Quantcast

Should the US play global policeman?

Should the US play global policeman?

  • no and I don't think anyone should

    Votes: 10 41.7%
  • no, the UN is doing fine

    Votes: 2 8.3%
  • yes, but I'd rather the UN do it and do a better job

    Votes: 12 50.0%
  • yup, even if the UN was capable of better.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    24

Ridemonkey

This is not an active account
Sep 18, 2002
4,108
0
Toronto, Canada
This is what our government should be doing:

1. Fighting a war at home to get our dumb lazy asses OFF of foreign oil.

2. Global policing: we should be involved in one thing only and that is nuclear non-proliferation and monitoring of other weapons of mass distruction (for real this time).

We need to be leading the UN into effective campaigns of diplomacy and/or military action against rogue nations with nuclear capabilities like Iran and Korea. Preferably the solutions will be diplomatic. We can't afford to have nukes in the hands of rogue nations - that will result in the end of modern civilization.

The US needs to win the respect of our U.N. allies by taking care of our problems at home. Once we aren't dependent on foreign oil, then we need to leave the Arab nations to fend for themselves COMPLETELY, except where there are real issues related to WMD. No more oil politics overseas! Once we have shown that we aren't hypocritical assholes, then we need to be tough with the U.N. and put everyone on notice that WMD issues around the world need to be dealt with with authority.

3. We need to lead the U.N. in some real, concerted peace keeping missions around the World in places like Sierra Leone. Do it right and on time rather than putting a half ass effort into it years too late. There's no reason why all the richest countries in the World can't lend some assitance to those in need.

Every person in this country can do their part (if you care at all). Two ways to start right now:

1. Reduce your personal energy consumption.
2. Don't buy diamonds.

Peace.
:monkey:
 

rbx

Monkey
I agree with fluff

No one nation should play global police because that nation in question would start imposing its ideoligies and beliefs on other countries.
Democratie is a wonderful thing but it should reflect the specific moral values and ideoligies of the country were it started.
not imposed on to!
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,022
3
Denver
No, but I wish the UN would do a better job: 3

:)

So far, it appears that most would like someone to do the job and do it better and that most would prefer the someone to be the UN.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Originally posted by rbx
I agree with fluff

No one nation should play global police because that nation in question would start imposing its ideoligies and beliefs on other countries.
Democratie is a wonderful thing but it should reflect the specific moral values and ideoligies of the country were it started.
not imposed on to!
Even if those moral values and ideologies mean genocide and wholesale slaughter of the citizens within that country?
 

rbx

Monkey
Originally posted by DRB
Even if those moral values and ideologies mean genocide and wholesale slaughter of the citizens within that country?
ofcourse not! since when does democratie equal genocide and slaughter?

For example, do you think that a social-democratic
system (like overhere in canada) would work in the u.s?
I dont think so, but at its basis it still a democratic system with the same human rights value as your democratic system.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Originally posted by DRB
Even if those moral values and ideologies mean genocide and wholesale slaughter of the citizens within that country?
Then we need a universal moral code and an independent body to police it.

Still doesn't put a single state in charge.

I'm trying to think of a nation that I know has not engaged in genocide/wholesale slaughter and not doing too well. And I fail to see why the victims need to be citizens of any country (and I'm sure you agree).
 

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
17,818
3,174
Colorado
What's even more sad is that people don't realize what % of the UN is made up by the US.
 

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
12,892
955
Front Range, dude...
This is what our government should be doing:

1. Fighting a war at home to get our dumb lazy asses OFF of foreign oil.

2. Global policing: we should be involved in one thing only and that is nuclear non-proliferation and monitoring of other weapons of mass distruction (for real this time).

We need to be leading the UN into effective campaigns of diplomacy and/or military action against rogue nations with nuclear capabilities like Iran and Korea. Preferably the solutions will be diplomatic. We can't afford to have nukes in the hands of rogue nations - that will result in the end of modern civilization.

The US needs to win the respect of our U.N. allies by taking care of our problems at home. Once we aren't dependent on foreign oil, then we need to leave the Arab nations to fend for themselves COMPLETELY, except where there are real issues related to WMD. No more oil politics overseas! Once we have shown that we aren't hypocritical assholes, then we need to be tough with the U.N. and put everyone on notice that WMD issues around the world need to be dealt with with authority.

3. We need to lead the U.N. in some real, concerted peace keeping missions around the World in places like Sierra Leone. Do it right and on time rather than putting a half ass effort into it years too late. There's no reason why all the richest countries in the World can't lend some assitance to those in need.

Every person in this country can do their part (if you care at all). Two ways to start right now:

1. Reduce your personal energy consumption.
2. Don't buy diamonds.

Peace.
:monkey:
But you are in Canadia, ehh?!