Changes

177 bytes removed ,  04:10, February 27, 2025
Line 36: Line 36:  
Meanwhile, isolationist sentiment grew in the Democratic party, largely in reaction to the failure of the [[Vietnam War]]. The chief spokesman was Senator [[George McGovern]], whose 1972 presidential campaign had the isolationist slogan, "Come Home America".
 
Meanwhile, isolationist sentiment grew in the Democratic party, largely in reaction to the failure of the [[Vietnam War]]. The chief spokesman was Senator [[George McGovern]], whose 1972 presidential campaign had the isolationist slogan, "Come Home America".
   −
===NATO and the Obama administration===
+
===NATO aggression and the Obama administration===
 
{{See also|Obama war crimes}}
 
{{See also|Obama war crimes}}
 
The principles and commitments of [[interventionism]] stand in stark contrast to isolationism.  
 
The principles and commitments of [[interventionism]] stand in stark contrast to isolationism.  
   −
Article 5 of the NATO charter demands that "an attack against one is an attack against all."  Any member can invoke Article 5. During the [[Obama administration]], the Obama regime was funding [[Kurdish]] fighters in [[Syria]], who in turn were staging cross-border attacks against [[Turkey]] with their American-funded weapons and training. Turkey, a member of NATO, could have invoked Article 5 to require all members of NATO to come to its aid.<ref>https://www.dw.com/en/how-natos-article-5-could-work-in-the-case-of-turkey/a-17983762</ref>  Under such a circumstance, the United States would have been required to destroy its own ally, the Kurds, whom it armed and equipped, or alternatively, all NATO members could have been required to fight the Kurds main strategic ally and backer, the United States.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/03/31/erdogan-blasts-white-house-support-kurds/</ref>
+
During the [[Obama administration]], the Obama regime was funding [[Kurdish]] fighters in [[Syria]], who in turn were staging cross-border attacks against [[Turkey]] with their American-funded weapons and training. Turkey, a member of NATO, could have invoked Article 5 to require all members of NATO to come to its aid.<ref>https://www.dw.com/en/how-natos-article-5-could-work-in-the-case-of-turkey/a-17983762</ref>  Under such a circumstance, the United States would have been required to destroy its own ally, the Kurds, whom it armed and equipped, or alternatively, all NATO members could have been required to fight the Kurds main strategic ally and backer, the United States.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/03/31/erdogan-blasts-white-house-support-kurds/</ref>
    
==Asia==
 
==Asia==
Line 63: Line 63:  
== The British Empire ==
 
== The British Empire ==
 
[[United Kingdom|The British Empire]] followed a policy of "Splendid Isolation" during the 19th century. Britain tried to stay out of any major alliances whilst also trying to maintain a balance of power in mainland [[Europe]] so as to avoid any dominant power arising to threaten their overseas territories or Britain itself. This policy ended in 1904 with the signing of the [[Entente Cordiale]] between Britain, [[France]] and the [[Russia]]
 
[[United Kingdom|The British Empire]] followed a policy of "Splendid Isolation" during the 19th century. Britain tried to stay out of any major alliances whilst also trying to maintain a balance of power in mainland [[Europe]] so as to avoid any dominant power arising to threaten their overseas territories or Britain itself. This policy ended in 1904 with the signing of the [[Entente Cordiale]] between Britain, [[France]] and the [[Russia]]
−
  −
==See also==
  −
* [[List of military strategies and concepts]]
      
==Further reading==
 
==Further reading==
Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
294,032

edits