[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

by Christine Preetha Philip... a response

Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
Many have built this nation to its greatness with intelligence, hard work, 
and the help of
God. Those people were guided by providence and they entered a wilderness 
with vision,
industry, and courage. Because of them and God’s grace, the United States is 
the leading
nation in the world. Human life is respected, the will of the people speaks, 
the rights of the
people are valued above everything else. The US does play the role mostly for 
and economic interests. Since the US has a substantial amount of power, 
should this
nation intervene in everything occurring around the world? I think that the 
US should be
the world’s policeman to an extent. “Global leadership” has its pros and cons.
    I say, be glad it’s the US and not Nazi Germany. We are grateful to be 
living in a
nation that protects us from certain harm and makes executive decisions 
rather than those
like Hitler, Kadafi, Saddam, Molosovich, and so on. Since the US is the 
leading nation, it
is their duty to look after the other nations because it is the moral, 
ethical, and just thing to
do. The US is also the biggest contributor to NATO, the force that can 
prevent the next
world war. Once again, would we want a country like Russia, who is having a 
hard time
sustaining it’s own economy, be the biggest contributor? 
    The US has delivered vast amounts of food for the troubled and starving 
in such
places as Berlin in WW2. If we didn’t, who would of?  We have also provided 
amounts of money and services such as non-combat military and structural 
engineering to
many countries ravaged by earthquakes in recent years. It’s pretty hard to 
complain when
you’re getting something for free isn’t it? Iraq was invaded for two reasons, 
oil and
military. If Saddam had been allowed to annex Kuwait and steal it’s oil, that 
would be the
first step to allow any country to attack a neighbor. The US does not simply 
protect a
nation, such as Israel, for the sake of doing the residents a favor. The US 
does it because
it supports ‘democracy and freedom’. I think that we should respect the US 
doing the job
as the policeman of the world. Left strictly to its own devices, the world 
will be a much
more dangerous place than it already is.
    Then again, we can’t assume that the decisions we chose to impose are 
good for everyone everywhere. We have to be much more careful before we 
impose our
massive power.  Still, better America doing it than anyone else. Global 
leadership also has
the immense costs and risks. Much of the $365 billion defense budget is spent 
to support
US aspirations to lead the world. Many people think that countries should 
have their own
policeman and the US should use that money only to defend itself. 
       There are also human costs and in some cases it’s not necessary to be 
the military
policeman of the world as well as the economic policeman of the world. 
Moreover, it is an
extremely risky policy that forces US involvement in numerous situations 
unrelated to
American national security. There are also several alternatives to global 
including a greater reliance on regional security organizations and so forth. 
Also as the
policeman of the world, we have sometimes not kept up with our citizenry in a 
because there are still homeless people, and most of us do not want our tax 
money being
used in certain circumstances.  
    I have mentioned the positive and negative aspects of this issue, and  to 
answer the
question if whether or not the US should be the world’s policeman, I think 
that it is the
sensible thing to do, but there are also limits.

This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/