Is the US wrong for getting involved in global issues?

Discussion in 'Politics Discussion' started by alexisfinch24, Jun 16, 2014.

  1. alexisfinch24

    alexisfinch24 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2014
    Posts:
    66
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, trading one dictator for another is always a possibility. But, the best thing for our country to do is to rid outselves of any real threats against world peace and freedom. I know people see our country as bullies but, we are more along the lines of protectors of freedom. I do not think we should get involved everywhere. We must watch for the true threats to peace and liberty then strike quickly and swift. Essentially cutting the head off the snake before it destroys too many.
     
  2. Kate

    Kate Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    515
    Likes Received:
    5
    Well said. I don't think it should be just America, though, and it rarely is. I get so stunned when I hear someone indicate that the free world should just "stay out of it" and let terrorist extremists "do their thing." It's like the thought process stops there and those people don't realize that groups like that *never* just stay in the little middle east countries they're terrorizing. They grow and they move on to "bigger and better" places... and if world leaders are looking the other way, next thing ya know, the World Trade Center is falling. I hate war. I hate terror. But... just can't pretend they're going to stay away from us.

    I've enjoyed reading your thoughts in the forum, alexisfinch24. They don't always agree with mine :D but they're well-thought out and backed up with solid reasoning.
     
  3. alexisfinch24

    alexisfinch24 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2014
    Posts:
    66
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, thank you so very much, Kate. I do not believe in just saying things to say them or, to be rambling on and on like a crazy person. I think out everything before I speak it. Especially on this topic which is so very near and dear to me.

    I agree with you on this Kate. There should be others involved but, it is not the case in so many of these situations. They do not want to get involved in the battles or fighting. They do however always want to be involved with the rebuilding no doubt to line their pockets with our money. They should be involved from the start if they hope to profit from the rebuilding.
     
  4. Kate

    Kate Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    515
    Likes Received:
    5
    This brought a very big smile to me... because when I read it, I thought of all the people I've ever known who were *exactly* like your very apt description... they grab onto an ideal and never give one thought to "oh, but if we do that, this is likely to happen." The worst "rambler about nothing at all" that I know can go on and on for an hour and afterward I always have to giggle realizing that he never said much except repeating his idealized "under 30" rhetoric a dozen times. :D Maybe my mama was right... maybe one of these times I'll be rollin' my eyes at one of those people and they'll stick that way!

    You're right about the reconstruction... you know the story of the little red hen?
     
  5. ash2014uk

    ash2014uk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2014
    Posts:
    54
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would like to think that the US do for the benefit of the country they are getting involved in but lets be honest, they wouldn't get involved if it didnt benefit them in anyway. Most the time it is due to resources that get from the country they help. To be fair to the US though, they will build some strong relationships with Countries if they help and this could help the economy in the US.
     
  6. Casper

    Casper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2014
    Posts:
    253
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sorry but I can't resist it. Here are a just few links on America 'bringing democracy' to the downtrodden. Please let me know if it has changed your view on U.S 'interfering', after you have read them.

    http://johnpilger.com/articles/break-the-silence-a-world-war-is-beckoning

    http://johnpilger.com/articles/the-...are-hoodwinked-into-accepting-a-new-world-war

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...ister-defies-us-accuses-saudi-arabia-genocide

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...nual-reports-unveiled-reveal-full-investment-
     
  7. Casper

    Casper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2014
    Posts:
    253
    Likes Received:
    0
  8. alexisfinch24

    alexisfinch24 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2014
    Posts:
    66
    Likes Received:
    1
    My reply...

    Just so that we are on the same page I want to tell you that I had already been to some of those sites. Now, I did check out the ones that I had not visited before and, they were full of information. Thanks for sharing them so that everyone can make an informed decision on the topic of this thread but, I have not changed my opinion at all. Because, I do not just make un-educated guesses. I always research and make my mind up about a topic that way before I put my two cents in.
     
  9. Annabell

    Annabell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    95
    Likes Received:
    2
    This isn't a 'what if?' though. It has happened. Countless times.

    More importantly, it has happened and the worse option was actually backed and installed by the US!

    I mean, there was a time when America was buddies with a little known terrorist known as Osama Bin Laden.
     
  10. Kate

    Kate Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    515
    Likes Received:
    5
    Getting lost here... that was an answer to your own post that said "Ah but what if by getting rid of one threat, you open way for a new, worse threat?" So you'd already said "what if" and the responses you're receiving are about that.

    So you're saying US, UK, etc. should just let ISIS keep getting bigger and bigger and expanding to the rest of the world just in case stopping them may lead to an even worse terrorist group?

    I'll wait for further response before saying more... you said "what if" and then "this isn't what if" so I'll have to know which way you're going here.
     

Share This Page