Also imagine that there are about 20 kids in your class and 8 of them a bullies and cause problems for everyone. YOu are the biggest strongest kid in the class. Would you take action against they bullies when they are roughing up the weaker kids?
Similarly should the United States act in the same way? (protecting weaker countries and peoples from hostiles)
2006-11-16 22:44:22 · 7 answers · asked by sshazzam 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Violence as a solution to any problem should only be a last resort. In a perfect world there would be no war, but we do not live in a perfect world. The United States cannot police the whole world it is just unworkable and unrealistic. The problem in the way we choose our fights. Wars we engage in are the ones where we perceive a vital national interest rather than a humanitarian one. Iraq is a good example. While there is a humanitarian side of the conflict, we would not be there if the country did not possess a large oil supply. Oil is central to the US economy and therefore represents a vital national interest. Compare this with Dafur. A terrible genocide is occurring there, but honestly speaking they have nothing we want. The optimum world military situation would be one where nations acted together against tyrants, but unfortunately political realities do not allow for this.
2006-11-16 23:10:15 · answer #1 · answered by Bryan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Comparing the world to grade school is ignorant. We're dealing with adults around the world, not 10 year old's who punch you in the arm when they want to bully. Our world is not a school yard and the comparison is not even close. There are many things we have no business involved in. The Iraqi's have lived like they have for thousands of years now and seems to be what the majority wants. Who are we to tell them what they should have instead of what they want? It's a very dangerous game we are playing right now and could end us in another world war in the near future.
2006-11-17 06:54:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that you shouldn't but discourage the other bullies to do bully. Doing so will only make you one of them. But, I think the united states should defend weaker countries.
2006-11-17 06:53:50 · answer #3 · answered by sino_si_max??? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Be the better person, bullying a bully is not any better. I would get a person of authority involved.
Yep, similarly with the US. We are not king of the world, and there has to be agreement with other nations about our actions, or we become the renegades.
2006-11-17 06:52:45 · answer #4 · answered by just browsin 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would let the bullies steal the money from the little kids, then beat the bullies up and take the money from them. This would teach them that there is always someone bigger, and would make my wallet fatter.
If they keep it up, I might form a syndicate and branch out, terrorizing other school children and using the funds to puy a ps3. Eventually, I would invest in more muscle, diversify my money intake from extortion to drugs, and formulate my empire.
2006-11-17 10:59:15 · answer #5 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No for 2 reasons 1. i can't police the world unfortually us hasn't learned that yet. 2. once you become the aggressor you have become the terrorist, try 2 make people think and live within your ideals of whats except able and what isn't. Once you think you can make people believe and take on your values it's called the Big Bully. And people hate and resent you.
2006-11-17 06:53:29 · answer #6 · answered by silkieladyinthecity 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only cowards are bullies. I would never bully anyone.
2006-11-17 07:49:54 · answer #7 · answered by mamabag06 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋