Is America justified policing the world?

Question

If not for us, what would stop China from invading Taiwan? What would keep Russia from re-absorbing their old satellite nations? Some countries have proven that they have no regard for human rights, and nothing motivates them more than power. Imagine a world in which no one was strong enough to keep countries like China and Russia in check

Answer 1

Just like any "police force" people like to shine a bad light on us. But who do they call when they need help or are in trouble? Being a leader puts us in a no win situation... damned if you do damned if you don't. If we step in people hate us... if we stay out of it people cry "where are they?"

Answer 2

If the US can keep a check on countries like China and Russia, who keeps a check on the US??? The UN? Ya right!

Time and again the US has interfered in other countries internal affairs. Sometimes it doesn't interfere but then it has it's own political and economic reasons for that. Ever since the Second World War, the US has adopted an attitude of "You are either with us or against us!" when dealing with other sovereign countries. Whichever country doesn't agree with (bow or bend to) the US, that country comes under the latter's negative eye. It may lead to diplomatic cold-shoulder, economic sanctions to starve the nation or even aggression and invasion.

The US has brought down governments that were not "co-operative", supported coups, invaded or supported other nations invading a third nation. The list goes on and on. There are a number of examples throughout World history that can prove this. Cuba, Vietnam, Central American countries like Guatemala, India, Laos, Cambodia............. and more recently Iraq. Iran and North Korea are probably next. The only reason that the US hasn't invaded Iran and North Korea is that it is possible that they have nuclear weapons now. North Korea already has it.

Every sovereign nation has a right to exist, how-so-ever cruel it may look. They all deserve a right to self determination. A democratic country like the US can understand what 'rights' are. But it seems that the US has provided themselves with a right to rule the world (or to put it in your words, 'right to police' the world.). This, I believe, is Wrong. The UN exists to police the world. But when it comes to dealing with the super-powers (especially the US), it is just a farce. The US never listens and agrees to the UN too if it is against the former's interests. Afterall, the Iraq invasion was opposed by the UN too.

And the US has created more problems for the world too because of this foreign policy. If you look back in history, you will realize that the US (the CIA actually) installed Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Al Qaeda is also part of a multi-million dollar US weapon (used against the former USSR in Afghanistan) which has malfunctioned and today turned against the US.

This aggressive foreign policy has only damaged the reputation of the US the world over. No one regards the US as their saviour, the US is regarded as a bully instead. A bully who can only think about himself. After 9/11, for once I thought that a US invasion of Afghanistan to hunt down Al Qaeda members was justified. But the US has gone back to its days of bullying by invading Iraq on a silly and unproved reason. God save the world if a nuclear war breaks out just in case the US actually does invade Iran and North Korea.

Back during the Cold-War days, the Soviet Union kept a check on the US and vice versa. Today there is no Soviet Union. The Cold War has ended. But the world is no less safe today as it was during the Cold War days. The US and its allies are partly responsible for this.

How can one justify the killing of Iraqi citizens, the mass murders of Vietnam, the oppression of Palestinian people in their own country by its neighbour Isreal (a US ally). Wasn't all this for US self interest? What about the human rights of these people? China and Russia are not the only villians of peace in the world after all.

I stand by my statement. The US is not justified in 'policing' the world. That is the job of the UN. And the US should not interfere either in the UN's working or in the matters of other independent nations. If a country calls for help (like Kuwait during 1991), then thats a different matter. Otherwise NO!

PS: The US can't decide which nations can have nuclear weapons and which should not. Until and unless the US disarm their own nuclear weapons, it should not even think of disallowing others from developing nuclear weapons.

Answer 3

I trust you, yet for motives you in all hazard won't like. The U.S. is continuously resented for having to act through fact the international's police rigidity. Why ought to our youths be expended to stabilize the armpits of the globe and squash the tinpot regimes that insist on damn their sabers? isn't there a international physique that assumes this place? The UN is meant to take the lead place on those concerns. enable's assessment how effective this is: a million) Meaningless determination after meaningless determination that are no longer incredibly honestly worth the paper they are written on... waste of time and breath to worry to even heed them. 2) whilst the UN does interfere, its brokers brutalize and rape indigenous peoples. does no longer that make the UN a criminal corporation that should be squashed? 3) funds has a tendency to vanish in the rip-off de jour. 4) each third international united states is positioned on an equivalent enjoying field, permitting medieval concerns to assume a place in such concerns as human rights. Ha! I agree this is stupid and wasteful to deplete time, treasure and blood upon something of the international. in line with hazard sooner or later we will study that this is under no circumstances favorite. No reliable deed is going unpunished, suitable? in line with hazard France ought to step and alter into the international's police rigidity. that could desire to be a revolt.

Answer 4

Hold on one minute. I don't think thats our job. The purpose of our military is to protect our national interest not police the world. Taking out Saddam and the Taliban was in our national interest. Attacking Iran to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons would also be in our national interest.

Stopping Serbs from killing Moslems was not in our national interest.

Answer 5

It seems like its always a catch-22.

If we don't help out, we're called out by the international community for not helping because we have the power and resources to help.

If we do help, we're called out by the international community for meddling in others affairs.

Whether it be China, Russia, Iraq, SE Asia post-tsunami, whatever.

Answer 6

I believe America is justified for policing the world because we can police the world. The UN, whos job IS to police the world, cant do their job worth anything. Sure its a double edged sword, no one can deny that, but in this case, one side is sharper than the other.

Answer 7

The United States has to police the would.

If we did not do it - it wouldn't get done.

Can you imagine any European country doing something because the feel it is right instead of because they feel it is profitable?

Answer 8

In the famous words of A. Hitler: Fornicate sie, wenn sie nicht einen Witz nehmen können.

Answer 9

Yes we are a super power and friend to our allies.

Our enemies would love us to wimp out. Hope our politicians know that.

Answer 10

Ahmen brother, we do what is right for humanity, contrary to what many people think, like people that think that soldiers are baby killers.