Do you think America has the right to use it's power to tell other nations what they can or can not do?

Question

America is called the worlds cop. If you were not an American and take Iran for example and their nuclear ability,do you think we should always protest the loudest, send in troops as the rest of the world agrees or not? We have 18 poseidon class subs, each has 24 mulitple nuclear warheads, and we have the same amount on ground. These subs can sit in the oceans bottom for 6 months without surfacing and could destroy the world as we know it. Now don't be a cowboy American, look from the outside. American is a nation that accepts all races, to the rest of the world we are mixed bloods and inpure and we tell them what to do? Now if the UN doesn't agree, we just side step them and "Get in done" Do we shoot down Koreas one missle over it's own seas? If Israel was not reformed by us in the mid east, do you think so many Americans would die there? When does it end? How many innocent pay with their lives and the changes of their blood lines because every 4 years maybe the party changes in DC?

This is a general question and not aimed at one political party or president. It's just a right or wrong thing in your opinion.

Have you ever seen a little girl that her parents were Christian and poor, that in a un named Mid east city that American bombs struck and she is so disfiguered that if it was your child, you would perhaps take her life? Sounds rough? Life and people in general are the same worldwide, It's fine to protect what you have but the innocent and the young always pay for the sins of their fathers it seems.

In WW11, the Japanese in the Philippines killed over 60,000 Americans, they would starve, beat, torture and burn alive Allied soldiers. They raped any woman they wanted in the villages any time they wanted. They killed over 1 million Filipinos. These are our allies we must protect the evil N, Korean nation from, right? Because we are trading partners and we help protect Japan, after all they are so skilled in electronics and cars...Do you not see the irony?

Answer 1

Nope.

Answer 2

What a good question, and a complicated one as well. My answer is a mixture of hope and despair, paradoxically. First, I believe that America has proven itself as the most stable government of the world. I think it is right and appropriate for the US to "market" this brand of government because it really does bring the the possibility of a better life for all humans, despite the flaws of temporary elected leaders. It works. We have access to the most resources of any other country, and part of that is because we have had the freedom to think of all the possibilities! That said, it is not a cookie-cutter template that can be applied to all cultures, and this is where despair sets in. Currently, we have an administration that seems to be more strong-arming then pursuasive in it's approach to the global discussion. This does not mean that I do not believe in a strong military; rather, it should be utilized and referred to as a last choice in implementation rather than being introduced as the first option in order to intimidate. America is so much more than a military giant, and this diverse pallette is what I wish for other countries to see. The biggest challenge seems to be to convey that this freedom does not lead to a slippery slope of debauchery as some fundamental religious leaders might believe (in this country as well as without!). I think the problem lies in short-term thinking among politicians who are heavily influenced by Big Business, which thrive in areas where there is a democracy (of some kind) rather than theocracies or dictatorships. Of course there is always the veneer of nationalism and patriotism when these conflicts occur (deftly manipulated and utilized); young men and women will die being deployed to enforce whatever action is ordered that supports the creation of a democratic model. But the engine driving it (currently) has Business as it's main item. The whole reason the US gives China MFN status is because the market potential is huge, regardless of human rights violations. The argument I've heard is that "we need to bring China into the fold of the International community" and this is one way in which we can eventually impose a world concept towards human rights. I would prefer a leader who could strike a balance between a business model and a socio-political one that reflects an awareness of global diversity, less religious rigidity, and more tolerance and inclusion. I would prefer that business be secondary to the humanitarian agenda, but I realize this is not terribly practical. But, should it be?

We are in a position to inspire the world, and so far, this opportunity has been squandered because we are not saying what we mean or doing what we say.

Answer 3

Absolutely not. To do so is to commit the worst kind of logical fallacy, the Appeal to Force, aka "Might Makes Right"- just because W says Iraq under Hussein was harboring terrorists doesn't mean it's so.

In simpler, non-political terms, let's say I've got a doomsday weapon at my disposal, capable of destroying the entire planet with the push of a button. Let's say I order the world to believe that the sky is green, a light, springtime green.

Anyone who refuses to believe what I just asserted regarding the color of the sky had best change their belief or suffer my wrath.

Is the sky really going to become green just because I've got the ability to destroy the planet for someone, anyone's not believing my assertion?

Hardly.

Unfortunately, life isn't so simple- we've got a tremendously complex world to live in, one with folks like W parading around "spreading democracy" and threatening our neighbors with such nonsense as "either you're with us, or you're with the terrorists"- which is, by the way, yet another logical fallacy, the False Dilemma...

Oh the irony.

I hope I've helped answer the question without boring you to tears. Ciao!

Answer 4

Remember how you answered this question when a Democratic president is in power again. He just may want to send troops to the balkins and bosina. Don't forget this quote from Clinton:

Clinton, Dec. 19, 1998: "Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. ... Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. ... Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons."

Answer 5

Yes we do! Especially when it comes to nuclear ability. That scares the hell out of me and Im glad we are "protesting" it. You mention that we are the worlds cop. That is true. We are also one of the first ones if not the first one there to help countires in diseaster.

Answer 6

No, we seem to forget that Manifest Destiny wasn't exactly a fair thing....and take it to mean we are the ones who are the greatest and deserve to call the shots. It's like in Palestine - we wanted them to be democratic, but now that they all elected a party we don't agree with, it's wrong. No, it's democracy, just like you wanted....

Answer 7

Absolutely not. I am an American proud to be one too. But like our Fuhrer and his party members say when they talk about when they speak about illegal immigration they are SOVEREIGN nations and they can do what they need to do.

Answer 8

I absolutely believe in the golden rule, He who has the gold makes the rule. Seriously yes I believe that we should do everything in our power to keep radical sadists from killing more Americans.

Answer 9

your my hero
at least one person realises what is going on
why does the USA say whose good and bad.
Dont you think the iranians object to The usa or israel having weapons of mass destruction - but the usa thinks that they are the world police and commit autrocities in the name of "terrorism"
AMERICA ARE THE TRUE TERRORISTs

Answer 10

Happy planet.