Agree: USA’s Role as World’s Police
The United States of America should act as the world’s police for a large variety of issues. It is necessary that the USA take this role upon themselves in order to protect the world from the many evils that are struggling to do damage to the society in which we live. No one else is able to take up this role, so this leaves the U.S. as the only options. With the USA acting as the world’s police, countries will have a chance to grow and develop even when they are threatened by evil forces that they can not overpower by themselves.
Some nations in this world can not combat the strong forces that are trying to take them over, and America must intervene to ensure the safety of these countries. There are many unstable regions that can act as safe heavens for terrorists or warlords. Since some countries lack the financial and military power to do something to control these areas, it may be necessary for the United States of America to take matters into their own hands. Without help from the USA, these countries will be unable to develop and grow to their maximum potential. The U.S.’s role as the world’s police will surely turn the entire world into a more united, safer, and stabler society.
Agree or not?
Going back to the original question: NO! No single country can act as the World's policeman.
Each and every country has it's own agenda and ir's own goal and objectives. Yes, alliances can be made to help / protect each other, but that's about all.
There was genocide of the Native Americans ex expat, several tribes were entirely wiped out do to a systematic extermination policy. However it wasn't the Americans that did it, it was the British and the Spanish.
Technically, a genocide is the systematic killing of a certain group (i.e.: religious, racial, ethnic, etc). As far as i know, the only group that the US has intentions of killing is Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Based on that argument, are you against the US taking on Al Qaeda and the Taliban? I'm all for getting rid of those lunatics!
Medo, the UN's security council approved, although reluctantly, the invasion of 2003. It is a fact that a few countries refused to help, but nevertheless, that invasion was approved by the UN. The pretext for the invasion was wrong from the start, but don't say that we went into Iraq unilaterally.
Look, the point of the argument is this, every civilization needs a country to keep the bullies in check. It has proven right throughout the history of mankind. There's always going to be a mad dictator plotting to overtake a country (like the James Bond movies). In this case, the U.S. is James Bond! lol
but I just believe in calling things what they are, rather than resorting to emotionalism which allows people to easily dismantle your argument.
yes, U r right, its make less harm when U name it mass killing or simply killing.
but it really isn't genocide by definition. Even if it was, there is no "history" of this on the part of america as you imply. They are guilty of many things, but not a history of genocide.
xxxpat
its sound good to hear an excuse for mass killing, however with this theory, everyone has the right to justify their evil deeds.
because there is still a thriving native american population and culture, even though they admittedly have been displaced from their land. And to imply that there is a history of American genocide is just an emotional overreaction. Things like that will cast anything you write in a questionable light.
I think no country in the world should be given full power, as they will abuse it. Unfortunately, US as an example had shown the world that they are good at abusing-look at banking crisis (abusing trust and laws) and interventions into other countries.
x-makki77, can you please give an example of one country where US have already interviened and helped the country grow etc as you mentioned I quote
"Without help from the USA, these countries will be unable to develop and grow to their maximum potential".
I like regular americans (and other nationalities as a matter of fact). They are friendly and very nice people.
However politicians in every country are the same.
Live and let live as said.
They're still armed police medo. Unless they're going into an armed robbery waving lollipops and roses, they're armed police. EVERY country in the world arms its police officers.
American police need to sign out their weapons as well and explain every single bullet used.
ohhhhhh
really, they are good in genocide through out their history, from the day first immigrant stepped in new land, till recent discovery of WMD in Iraq & arrest of world's horrible terrorists from Afghanistan.
I think Somalian pirates should be named the world police
Pilgrim, agreed they have access, but there is a big diference between, getting a senior officer to authorise their use to sepcially trained officers who have to obtain them for a specific purpose from the armoury, to walking around with a gun available on your hip at all times.
MeasuringRhyme, the Invasion of Kuwait was a hostile attack and intervention was requested by the legal government of that country, the lastest in Iraq was totally diferent, and was based on alledged WMD that have never been proved or found. To compare one with the other is clearly incorrect. And as for the comment "Had it not been for the US, Kuwait would've belonged to Iraq!" It was not only the US involved, and that was sanctioned by the UN, without any twisting of the UN Sercurity Council Resolution as with the ongoing one.
wow cool history measuringrhyme. heheheh
Oh and another thing, if you don't think that the US shouldn't be involved in some matters, then go have a conversation with one of the Kuwaitis that fled for their lives back in 1990!
Had it not been for the US, Kuwait would've belonged to Iraq!
Shahana,
For you to call Americans black hearted devils only shows how ignorant and full of hate you are! I'm an American and i live my live the righteous way or i try my best to.
Stop these shallow generalizations and in turn the hatred around the world will dissipate.
They may not carry them on patrol, but they do have access to them, so you can't say they don't use guns. As for whether or not an army should be the police, there's loads of situations where many countries have had to call a state of emergency and bring in the military to police, especially in cases of natural disasters. One of the main purposes of a military should be to help in civilian issues such as natural disasters.
UK, except high risk areas like Airports and special armed response units, traffic cop or patroling police officer, even plain clothes detectives do not carry a gun, except in extreme circumstances.
Army's use guns everywhere, true, but should an army be used to police?
Sorry shahana454, but fed up with continual references to the USA being the world's white knights, and I know the UK is no better and easily led.
and where's your source?
PLS NEVER BRING LIKE THIS TOPICS ..
Try to stop this kind of adds from now..
This is happy play ground for a lot of white hearted
friends. Dont bring here black hearted (AMERICA) devils..
Who doesn't use guns to police their own country? I wasn't aware there was a police force or army that operated gun less. What country is this medo?
UN should provide the policing role.
The US Shoot first ask Questions when it's too late.
Look at Iraq, that was the US International Police in operation Invasion and war, for what non existant WMD.
US have to use guns to police their own country, is that what we wants, gun totting cowboys around the world to protect us, I think not.
Only an opinion.
UN Peacekeepers should be the world police and the UN should decide if more aggressive action is needed in cases of genocide, etc.
...At least that's what it would be like if the US didn't constantly act in it's own interests and ignore the UN.
agree with flor...
agree with you DaRuDe...:(
such a boring day today, no good topics to hijack...:(
on QL
and such topics are making it worst
just asking! You're talking about state policy here!
if they replaced our police at india,they are much better than us.....
totally disagree!
Dont agree.
Disagree.
read it somewhere before!