America: World Police? ...could someone please check the rules...

I was in class and we were discussing a bunch of different issues reguarding America, and the one big one that got everyone talking was: Why should America be encharge of "policing" the world? especially when it's unconstitutional to do it.

?thoughts?

 

I don't see anything in the constitution preventing America from policing the world (other than maybe the clause about Congress declaring war, not the president). But it seems like a very bad idea to do so. For example, we're supposedly "fighting terrorism" in the Middle East, but for every terrorist the United States kills or arrests, it breeds three more.

That's not to say that we should become isolationist and just ignore the rest of the world. I think we do have a moral imperative to stop the genocide going on in Sudan, and formerly in Rwanda, Serbia, and Nazi Germany. But to bomb or invade every country that irritates the United States just breeds resentment and doesn't really accomplish much.

 

it's in the constitution that we defend our country. I take it that means "don't start no stuff won't be no stuff"(-lil john, the eastside boys, and youngbloods.)

 

...and what does that have to do with infiltrating a country, and changing the way they do things?

 

The Constitution says that we must declare war (which ironically, the government ignores). But it doesn't really say WHY we should go to war...it leaves that up to Congress to decide. Defending our country is the most obvious reason, but it's not necessarily the only reason.

Personally I think we need to send troops into Darfur, even though the Sudanese pose no threat to the United States, simply because it's the right thing to do. If that means declaring war, so be it.

 

As I understand it, the War Powers Act puts a very short time limit on military actions that the President can undertake without congressional approval. I'm not sure if this means a formal declaration of war is needed or a mere "resolution" is sufficient.

 

Really, what's happening over there is none our buisness. Sure I totally agree that it discusting, but I think we're supposed at least be asked for assistance or something. Why is it our place to make the rules for the world and not some other country?

 

It's never been challenged in court. My guess is that if it ever got to them, the Supreme Court would overturn the War Powers Act.

 

It's one thing to let every country decide their own rules when it comes to government type, laws, civil rights, economic system, etc.

It's quite another to ignore large-scale genocide because it's "none of our business." Do you believe that the United States had the right to declare war on Nazi Germany, which had never attacked us?

 

we diddn't declare war on germany, we declared war on japan after they bombed pearl harbor. germany & japan were allies and thats how we got involved.

 

But we could've just declared war on Japan and not on Germany. The alliance between the two was weak at best. Or what if they had not been allied at all...would it have then been unacceptable to stop the genocide in Germany and Poland?

 

you didnt attack the germans to stop teh genocide, you attacked the germans to stop the spread of facism. you didnt know about the genocide 'officially' till you were well into the nazi's conquered territory...
after the war stopping the holocaust became a poster child of sorts for the good deeds that had been accomplished by going into the war.

 

Maybe the allies didn't know the extent of the systematic torture that the Germans were committing in the concentration camps, but they definitely knew that they were killing millions of innocent people at the time of the United States' entry into WWII.

 

Actually, it went like this:

1. Japan bombed Pearl Harbor
2. We declared war on Japan
3. Germany declared war on us
4. We declared war on Germany

 

If america wishes to police the world....then they should pay the total cost...America will be bankrumped within a few years.....besides the politcal ramifcations thre are many cultrial and fincanical concederations to take into account.....America can barely police 2 countries(Afgan-Iraq)

America can't police the world without the Worlds help...and i for one do not wish to give up my freedom for American Freedom

that is like asking a Jew to give up his freedom to Nazi freedom

 

Hitler actually declared war on us, that was sufficient causation for our entry in the defensive war against an already active Nazi militancy. Quite the contrary to our current perpetration of the very same self-justified war of aggression which we established the Nuremberg Principles to condemn and criminalise when previously pursued by Germany.

That parallel is clear to all but those who think star spangled packaging and political double entendres, such as "export of democracy" and "liberation", sufficient to differentiate our present warmongering from that which our grandfathers fought and died to stop only a few generations ago.

 

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p261_Irving.html

 

Ah, a quick look at one of my WWII timelines shows that you are indeed correct. My mistake.

My point is this: Wouldn't it have been acceptable to declare war on Germany for no other reason than to stop the mass genocide going on? What if Germany had NOT declared war on us?

 

We'd have prolly fought their ass anyway, cuz they were in alliance with Japan. Anyways, America is the World Policer cuz we're the biggest, bad-ass-esd country around, an no-one's gonna stop us.

 

Ah whats it matter in the end... in a while countries all over the world will unite to bring down the big American Monster... no longer will we have a chance to police the world... we will become the policed...

can't wait for that!
god damn infidels.