Would you prefer the Russians or the Chinese to be the world's police force? Someone will be filling that power vacuum..

The UN is a joke.

Oh lets go complain to the UN about Russia invading Georgia, oh wait Russia can veto anything that might go against them.

GG, destroy the UN, nothing but an area for worthless countries to try and complain when they do little for the world.

> Red_Rooster wrote:

> This is coming from an american himself. I wish we would stop involving in everything in the world. They don't really appreciate it and we are going bankrupt because of it. Just because you are the only superpower does not mean you should try to dictate how the world functions. I say we get our own shit together and lets do it fast!
Really what are we gaining by invading countries and giving so much in aid? We stayed in Iraq and now Russia has higher moral authority than us! It doesn't matter if we are there to do good for the people or not. The world doesnt see it that way.
Anyone agree/disagree? leave your thoughts
_____________________________________
I understand
but
usually the lefties say that the Americans SHOULD interfere in the political lives of people in nations where they're not as high a "civilized" standard in everday living and political life
and usually the righties say that Americans SHOULD interfere in the political lives of people in nations who's government, or anti-America groups, attack the USA on American soil and/or American companies off American soil.
And both extreme sides say the other is selfish and attempt to justify why they're not.

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

> Soth wrote:

> Tire the United States is the worlds LAST super power.  There are other powers out there but none can compare to the united States.

As for the United States being the "world police".  In this age of technological advances in communication and travel we feel a bit more connected.  The feeling of isolationism is quickly disapearing.  There will always be a "world police" if it isnt the most powerful entity in the world who is fulfilling the role the weaker entity claiming the role of the "world police" would eventually piss off the more powerful isolationist country and large conflict would arise.  It's best to have the most powerful country fulfilling that role.
____________________
Or its best to fulfill George Washington's request to stay out of the political affairs of any other nation.

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

The world is economically interdependent, but states continue and probably will continue to exist. A world government is just not possible right now, because of the way power is currently structured and it would be just too inefficient.

As for the US policing the world, I agree. We should aim for a balance of power and build strategic coalitions, rather than just act and treat our allies like they are our subjects. That kind of policy, we shall call it the Bush policy, is expensive, makes enemies, and pushes the balance of power out of balance - which increases the risk of war or other costly international events.

You guys misunderstood my post. I want everyone in the world to figure everything out themselves.

one example, the US is trying to broker a peace deal between palestine and israel. I really dont think we should be doing that. Let them figure their own shit out. Nothing we say is going to help and it might even be hurting the process.

The US, at one point, maybe 15-20 years ago could interfere in everything. But at this point we cant. We dont have the money and the manpower to do everything. We have our own problems to fix! And also we need to stop invading and OCCUPYING places. If one group of people attack us we should go after them by bombing them and using our high tech missiles. Invadin and occupying a whole country just for a few guys is wasteful spending and it creates problems instead of solutions!

> Red_Rooster wrote:

> You guys misunderstood my post. I want everyone in the world to figure everything out themselves.

one example, the US is trying to broker a peace deal between palestine and israel. I really dont think we should be doing that. Let them figure their own shit out. Nothing we say is going to help and it might even be hurting the process.

The US, at one point, maybe 15-20 years ago could interfere in everything. But at this point we cant. We dont have the money and the manpower to do everything. We have our own problems to fix! And also we need to stop invading and OCCUPYING places. If one group of people attack us we should go after them by bombing them and using our high tech missiles. Invadin and occupying a whole country just for a few guys is wasteful spending and it creates problems instead of solutions!
_____________________________
I didn't misunderstand.
Please see my third post in here.

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

"US is trying to broker a peace deal between palestine and israel. I really dont think we should be doing that" - FAR from truth, instead US RULERS TRY TO KEEP CONFLICTS GOING ON AND ON AND ON, the longer the conflicts continue the more profts they get. Vietnam war is an example - americanbankers were financing russians to fight american troops, american troops had orders not to destroy vietnamies vital military points in order to prevent complete destruction of vietnamese defences

and when u say "We dont have the money " it simply means YOU the TAX PAYER has no money but military complex is getting more and more welth with each passing day

"and NATO has never made any enemies"

Sure it made enemies, why was otherwise the Warschaupact conceived?

Hmmm, interestin' proposition...

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

What's wrong with bein' police fer th' world?  It makes it easier t' be pirates.  yaaaarrrr

> Einstein wrote:

> Well to keep costs down we could just nuke the location of an offending dictator of an evil regime. Eventually all dictators would be worried they were next and decide to stop the evil stuff?

Or they could run crying to Russia and get them to nuke the US, one of its allies or absorb them Russia itself?  I like your idea though, but it carries too great a risk of nuclear war.