If we sit back and do nothing, the chances the dictator threatens the US becomes much higher. Also most non democratic countries stand to oppose the United States. These countries are often supported by enemies of the US such as Russia, China, and Taliban so by intervening we are taking away power of countries that pose a threat to our nation. Don't forget that when the first Americans were fighting the British for freedom, we desperately needed the aid of France to be victorious. Even the US needed help at a point. By being proactive we can prevent the horrid things that may result if we don't such as a genocide. Lastly, it is morally right and just to help these countries, imagine if you had no freedom and the people who can help you refuse to simply out of their own greed.
No country has the right to intervene with foreign affairs for no reason at all, but when there is a compelling reason, it should intervene. The United States cannot let anyone violates the international law, much more allow other countries harm US citizens. Obligated to protect the law and the people, US can justify its foreign intervention and can expect support from its allies.
The U.S. should intervene in some foreign affairs. If there is genocide going on, the United States should help intervene to stop it along with the United Nations. If the United States (and other countries) would not have intervened during the Holocaust, things could have been much worse. While I understand that money is an issue, in extreme cases, I do believe that the U.S. should help intervene in foreign affairs.
Help others so they can help you when you need something or any other thing what ever your momma says do eeses th, Fhk5uyg yvhvyg 6ygygyf. FYI guy guiv was your last time uof is your birthday 🎁 is the season to fall in love of our life and how they feel as if the lord is not the only reason he is in control of that god is the most amazing 😉 is to say
They need the help, and it's not like anyone else is gonna help them. The US took it upon themselves to intervene, and now the least you can do is see it through. If they aren't gonna help us out, that's there problem. If things do start to get really bad (i.E. Localized Depression, famine, something that only affects the US and doesn't really affect other nations), then we can divert funding back to our own people. In the time it would take to do that, we could count on at least a few countries to help us out.
In the event of foreign conflict, it is simply morally right for the US to intervene, especially if assisting a poorer nation or an ally of the United States. Should civilian lives be at risk, even if they are not citizens of the US, they are still humans and do not deserve to lose their lives in a war for no reason. Where third-world countries are concerned, the United States should step in to protect citizens of a country with little resources of their own, or a weak/small military. After all, as the #1 global superpower and the 5th richest country in the world, we have more than enough money and power to provide for smaller nations that don't have as much. And lastly, allies of the US are trusting us to have their back, especially if they are involved in an affair of some sort. It just would not be right to leave them to fend for themselves, even if the conflict is foreign. By making an alliance, we are creating trust between 2 nations, and morally, it is so wrong to betray the trust of an ally that is struggling in a time of war.
Donald duck "Absolutely NO - nothing to discuss" have a fun day today america dank memes forever ear rape north and south koria have peace treaty they no kill each one debate my life sentanse have fun days penny wise burger-king foot leatus mick pick 99999999999 ant 99999 and 778888
As a 3rd world country, as a country that believes in the better, that tries to implicate change, when we are trying to help others we need to take on the responsibility, take on the charge, and change lives elsewhere. As a government that believes in empowering change, making our country a better, place we have to think a bit beyond our borders, and that us living in a world where we are not constantly faced with a discussion, sometimes we need to take that on, and try to do whats right, rather than stand on the sidelines, Lindsoe as a bystander, as someone innocent, is being, beaten, rapped, and murdered, because of their leadership, we are lucky that some of these problems aren't as common here in Canada, or the U.S, so instead of taking our great opportunities for granted, lets take the pride that we have as a nation, and try to spread it to those who are in need or true leadership!
If we where to help a country in the middle east that has a lot of oil reserves and is by the gulf and we help them out if Isis or aliquot came in there and tried to take the oil and we helped them we could get some of the oil maybe for a lower price if we helped
I believe you are a fucking cunt who doesnt deserve life for not letting immigrants in because maybe some of us want to die. So what if a few bystanders are killed too? Less stress for them. Im right and you arent allowed allowed to disagree because #prayformanchester and #prayforfrance
During U.S History class, I learned that the U.S was not a major power. The U.S was actually choosing to be neutral and isolated itself from the war until the attack on Pearl Harbor and 2 days after, the Japanese the U.S Naval port in Alaska. Once the U.S dropped the 2 atomic bombs known as "Little Boy" (Hiroshima) and "Fat Man" (Nagasaki) on Japan, the U.S put so much fear into Japan and the rest of the world that the U.S became the #1 world super power and still is today. After the War, the U.S signed a document stating that "The U.S is expected to interfere and resolve foreign affairs that could/are potentially dangerous to the surrounding countries or continent." If the U.S would not have nuked Japan, we would probably still be at war with Japan to this day. So, in all, if you want to complain about the U.S being the world police, just remember that we caused this and now we can't turn back.
The United States should have already learned to lessen the amount of foreign affairs we get into. Our military is supposed to be defending the country of the United States. The military should not interfere into every conflict that goes on in the World. Every time we try to help someone we at least develop one enemy.
Take the recent U. S. Presidential election. Russia supposedly meddled in the election, Which many Americans oppose that type of intervention. However, The U. S. Does this all the time to other countries. Take Syria for example. The U. S. Did not like their former leader because they refused to "fall in line" with what the U. S. Government wanted them to do. So, The U. S. Government supplied the opposition to overthrow the government with weapons. When that opposition did not "fall in line", The U. S. Government did the same thing again. Now, The area is a war zone. The U. S. Government takes no responsibility in the matter, And just goes ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, While also rejecting anyone trying to flee Syria.
The U. S. Has shown little to no responsibility in dealing with other countries' well-being. It's all to get more power.
On top of that, The U. S. Has neglected its own country for decades. Rather than focusing on the rest of the world, Maybe the U. S. Should focus on itself, And until it can get its crap together, Should not be able to intervene anywhere else.
Plus, It probably would save a ton of money in the long run and improve international relations with the rest of the world.
What did we see when America tried intervening in Afghanistan? We got the Taliban. What happened in Iraq? A radicalised population sowing seeds for ISIS. Almost always, American intervention only helps bring more people to the extremist nationalist causes of that nation, And when they use military force, they leave behind a volatile state with high-AMERICAN-tech weapons. Intervention is needed, but it should be done in a non-violent way, that targets those in power — not civilians; dictators could not care less about their starving and dying citizens. When people cry over immigrants, they should focus more of their attention on making the migrants’ countries better, as opposed to ostracising them — precisely what turns them radical. It does not help that most of the refugees today are fleeing places the US intervened, or ignored. Instead of this cycle of turning people against them, the US should be more clever and strategic in its foreign diplomacy.
We all know the US likes to screw with the world, and with the new presidency coming in, it's probably also going to be screwing with it's allies. It's foreign policy only serves one benefit: what benefits the U.S. I'm all for the US buddying up with people to make peace and defend countries, but at this point, I'd rather have no US because 1. Too much power for one single country (like China), especially when this country has more wrongs against the world than dictatorships (maybe apart from Hitler), 2. When has the US actually made good change in the world? Yes, they probably have, but there are probably more times they have made bad change.
We,ve seen U.S in too many places and they don't always come with "Peace". U.S. should respect the other countries and not intervene with their things unless they asked to. Did the U"S do something good? They have. But they also have done bad things. Not everything is "heroic", but at least resoect
Sending troops would cost money that the U.S simply does not have at the moment. It could also cost the lives of the men and women in the Armed Forces. So, we would be pushed farther into debt and lose military support. Not to mention, we could be spending our time protecting our own country from our enemies.
Sure I do believe that israel has entitlement to their land, and that if they need support than thats ok, but the u.S has already intervened in so many other affairs that they had no business in, and alot of times something horrible has happened because of it. If it affects them then they should e involved, or if they were helping then of course, but alot of times they either just take over or leave the country that most likely didn't want help stripped of resources and money, and something terrible ensues so even though it is an issue debated I wil have to say no. It is not because of jesus or religion or something else, but because as a sensible person I have to go with the sensible answer
While there are legitimate justifications for foreign intervention, human rights abuses is certainly not one of them. Currently, human rights abuses (HRA), especially by China are the subject of intense mainstream media scrutiny, suggesting we somehow need to intervene. This is not the case in HRA, as it is no justification for intervention.
We need to focus on our own problems. We need to address the problems that we have within our own country before we try to enforce it in other counties. If anything we could lead by example rather than depleting our resources and accomplishing very little. It makes no sense to interfere when we are far from good.