opinionated question!!!!! person with most passionate answer wins 10 points(BEST ANSWER!!!!!!!!)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Question

what do u think about the neutrality policy? Should the U.S. go back to that policy? how do you feel about this policy in your personal life? When should you mind your own business? When should you get involved in other people's disputes?

Answer 1

I love it! I think we should definately go to that policy immediately and permenantly. Lets face it we are and always have been the Big Dog on the block. We should Pay attention to our own best interest. I mean that in every way! If other countries don't like what we are doing-if it is best for us-*** EM..we should only interfere I believe when their actions or interests cause our country or our citizens problems. Then we should act independently and decisively and if our enemies or allies don't like it--*** EM! They need us more than we need any of them!!

Answer 2

I've said this plenty of times.Every time we did mind our own bussiness we were attacked,which dragged us into both world wars.If we would have stopped Hitler while he was still weak then we would have saved millions of lives.If we had gone to Afghanistan after the USS Cole was attacked then the world trade center might still be standing today.We should get involved if we see somebody as a future threat.The same mistake was made with Hilter when France and Britain thought it was not enough evil to fight,but before they knew it there was too much evil for them to fight.The same mistake is being made today,they think Islamic Fascists are not evil enough so there for the victims of 9/11 shoud be denied justice.The question to ask these people is if it was their mother,their child or their brother or sister that was killed by Al Qaida,would'nt they want justice ? We must sometimes take lives in order to save lives.The two nukes dropped on Japan saved more lives than they took.The only other choice was to invade the mainland where every man woman and child was going to charge the front lines with bamboo spears and would have fought themselves to extinction.They say two wrongs don't make a right,but sadly that's not always the case.Violence is wrong.But sometimes you must do the wrong thing in order to make things right.Sometimes every chioce we have is the wrong chioce,just like the choice we made to nuke Japan,but the choice we made was the choice which was the least violent and Japan is doing very well in this world today.As blackhearted as it sounds we must never under any cirumstances go back to the neutrality policy.It will only cause more lives to be lost in the long run.100,000 lives taken now is much better that 10 million lives taken later.We are the back bone of the U.N. and right now we let them walk all over us.My suggestion is that we should stand up to the world while we still have the power to do so.It may be the wrong thing to do but will only save lives in the long run,
once again we can make things right by doing wrong.I know it sounds strange to most people but that's just how reality works.Very rarely is reality a pretty picture.

Answer 3

I suppose, to be honest, I don't really have an opinion on it one way or the other.
If the U.S. went back to that policy there are good and bad reasons for and against it so I'm guessing either way the U.S. decided to go would be alright. As far as minding your own business, one should mind one's business when those involved want you to but if those involved want you to get involved as well I suppose that would be OK too. When it comes to neutrality I really have no opinion one way or the other. As far as being neutral either way one chooses is fine with me.

Answer 4

The US should not be neutral, but you cannot install democracy at the point of a gun. If a people want freedom enough to fight, we should supply arms and support but not fight ourselves. When a madman tries to take over the world, (like Hitler) then we have to fight. That is why people are concerned about Iran. Those people are crazy and the question is; should we crush them now before they are strong or wait until they attack us?
I am against preemptive strikes, like we did in Iraq. We have to maintain a strong military so we can beat any attacker

Answer 5

The U.S. should not be neutral, but at the same time should not be trying to run the world, giving away our money to other countries, maintaining troops all over the world.

It is time to let other countries of the world bear the burden for a change.

Answer 6

He tied a bag to a Hawk he met at the carnival, who he later ate because the long and far bridge that was to far for throwing his bags across made him hungry.

Answer 7

Neutrality is a coward stance. US must be strong and lead in putting order in this chaotic world.