Interventionist or Isolationist?
I believe that there is no clear-cut position as to whether we should be Interventionist or Isolationist. It all comes down to circumstances. Almost every conflict the United States had been involved in has been about economics and what our country can gain. We have been one of the world’s greatest powers since the early 1900’s, mainly because of colonialization and domination of world economy.
In World War I, we should have maintained our isolationist policy if possible. The main reason we became involved was because the new expansionist mood of the Axis Powers threatened the global empire we were apparently building. And, the war interfered with our prosperous trade system with the other countries. As Henry Ford put it, “Do you want to know the cause of the war? It is capitalism, greed, the dirty hunger for dollars.” And, in the end, I don’s think we could have stayed out of the war if we wanted to. The world at the time was a tangled web of alliances that meant a local conflict could start a massive war. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and his wife was the spark that ignited that web. Even after the start of World War I, the United States was content to sell food and munitions to the countries involved in the conflict. It wasn’t until Germany began to attack the ships taking those trade items to Europe that the U.S. started to get mad. They had been trying to pursue a policy of neutrality and semi-isolationism, but now they were being dragged into a conflict they had nothing to do with. The United States had nothing to gain but the money from trade. Therefore, we payed a price of many lives for little to no gain.
I have a different view, however, on World War II. Once the war had started, it should have been interventionist all the way, from an economic and a patriotic point of view.
The desire to avoid "foreign entanglements" of all kinds had been an American foreign policy for more than a century. A very real "geographical isolation" permitted the United States to "fill up the empty lands of North America free from the threat of foreign conflict.” President Roosevelt wanted to avoid war, especially since it was contrary to American policy which most if not all Americans were in agreement with. And as I said, another factor that led to the decision of Neutrality by President Rooseve...
... middle of paper ...
...endanger the United States more than it already was. On the following day Roosevelt argued that the attack "had given us an opportunity". Congress approved the declaration of war with only one dissenting voice.
If we hadn’t gone to war, many things would have happened. First, the Great Depression probably would have continued because it was the jobs and income from the war that brought us out of the Depression. Second, the Nazi’s would have been able to continue with their death camps and many millions more people would have died. Third, we never would have gotten our atomic revenge on the Japanese. However, it was those same atomic weapons that fueled the Cold War, and left people living in fear for the next several decades.
So, as you can see, there are advantages and disadvantages to being Isolationist or Interventionist. We can do a lot of good for the world by stepping in, however it is often at a great cost to ourselves. And our country can be seen as a great protector or a greater destroyer. Being only Isolationist or Interventionist would mean we are weak or too controlling. All we can do is try to find a medium and decide when is the right time for action.
Both the conservatives and liberals during time realized that American involvement had gone too far. They were suppose to be promised isolation. Sentiments of the 1914 Proclamation of Neutrality had come back, mainly due to the involvement of over 100,000 American deaths in a war which did not even concern them. As Washington said in his Farewell Address, to resist being involed in foreign alliances, so did the liberals. Take the article from the New Republic (Doc. B) for example, the article indicates its reluctance to continue with an alliance to "intensify . . . the old and ugly dissentions." The conservatives also felt that further involvement would be futile, for such a pact would mean future skirmishes would lead to new wars, where the U.S. would have to enter, as a result of
The U.S. has been sending troops to over-sea countries to aid the needy, and take certain measures to try to keep our country safe. We want to help the innocent lives, care for the civilians, and want them to be free. We help other countries so that maybe one day they can stand on their own! Power is everything. Power is what controls the world, and without it, you become weak. When we help other countries, that shows how powerful we are, and how strong we are to stand on our on and help! The U.S is considered to be the superpower in the world. Therefore, it should use its power to help other countries in need. Yes, we have a lot of problems with our government,
In the book, America’s Great War: World War I and the American Experience, Robert H. Zieger discusses the events between 1914 through 1920 forever defined the United States in the Twentieth Century. When conflict broke out in Europe in 1914, the President, Woodrow Wilson, along with the American people wished to remain neutral. In the beginning of the Twentieth Century United States politics was still based on the “isolationism” ideals of the previous century. The United States did not wish to be involved in European politics or world matters. The U.S. goal was to expand trade and commerce throughout the world and protect the borders of North America.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed the United States Congress following the unexpected attack by Japan on Pearl Harbor the previous day. As a result, Roosevelt asked the Congress to declare war on Japan. In his speech to Congress, President Roosevelt stated that the previous day, which was December 7th, 1941, was a date that they will live in notoriety. President Roosevelt said that the United States of America was abruptly and intentionally attacked by naval and air forces of the Japanese emperor.
The United States remained neutral in World War One because they saw it in their best interest. At the time the war began, the U.S. industry was struggling. Staying out of the war was a way to boost the industry in America by utilizing trade with both the Ally and Central Powers. The U.S. also had no real reason to join the war. They had close ties with both sides. Some problems, however, would arise that would question the U.S. decision to remain neutral and sway their opinions to one side of the war.
When World War I broke out in Europe, Woodrow Wilson announced that the United States would stay out of European affairs and remain neutral. Wilson was aware that the United States had no interest in the matters that did not directly affect the interests of American citizens. He hoped that the United States would remain neutral and continue to trade with warring nations. The American view of neutrality meant we were entitled to safely and freely trade with either side at war as long as it was out in the open seas. The United States hoped to stay out of the way because war was viewed as wasteful, irrational, and immoral.
World War II was an exceptional war for the United States. The United States emerged from the war as a world superpower and protector of all other nations. There were many reasons why the United States entered World War II, however President Franklin Roosevelt was in some way directly connected to every reason. Roosevelt wanted to enter World War II as soon as it started for political and economic needs. However, the American people did not want to enter in another war, such as World War I, that costs so many lives and money. Therefore, Roosevelt schemed a plan to enter the United States into World War II that would change the minds of the American people, including the direct aiding of Great Britain, the German bombing of a United States warship, and the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor.
Although the United States appeared isolationist in the 1920s, it cannot be called truly isolationist as policy remained interventionist over some issues. Although it did not join the League of Nations, it worked closely with them, especially over humanitarian issues. It also instigated and signed the Kellog-Briande Pact in 1928 along with 63 other nations, outlawing war. Furthermore, interventionism continued where it was most convenient in regard to colonial interests, trade opportunities, ensuring peace overseas and the repayment of foreign debt. Although President Harding claimed we see no part in directing the destiny of the world', it seems that a foreign policy of interventionism was needed in directing the destiny of the United States.
Group therapy, is like a night out with the ladies. An evening night out when the ladies take a break from motherhood and being a wife. And take the necessary need to let go of some stress and resolve any issues they may have. Sharing and supporting, is like a study group were students get together to focus on particular projects. While socializing and answering each other’s questions, as well as self-help.
Group therapy is a setting among other antisocial personalities. This style allows the patient a different type of incentive to improve some of their disorders.
Similarly, inferiority feelings may be challenged to offset the negative concepts and values that form the roots of social and emotional issues. Group therapy can facilitate the social context in which the participants may develop the sense of belonging and community. Some of the beneficial dynamics of the group are the identification between group members’ behavior, participants can benefit from others group members’ feedback, ability to help other and receive support from others members. The group enables the possibility of trying new behaviors and encourages the other students to take action over their lives. There are four stages in group therapy that correspond to four goals in counseling: first establishing and maintaining interconnected relationships with another student of the group; the therapy is based on the idea of equality between members, mutual respect, and identical involvement. The introduction of self-rule bases from the counselor, who is the mediator, is important. Both, students and counselor work together in the process to explore and look for positive change during the sessions (Corey,
The U.S.’ involvement in World Wars I and II did not occur immediately following the beginning of the wars. Rather, in WWI, President Wilson, who had built his re-election campaign around the slogan, “he kept us out of war,'; entered the U.S. into WWI shortly after his re-election. Although Wilson had not specifically promised to keep the country out of war, he declared that only a negotiated “peace without victory'; would prove durable (Bailey, 722). Unfortun...
Irvin D. Yalom, author of the book The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy, has vast knowledge and experience with group therapy and, in this book, imparted it to neophyte counselors in a logical and detailed format. The author carefully explained the therapeutic value of a group, the factors necessary to facilitate change, and the role of the therapist. The author emphasized the here-and-now focus, and how group members create a social microcosm of their life within the therapy group. Yalom advised on practical matters, like the selection of clients and the creation of the group. He then carefully explored the stages that groups move through and some problem members could encounter.
As a student, practice is crucial to learn group therapy techniques. In order to achieve these practices, I attended 2 support groups of the same topic. Observation and attendance constructs an idea of how group therapy works. Attending this group was important because of the profoundness of its meaning and experiences I have witnessed.
Corey, G. (1999). Theory and practice of group counseling. (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.