The Era of the Monroe Doctrine is OVER!

US Sec State John Kerry made the announcement.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013 ... -Mangle-It

namelessfly wrote:US Sec State John Kerry made the announcement.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013 ... -Mangle-It

The post title is hilariously ironic.

RandomGraysuit wrote:

namelessfly wrote:US Sec State John Kerry made the announcement.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013 ... -Mangle-It

The post title is hilariously ironic.

Damn spell checker.

That Kerry mis-stated the purpose of the Monroe Doctrine is not arguable and he should rightly be critiqued about it.

But do you have an objection to the gist of the statement, that the USA no longer has to act as a "protector' and 'guarantor' and to the Central/South America nation states against European/other incursions?

Seems logical that a doctrine promulgated in the 1820's may be a tad outdated in 2014.

Not that it has ever stopped the US from meddling....(and not even mentioning Allende or El Salvador--I am thinking of TR's 'founding' of Panama (which ticked off Colombia no end...).

Just wondering...

Actually, the position articulated by Sec State Kerry is consistent with my own evolving, neo-isolationist sentiments. If some European or Asian power wishes to deploy forces to the Wester hemisphere to kick the crap out of some South American dictator (China extorting oil from Brazil) the US would not object provided that they either limited the agregate fission yield on the weapons employed or used close surface bursts that kept the fallout confined to the target country. Unlike Kerry, Inam cognizant of the force posture that the US would need in such a strategic environment.

Hutch wrote:That Kerry mis-stated the purpose of the Monroe Doctrine is not arguable and he should rightly be critiqued about it.

But do you have an objection to the gist of the statement, that the USA no longer has to act as a "protector' and 'guarantor' and to the Central/South America nation states against European/other incursions?

Seems logical that a doctrine promulgated in the 1820's may be a tad outdated in 2014.

Not that it has ever stopped the US from meddling....(and not even mentioning Allende or El Salvador--I am thinking of TR's 'founding' of Panama (which ticked off Colombia no end...).

Just wondering...

Hutch wrote:…But do you have an objection to the gist of the statement, that the USA no longer has to act as a "protector' and 'guarantor' and to the Central/South America nation states against European/other incursions?…

idk – haven’t we had to do that at least as recent as the 60s – last I checked Russia was in Europe

Hutch wrote:…Not that it has ever stopped the US from meddling…I am thinking of TR's 'founding' of Panama (which ticked off Colombia no end...)

Yea how horrible, caused that big ditch to be dug when Colombia refused to! We certainly didn’t need that 30 years later, or now, do we? Never mind the financial boon to the people actually living there (or the solution to malaria that it resulted in)

MAD-4A wrote:

Hutch wrote:…Not that it has ever stopped the US from meddling…I am thinking of TR's 'founding' of Panama (which ticked off Colombia no end...)

Yea how horrible, caused that big ditch to be dug when Colombia refused to! We certainly didn’t need that 30 years later, or now, do we? Never mind the financial boon to the people actually living there (or the solution to malaria that it resulted in)

I never argued that the Canal wouldn't be dug, I merely noted that when negotiations with Colombia did not move as quickly as planned, Groups (with associations with American business (and if I recall correctly, a moderately shady Frenchman)organized a 'revolution' that was recognized as a new Government in record time by the USA and treaties regarding the canal written and signed in lterally days (we won't mention the US warship(s) that 'discouraged' Colombia from suppressing the 'rebellion'.

And FWIW, the original plan was to dig the canal in Nigarauga, which offered much better terrain and inland lakes that would have made the job easier.

Recommend "The Path Between the Seas" by David McCullough for a good general read if you haven't done so before.

Again, I don't argue that the US has national interests in this hemisphere-always have, always will. I did ask if the 'revelation' that the Monroe doctrine is outdated was really all that much of a story.

MAD-4A wrote:

Hutch wrote:…But do you have an objection to the gist of the statement, that the USA no longer has to act as a "protector' and 'guarantor' and to the Central/South America nation states against European/other incursions?…

idk – haven’t we had to do that at least as recent as the 60s – last I checked Russia was in Europe

Hutch wrote:…Not that it has ever stopped the US from meddling…I am thinking of TR's 'founding' of Panama (which ticked off Colombia no end...)

Yea how horrible, caused that big ditch to be dug when Colombia refused to! We certainly didn’t need that 30 years later, or now, do we? Never mind the financial boon to the people actually living there (or the solution to malaria that it resulted in)

Russia is in Asia as well as Europe. It spans something like 8 time zones.