Should the USA be the World's Policeman

[Rikard_OHF]

Originally posted by MagiK: I will note, that immigrants that I have taked to who have tried living in europe, in Germany, France, Greece, Italy and England have all commented on how rotten immigrants are treated there compared to here. [/QB]

I cant see in this sentence that these people didnt come from the US

Anyway Once again these were just few people, and if some people who work for the goverment is rude to them, doesnt mean the goverment is rude to those people, it just means that they have hired the wrong people. Rest assured that there are people from the US goverment, who treat immigrants badly
You only talked to people who didnt make it in Europe. I give you a different prespective, that of people who did make it in Europe. I know loads of immigrants in Holland who are treated quite well by the Dutch Goverment

[Timber Loftis]

I agree with MagiK (I think - he's posted a lot here) and the others, Including George Washington, who have said America should support its own interests in international relations. To do otherwise would be failing its people. This has its good and bad points, I realize (believe me, I certainly sided with the UK over the beef-hormone issue that the US/Monsanto rammed down the world's gullet). But, ultimately the question of where we should use "police power," "military might," or plain old dollars should be selfish.

This rule applies when that selfishness is economic or emotionally driven. Like Afghanistan - recent actions/war there allowed the US Government to: placate its citizens' outcries for a revenge and manhunt; try to push the region toward a government that the US and its citizens find more palettable; satisfy some small portion of women's rights groups' issues; and set the foundation for what may become a friendly fertile marketplace to sell our products like Coca-Cola and Mickey Mouse.

Should we be a police power and fix problems just 'cause it's the right thing to do? Yes, but only if it's what our people want. Again, the government is BY and FOR the people - internationally as well as nationally.

[ 01-16-2003, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Timber Loftis]

How the heck did this become a discussion of immigrant treatment by different nations?

[homer]

Originally posted by MagiK: Yes. Ok I will expand on that a bit [img]smile.gif[/img] We should promote and help those nations that share our views, dreams and goals. We should promote and help those who think like us. For those who do not, hey, they are free to do as they please, just don't cross us or ya might get whacked.

Dose not this go against some of the basic things we are supposed to support in this country. Freedom to follow our own beliefs, without the fear of “getting whacked’.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: I do not recall Clinton calling N. Korea "evil" (even if they are)or building up a huge military presence over near them either. Bubba was a bit more diplomatic than that. Bubba didn't do anything to them except give them the material to be a nuclear threat to the world, the military presence there has been there since the Korean war in the 1950's. It takes two to tango, that is, it take two to wage war and to engage in agressive posturing. History reveals that walking softly and carrying a big stick is the best way to handle N. Korea and avoid conflict. Clinton policies along these lines helped achieve somewhat of a dialog over there. What do you do when they don't stick to their agreements? T.R. would have whacked their silly asses with the big stick. Bush policies have been anything but diplomatic concerning N. Korea and have set back relations 20 years. This is in your professional political opinion? As far as anyone outside the pentagon and state department knows this may be the exact right track...time iwll tell. All I know is that when dealing with N.K., acting like a pansy is NOT the right thing to do. You may choose not to see GWB's role in the current escelation of tension, but it is there. You may choose to ignore the fact that it has bee N.K. driving the escalation, with the idea that the USA may be more tractable since it is comitted in the Persian Gulf at the moment. In the end this whole discussion between us, except for my first statement is all opinion and speculation. The only fact is that "bubba" screwed the pooch by giving nuclear reactors to N.K.

[quote]Originally posted by homer:

Originally posted by MagiK: Dose not this go against some of the basic things we are supposed to support in this country. Freedom to follow our own beliefs, without the fear of “getting whacked’. Not at all. The constitution is for our citizens and has no bearing on oppressive aggressors who threaten our national self interest.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: I do not recall Clinton calling N. Korea "evil" (even if they are)or building up a huge military presence over near them either. Bubba was a bit more diplomatic than that.

Nor did I say that he did. What I said was that North Korea had used this very same "ploy" of withdrawing from the nuclear treaty during Clinton's administration. Here is the salient excerpt from the CNN link listed above.

"They don't know when to stop and they might find themselves falling over the edge of a cliff, down the precipice into war – even if that is not their intention," Wendy Sherman, former special advisor to president Clinton and the secretary of state on North Korean policy.

In 1993, after it first agreed to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) -- North Korea threatened to pull out and forced weapons inspectors to leave.

The U.S. it seemed was poised for war.
{excerpt from CNN article}

So Clinton was "nice" to North Korea instead of being "mean", but North Korea still rattled their nuclear sabres and threatened to withdraw from the treaty.

You want to blame all the tension with North Korea on GWB, go ahead. History - even very recent history - refutes that claim.

[Ar-Cunin]

One small point Magic

The nuclear reactors that the Clinton Administration agreed to help North Korea build were two light-water reactors. These do not produce plutonium as a 'waste'-product - Unlike the reactor that NK recently reactivated, which the two former was supposed to replace.

[homer]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Should we be a police power and fix problems just 'cause it's the right thing to do? Yes, but only if it's what our people want. Again, the government is BY and FOR the people - internationally as well as nationally.

I realize we have an elected government and I agree that this is, ideally, the way our government is suppose to work. How often dose our government take action without full support of the people? I would submit that it has happened in the past and will most likely occur again.

[Timber Loftis]

Agreed, Homer. The thread was a "should" not a "does," but your point is well-taken.