificant compared to the economic manipulation that is the true source of its power.

As Wong pointed out, US military intervention is not the source of world stability, and it's also not the source of US supremecy. The US could become militarily isolationist and fairly little would change, so long as it continued to serve its own interests, usually at the expense of others, through controlling stakes in institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, and through the power of green room negotiations, the real power, in the WTO. And through simple economic intimidation, nobody can afford to get on the bad side of the US economically.