Excuse me for not buying this one second. For a "christian", living outside of the US (yes, there are christian zionists but they are mostly in the US), you seem to be too obsessed with wanting the US to go to war to take out Israel enemies. Your devotion to Israel, to such point that you want America to sacrifice its own people to fight Israel enemies, indicates to me that you are not who you claim to be.
the US policing the world! isn't botching up big time in the middle east enough damage for us to take! and yes i think that the UK is as much to blame. but the mere thought of one nation policing anywhere other than their own homeland is abhorrent and immoral! and as for going to war with iran, well lets just hold on a minute and take a long hard look at how the last military exercise went? the UN is the only body that should be ever permitted to police anywhere, and then only as a temporary fixture. is there no-one out there who can add a little much needed common sense to this debate?
if america doesn't police the world, who will?? the UN...please. the UN has no balls, the security council especially. if America doesnt keep everyone under control then there will be some huge problems all over the world.
The US should mind their own business. I wouldn't mind so much if their "policing" was effective, But it seems to consist of nothing but fucking other peoples countries up.
Guess what: one of the beliefs of Christians is that liars go to hell. I believe in that and that is why since becoming a Christian I stopped telling lies. Now, the Jews have suffered more than any other nation in the world ever. This has been going on throughout all centuries. I think they should get some peace now that they are back in their own country and they should not have to live in constant threat from psychopatic neighbours who are hell bent on doing Allah' will (Allah being the god of war).
And what about a country like Liechtenstein ? I bet you even never heard of it. Neither in bad nor good, but why would this country be less trustworthy than USA? You say USA, because you where conditioned to say USA. You think USA because you live in the USA, and think it simply should be the way to go. Call me "left-winged", "European moron", I consider myself an anarchist, and I know why. The notion of country should be erased from peoples mind, it's only a way of peoples to make them part of a group, which is almost always a bad thing. And by the way, you can replace "nation" by "religion" too. It's just the same. Put a good person into a bad neighborhood, and if he don't move out, he will copy his neighbor comportment just to fit in the group. Nations are nothing else, and a nation mind is a simple thing to manipulate when you have access to the media. Utterly, my dream world would be a world without any kind of borders, where police would not bee needed, because good sense would prevail. A pure utopia, because I know for sure than the human race will nuke itself long before that. And no world police could stop that. A police don't stop actions, a police punish actions hoping that this punishment will discourage other from doing that action again. Guess what, it don't work that often...
Allow me just ONE reason why USA is better than Liechenstein. Just so you know this small country you mentioned has two houses of parliament even though it has such a tiny population. The ONE reason USA is better than Liechenstein is because USA put an end to the WW2. That's just ONE reason.
plus liechtenstein is just a principality right? Can it really defend the planet with a fleet of cruise ships?
I didn't said it could, I don't even know if they have an army. My point was just to say "why would USA be more trustworthy than them ?" As I said, I don't believe in any preventive effect of any police. A police is only an armed arm to crush those who don't fit the shape, barely less.. So, why would I want a police ruling the world ? I seriously consider that as the first step to any tyranny. And seriously, if you cherish the first amendment about free speech, be ready to pay its price. Free speech means that you must be ready to hear, see and consider behavior or opinions that are against yours ideas. Refusing that to other is denying them the right to free speech. From an article of the Washington post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/24/AR2006022401825.html It's a high price, and it's why it's so hard to pay.
So you are happy as punch as situations in, say Rwanda, Kosovo (at the time), Darfur. Etc. You think situations involving mass murder should, you know, just work themselves out?
Oh lordy god help us! GTech has a new groupie. As for the answer to the OP's post, of course the US should not be the worlds policeman. It thinks that it is the worlds policeman, but it clearly is not. No country should be the worlds policeman.
The USA didn't put an end to the WW2, USA where a part of an alliance that defeated the head of the ww2 belligerent, Germany. And to remind that USA entered in that war only after the Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Before that, it was just none of their business. There is a slightly nuance there. And I remind you than Staline helped that coalition too, was a true tyrant, and that Russia had more mens killed in that conflict (27 millions military casualties) than USA (600`000 military casualties). http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob62.html
Don't try and minimise it. USA put an end to WW2. The whole Europe has a reason to be thankful to the USA. I am. I am a European who sadly also had the pleasure to live under communism.
Of course not, but that don't means for me that an police should handle that. A police would not change anything on darfur for exemple. The problem there is political. As long as the European, USA and the Western world in general will continue to see Africa and third world as a negligible quantity, anyone with enough mens in it's militia will be able to do the same. You talk about Rwanda, but it's the same. Westerner simply consider that genocides have happened in Africa before, and will again. They consider it like a normal behavior from those "barbarians". And it will happen again, because westerner just don't give a damn fuck about what happens there's if George's Clooney don't talk about it.
US should really stop policing. Just police when distress is requested. Dont just invade a country when no one asked for nothing.
I don't say I'm not thankful for what the USA did. I truly am, and I too lost many peoples of my family, fusilladed by the SS in France or Belgium when they helped jews children to pass to Switzerland. But I don't consider that USA alone put an end to ww2.
According to hollywood movies they defeated the nazis single handed. That's where americans get thier history from.
To answer the question posed, I'd say for the most part, no. The US should not be the world's police. However as Peter Parker's Uncle Ben was so fond of saying, "With great power comes great responsibility." When the U.N. can't or won't do the job of policing the world, it unfortunately falls to whoever is best equipped for the job.
With no world's policeman how do you stop genocide in places like Kosovo, Rwanda and now Darfur? Without a world's policeman how do you stop Iran from developing and dropping a nuke Israel? Without a world’s police force who is going to tell Israel to stop next time they retaliate against an attack on them from Hezbollah? Without a world’s policeman how do you respond to pleas of help from people affected by natural disasters? How do you help stop the spread of AIDS in Africa without a world’s police force? Because saying that America should stay out of other peoples business doesn’t only include the military it includes all forms of aid we give to the rest of the world. While everyone hates that the US is the world’s police force, we’re also the first one they call when they need help and I’m proud of American for being the first one to be called on when others need help.
Oh yes without a doubt, i think there should be a number like 911 that other countries can call in a crisis. Bomb Iran