Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Blog #19 - Is the world ready for American democracy?

As we talk about American foreign policy, we've discussed what our goals and guiding principles should be. Our foreign policy goals, as we have collectively discussed in 3 different classes, seem to be:

  1. protect U.S. freedoms at home
  2. improve the quality of life around the world
  3. promote democracy
  4. gain allies
  5. become wealthier as a nation by promoting trade
  6. to maintain our status as the world's superpower.

Today, we discussed how the U.S. might act in situations involving human rights violations (we used China as an example) or genocide (Rwanda, Bosnia, and Darfur come to mind). In addition, many other scenarios could come to mind when thinking about how America should act - how should we treat our allies? Should we honor treaties that we've signed 40 years ago but don't really fit our needs now? What kinds of trade practices should we follow? With these and many other questions, we could fill the rest of the year w/ debate and discussion.

But, right now, I just want to focus on two:

1. Should America's #1 foreign policy goal be to spread democracy around the world? Why or why not? (Think about the assumptions as mentioned in your textbook -pgs. 894-895)

2. Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not? Please check these links for a debate about this actual question:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19180589 - NPR audio file of the debate.

http://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/TranscriptContainer/AmericaWorldPoliceman%20021208.pdf - transcript of the debate.

Answer only one of these questions in a thoughtful paragraph of a minimum 150 words. Your answer is due Wednesday before class.

56 comments:

Anonymous said...

I believe that the United States should be the world’s policeman, but only to a certain point. It is critical that the United States sets limits to when and when it is not okay to be a country that polices the world. In the world there is always going to be chaos and conflict somewhere, in some country. The United States, and many others, believe that United State’s system of democracy is the best form of government in the world. I agree with what Max Boot said that, “Without an effective police force, the world community would fall apart.” Somebody has to keep things in order. While America is keeping things in order, they need to remember the limits. Not all countries think that democracy is a good thing, and that is a matter of opinion. Instead of enforcing our beliefs, we need to help countries while having them make the decisions. We have to remember that we are there to aid assistance, not take total control of the countries decisions.

Jacob Trunsky
4th hour

Anonymous said...

Emily Corless
2nd Hour

America’s foreign policy should and should not be spread throughout the world. America should help the countries that wants help in achieving America’s foreign policy. America should leave the countries alone that do not want help in achieving America’s foreign policy. America needs to learn that not every country want their help. Countries need to try and achieve their own foreign policy, but if the countries ask for help, we should help. When a country gets in to a conflict, America should mine their own business and leave them alone. On the government’s priority list America should come first and should always come first. America should not be the world’s policeman. Other countries need to know how to end their own conflict and chaos. The countries can learn from their mistakes and grow from those things. If a situation does get out of control, America and other countries should step in and try to restore order.

Anonymous said...

Michael Guz
4th Hour
The United States seems to recognizably have the largest ego of any country in the world. The general message we portray is that our country is capable of taking care of ALL of the world’s problems in other countries. There’s a disregard toward other developed nations that can put an equal input into foreign policies. Obviously one nation can’t take care of all countries in the world that need help. The fact that the United States tries to do this prevents most countries from being helped by other nations, with the US being in charge everyone. Furthermore, the US doesn’t even do a very good job at helping other nations as seen in Sudan and Iraq. We really need help from other countries. In an ideal world, all nations would be able to put equal input into helping other nations succeed. Another ideal concept would be that the United Nations that we have put more effort into teaming up to help the world and be allies in deciding who and how to help. But if the US doesn’t participate with the rest of the world this can’t be accomplished. It would also be a big help if the United States can combine our strengths (military) with other countries strengths. But our big ego still gets in the way of making any of this happen.

Anonymous said...

I think that foreign policy for any country and especially the United States is very important for everyone. I said especially for the United States because of their power and their role in so many things. And many countries foreign policy are within the same group of things, things like the protection of their land, the improvement of life, the gaining of allies, becoming a stronger/wealthier nation through, those are some of the things we discussed in class. But for America we said that spreading democracy is a foreign policy, and that should be one of their foreign policies, but I do not think it should be their number one policy. And I think it should not be the number one policy because sometimes when the United States is trying to spread democracy it may not always work and it may backfire. And sometimes the other things that we discussed may need to be the number one policy for the United States, which is why I think spreading democracy should not be the United States’ number one foreign policy.

Maher Abou-Rass
4th Hour

Anonymous said...

I don’t think the United States should really force countries to be democratic. They can choose to be whatever kind of nation they want to be and the U.S Has no say what it should be. They could be communist or democratic. If the U.S made every nation in the world like us then the competition would be even greater with their economy doing better. It would make the U.S. seem not as strong to the other nations. Soon they would be equal to us or better than us. If not then the US would look like the bully to all the other nations telling them what to do and looking like the big shot of the world. The only situation in which the US should intervene in another nation and their choice in government would be when it affects the world like World war II. Overall we shouldn’t force our ways of life onto other nations. It would either make us look bad or hurt America’s economy badly.
Nick Theisen
4th hour

Anonymous said...

America should not be world’s policemen, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, and more because it might start up wars. If America became policemen for the world by creating order out of chaos, then I think that all of the other countries will keep on depending on us to do their dirty work. Another reason why creating order out of chaos would be bad because we should not get into other people’s business because that country can probably figure put how to handle the problem on their own. If we also helped end a countries conflict, they country that we are helping out with might not like our decision on what how we should solve the problem. Then we might start a war with that country because we disagree with how they do things. An example of this is helping Saddam with Iran and then realizing that we were doing the wrong thing and went to war with them.

Jake Cramer

Anonymous said...

In my opinion I believe that America should not be the world’s policeman. I don’t think that America always needs to solve conflicts concerning other countries. I feel that if two countries are fighting each other, then they can work together to solve their conflicts, and America could try to assist but I do not think it’s necessary for the United States to get involved militarily. When the United States invaded Iraq their mission was to get Saddam Hussein, but instead the country is now in chaos all around. I feel that if the United States took a different approach in invading Iraq then the country wouldn’t be such a mess today. But in some cases America should act like the world’s policeman. For instance if a country is threatening the United States or other countries then the United States should try to stop that dangerous country from doing something harmful.

Stefanos T. 2nd Hour

Anonymous said...

America should not be the world police. America tries to get involved with the conflicts between other countries. America should not intervene and pick a side because then the side without the U.S. will build up hatred against the U.S. which will end up hurting us in the end. It could also cause a large scale war if we go to war with someone and other countries in the Middle East or Asian decide to ally with the country we are against. America has too many problems to deal with at home, and they should not be worried about other country’s problems. We are in a huge debt and are having economy problems that should be dealt with before we get involved with other countries. Our number one and only priority should be to protect our country and our allies. This is why I believe America should be so involved in foreign affairs.

robert g. 5th

Anonymous said...

In a recent debate over the U.S as a policemen Ellen Laipson said, “The US is a country, not a global government. We have to know our limits.” I agree whole heartedly with this statement. I think that the U.S should not be the world’s policemen. I do think that we should be a policeman of human rights. I do not think we should be able to march over to a country and be like, I don’t like what you are doing, and you are going to change. Because of our wealth and size we have influence, I think we should use these to the world’s advantage, like humanitarian efforts. I also think that we only ever go to help a country when we have something good in it, natural resources or investments. If we were a “world policeman” we wouldn’t be able to define who and why we helped someone, if we didn’t have any investments we would still have to go which is putting our own soldiers and loved ones in unnecessary danger. Rather than be a policeman I think rather we should be advocates of what we believe in, and lead by example. No one can live without human rights, but you can survive without democracy. We should get our priorities straight, although I do believe if we get asked for help we should be able to give it. Overall I think that no one should have the title of policeman, because then you have the problem of policemen going corrupt.
Kelsey Kaline
5th

Anonymous said...

2. I think that America should not be the world’s policemen. We might be creating order and that might aid in some ways, but we don’t just fix the problem we try to go farther and change their government and change their lifestyles. We might think that this change is for the better but the fact is that what is good for our country is not always good for everyone. We end conflicts, and that is great but I think that we should stop there. We are a very young country and we can’t go around changing governments that have ruled these ancient countries for centuries. I guess I am a little bit on the border, I think that if there is a conflict in a country that might affect something in America then we should intervene. If we do intervene though we have to know when to stop and leave the country alone and stop changing it.

Frederick Carington
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

1) I think that our first concern shouldn’t be trying to create and spread Democracy. While Democracy is a much more stable government type than most others, isn’t practical for the whole world to have Democracy as there government. There are many powerful countries in the world that currently don’t have Democracy, like China. There government might not want to change since the sudden change might upset the balance they have built. With new sudden changes, the government could fall apart. The same sort of thing is happening in Iraq. Also, if new change isn’t instantaneous, then the slight absence of government/police could start the very same anarchy that’s occurring in Iraq.
Lastly, the people themselves might not want to change governments. Those people have been living their life that way for their entire lives, the change might scare or anger them.
Unfortunately, this is also happening in Iraq. Many people like the idea of change, but many other resent it. The spread of Democracy isn’t a great idea for our #1 concern, but it still should be thought about.

Rob
Salton
4th

Anonymous said...

After clicking on the questions link, I was taken to a website with one statement on it. That statement said: “America should not be the world’s police officer” and incidentally enough, I couldn’t agree more. America is a wonderful country, are democratic system is not only beneficial but holds the base glue to the wood that is our country. I have never felt more inclined however to state that even for a country that is as wonderful as ours; we can have the annoying upper hand that annoys all of the other global countries. Let’s face it, most of us are proud to be an American. (102) Here in the USA spirit is something we hold dear, but in third world countries where resources of any kind are hard to find and much worse, sometimes inaccessible to come by, our wasteful delight does not please them. As it very well shouldn’t. Here’s the thing, the world, for the most part is perfectly capable on its own, the majority of countries have been around a lot longer than ours and none of them have gone down in a pillaring smoke of flames quite yet. Wars will come and go, but a change can transform forever. If instead of trying to make governments that are set in there ways change, why not try a new tactic. A peaceful allye. It’s a concept far easier said than done but some of the most successful movement have been made in peaceful ways. Look at SNCC, or the freedom riders. They changed the worlds in peaceful tactful ways. I once saw a political comic where there was a giant Johnny apple seed spreading unwanted democracy all over the world. The artist was from France and of course, Johnny was wearing a giant flag with an equally large goofy smile. What exactly does that say about us?
-Angelina Bertoni l* - *l
5th

Anonymous said...

I think America should not act as the world’s police man because America can’t stop the chaos. If we can’t end the conflicts in our country what makes us think that we can end much bigger conflicts. Other countries don’t think of America as before; we were a strong, powerful nation that other countries wanted to be. Now the world doesn’t agree with America anymore, the “popularity” has declined. Countries now see us as a bad country especially now because of the war. We don’t have the power we used to have; we no longer influence as much people as we used to. Presently China is the one moving upwards, gaining all the power that we once had. It seems that we are starting to lose our integrity and the world is seeing through the fa├žade that we a trying to put up. And if we don’t have trust we don’t have respect and we need that if we’re going to try to be a police man.

Nikita Charles
4th

Anonymous said...

Personally, I do not think that American should be the world’s police. I don’t mean that we can’t help our allies, and even countries who are not our allies when they ask for help. I also don’t mean that we can’t aid countries who are in need of it when we know for sure that we will be able to help them. I just think that we shouldn’t try to fix every problem that is happening in every country, mostly because America can’t handle that much pressure. An example of this is the situation in Iraq. For a while now America has been trying to help Iraq form a stable government, and create peace there, but it has not been working out. If we can’t even fix the problems in one country, how are we supposed to police every country in need of it? It’s not that I don’t think America means well, it’s just that I don’t think America is capable of taking on the responsibility of being the world’s police service.

Bethany Slon
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

I feel that America shouldn’t be the world’s policeman at all. I do feel like America should help other countries out and try to create order out of chaos but not get there nose into other countries businesses if they don’t need to be. America should help other countries out in times of needs if they are our ally but if we have no major relationships with another country and there problems do not effect us then we have no need to be creating order. We should let other countries handle there business if its not our own. I feel that if we go and “police” other countries that we have no relationship with we are just creating more conflict in the long run. I feel that America should help end conflicts in our allied countries and the countries that are not our allies who have conflict will want to become allies for help. Eventually, with this theory, I feel that we will gain more allies and create less conflict in the world.

Ryan Bertrand hour 2

Anonymous said...

I don’t think that Democracy is right for everyone. Although it is a great system and works well in the U.S. that doesn’t mean that it fits the goals of every other country. I think that it is important for us to respect the different systems of government and recognize that they can work too. Democracy is not the only solution. There are plenty of countries around the world that are perfectly functional without the U.S.’s democratic method.
I also don’t think the U.S. should act as a world police. There is a big difference between responding when asked for help and just “helping”. I think a lot of the time our method of helping isn’t really helping. It seems to me that it is always too influenced by our goals and not the goals of the specific country in need. Overall I think that the U.S. should use our power for good, and good meaning helping those who actually want it.


Sarah Zamler
5th hour

John Cassetta said...

For question #2, yes I believe America should be the world's policeman. We are known around the world as one of the most powerful and wealthiest countries in the world. We should put that power to good use and help those out there who are suffering. It's even a law in our country to stop genocide if its occuring, and as seen in the past, we really havent stopped genocide or violence to our fullest potential. That's an understatement too, for example, we have supplied Saddam Hussein the weapons he used to kill hundreds, if not thousands of people. Also, there aren't many active forces in Sudan either. People may say it's their problem and it's not any of our business, but they would shutup if we were in the situation. We are a nation based on democracy and human rights, and to ensure safety and future conflicts, we should spread that democracy and creating bonds of trust through actions of helping others in need when they need it the most.

John Cassetta
4th Hour US History B
Mr. Wickersham

Anonymous said...

2. It is definitely not America's job to be the world's policeman because right now there are experiencing problems at home that should be fixed before we can go around telling other countries what to do. We are having problems economically and are not financially dependent, who are we to boss anyone around when our country is in disarray? Some political figures think that with our strong military power we should be in charge but this seems like bad judgment on their part. Why should it be America’s job to be in control of the whole world? I agree with some of the politicians who claim we should be helping with problems unrelated to force but we should not be dealing with military actions at this time. It would be bad for our government seeing as most people are against the war in Iraq at this time, it would cause an uproar if we were to be getting involved with other countries problems. And who likes a nosey neighbor?

Ally R. 3rd Hour

Anonymous said...

1. Yes I think that America’s #1 foreign policy goal should be to spread democracy around the world. The more nations that choose to become democratic, the more successful Americans will be. Nations that are democratic are more likely maintain international commitments. They are also less likely to engage in terrorist activity, and have war against each other. People around the world like to choose who their leader will be, and democracy gives them the right to vote and elect who the majority of the people want. Many people think that this would be unrealistic; I just think that it would be time consuming, and expensive. The transition to democracy can definitely be hard but I think that it is worth a try, and I think our government is going to try.

Christy Slowinski
2nd hour

Anonymous said...

Yes, I think America should be involved to democracy around the world. Promoting democracy would make the countries around the world safer. By promoting democracy there will be less wars and no terrorists. America should be protecting human rights. Trading with other countries will help stabilize the poor countries. It will create jobs in the country. There will be more wealth with better human rights. The U.S. is involved because at the world markets the U.S. can sell there goods. There is more economic freedoms.
Justin Laffer
5th

Anonymous said...

1. Should America's #1 foreign policy goal be to spread democracy around the world? Why or why not?


I do not think that America’s number one goal should be to promote democracy around the world, but I think that they should still try to promote it in countries that are capable of sustaining it without chaos. Another reason that we could probably not get every country around the world to have a democratic government is because there are not enough quality leaders in the world that can lead a country without a bunch of controversy. But in more civilized countries that are not democratic we could offer support if the people of the country want help we can give it to them but if below a certain percent of them do we could back off and let them go back to doing what they were doing until there is some reason that we have to intervene and then we could try to get them back on there feet and slowly retreat.

Anonymous said...

2.
I don’t think that America should be the world’s police force because often we try to change the country we’re helping to best suit us. We’ve done this in Iraq by stopping a new temporary government from forming. By stopping a new temporary government from forming we helped add to the chaos that’s going on in Iraq because we thought that their government wasn’t in American interest. Also if we are the world’s police force who has the authority to tell us when to stop when we make situations worse in other countries? As a country we, don’t listen to other counties or organizations, such as the UN. America claims to be spreading democracy when we enter other countries on missions, but sometimes we have to realize that democracy isn’t the best thing right now for the country. When we stopped Iraq from setting up a small temporary government we claimed that that government was better than no government. Democratic governments take time to be created and while it is being built there needs to be some form of ruling, even if for a while that ruling isn’t democratic or in the best interest of America.
Robbie Lewis 5th Hour

Anonymous said...

I believe that America's number one foreign policy should be to spread democracy around the world because allowing people to rule the government gives a sense of saftey towards the Americans. If every country has decided to have a democracy, it allows the prevention of future terrorist attacks towards other countries because they will all have similar governments. Countries would also be less likely to cause war towards eachother. This is because since there governments would be ruled by the people, people wouldn't have a reason to rebel against the government to create disasters towards there own societies. By spreading democracy around the world, it gives each country a chance to make peace with eachother to help to strengthen there relationships with eachother to avoid arguements or dissagreements with another. It would help improve issues such as gas and oil with the Middle East or manufacturing trades with China and Japan become more simplified,less money debts,and less exhaustion on both countries.

Melanie Shaw
4th hour

Anonymous said...

Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not?
Yes I think America should be the world’s policeman because America has enough power to. There are many countries that need our help because of economy issues or being invaded by surrounding countries. We are also wealthy enough to support these countries. President George Bush has said that we were going to help Iraq build up their government and economy after the war, but all the U.S. army has done so far is ruin it. We still haven’t helped at all. We also have enough power to do that too. The U.S. may not be the smartest country on making decisions, but when it comes to helping other countries, we would help a lot, we could protect them. For example, for the genocide in Darfur, we are powerful enough to stop that. Also because we have a law on genocide saying it’s not allowed and for us to try our hardest to stop it. We could have done a lot for Darfur to prevent it, if we were the world’s policeman.


jourdan g
4th hr

Anonymous said...

I do not think that America should take over as the world police to create order and stop chaos. Although I do believe that America should help its allies and other countries in the world that need our support, I do not believe we have the right to take over the control of other countries. America happens to be very powerful with potential to do great things and help many people, although it could cause much damage taking over. First of all, America may want to start changing things about other countries that they do not agree with, because they may feel they have the right after helping them out with security. The other countries may feel that America is trying to take over not only their security, but their laws, culture, and lifestyle. The other countries may not want to work with America and be allies with America if they no longer have dominant control over their own country. America may be the greatest country in the world, but the title does not give it the right to take over the world. America is a nation of uniting people from all over the world, which is what we must continue doing; working together for world peace.
Paul Sidlosky
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

1. yes because democracy is the best way to get things done. America is been running on democrat for many years and hasn't come to any problems like the ones in non democratic countries. everyone in a democratic government gets to speak their mind through voting and other forms of free speech. America has already tried to help other countries such as Iraq in 1990. they gave Suddam Hussian weapons of mass destruction to invade Iran. I think they helped him then so that they could use that excuse as black mail to help them get Iraq to become democratic. right now America is in Iraq because they thought that suddam Hessian had weapons of mass destruction. they found nothing but are now trying to create a democratic government very similar to our government. America volunteered to be the foreign affair officials or police. they are always in other countries wars and other types of business such as peace treaties and government issues hoping that in return that country would become democratic.
kathy kakoz
2n hour

Anonymous said...

Yes I do think America should be the world’s policeman. As Max Boot stated, “As long as evil exists, someone will have to protect peaceful people from predators.” I agree. Compare the world to your hometown, there are policemen protecting you from any violent crimes that may occur. Though it is a huge responsibility the policemen chose to take on that responsibility of ensuring your safety. The same thing goes for the United States and the rest of the world. We have helped many countries and made some mistakes at the same time, just as officers around town do. The issues of the world are much larger then suburb crimes, but the United States is also a much bigger police force then Birmingham’s policemen are. Our intentions are good, and we are doing our best to secure our nation so that we can help others achieve as well as we are. It seems to be working with our efforts to help out Africa, but it is lacking in the Middle East.

MOLLIE YARSIKE-5TH

Anonymous said...

2. Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not?

In my opinion, I do not think that we, America, should be the world’s policeman because many countries don’t like us budding into their business. There are different countries for a reason, and some is that problems in say Russia should stay in Russia, why do we have to go in and try to be the hero? We don’t always need to be creating order out of chaos and helping end conflicts; we just need to learn how to back off sometimes because not many people like other people that don’t even know the situation just jumping in trying to help. I believe that we only need to create order in our allies and help conflicts in countries of our allies because sometimes it’s like helping the enemy and we don’t even know it. And looking at it with a different point, how would many Americans feel if some country just jumped in to our problems trying to solve things all of the time?

Derek M.
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

2. Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not?

America should only intervene in conflicts when they are dealing with allies or when one side of a conflict is helpless and innocent. In any other conflicts the U.S should remain neutral. The intervention should only be a military one if there is no other option. When America is deciding what conflict they should be a part of they look at what’s best for America, not the countries that are actually in trouble. When the U.S. invaded Iraq they didn’t look at he effect it would have on the people, they just saw it as a chance to gain more power in the Middle East. When the U.S. took sides in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict they didn’t foresee the Palestinians gaining a negative view of America, they only saw the future Israel as a nation more submissive to America’s control. When it comes to the genocide of an entire group of people however, America doesn’t care. They see that military control can be more beneficial to them in other places like Iraq. When people such as the people of Sudan in that kind of trouble it is America and other powerful nation’s duty to help them. Sitting by while thousands of people are dying for no reason and generating false information to invade a stable nation is a complete misuse of power. America needs to stop being so selfish and think about the rest of world.

Stefan Rush
4th Hour

Anonymous said...

Should America's #1 foreign policy goal be to spread democracy around the world? Why or why not? No, I do not think that America’s #1 foreign policy goal should be to spread democracy around the world. I think it is a waste of money which should be spend in are own country because we have are own people here who are starving and can’t afford to even take care of themselves. Why we spend are own tax payers money to help some across the world when we have are own people outside our own door who needs are help? Why should we help more people who don’t appreciate us and we can’t spend more money since were in dept. Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not? Yes I think that America should be the world’s policeman because we have the most power and supplies to due it. I feel like it is our responsibility to help some helpless nations that need are help. I think that all of our dept should be forgiven as pay for being the world’s policeman.

Tyler Howe 4th hr

Anonymous said...

2. Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not? I personally think that America should not be the worlds policeman. And staying out of other countries business unless we caused it. We should not become involved with other countries problems unless we helped cause the problem in the first place. If they create the chaos themselves we should not restore order. If we were a part of creating the chaos it is right to help restore order. Also we should not help end conflicts between countries unless we are one of the countries involved in the conflict
Marin Haffey 5th Hr..

Anonymous said...

2. No I don’t feel that America’s number 1 foreign policy should be to spread democracy. Every time we attempt to spread democracy it ends up being a failure. Throughout American history whenever we attempt such a feat we annihilate everything that once was said country. We desecrated the forests of Vietnam with agent orange and napalm. We lost 58,000 U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands Vietcong soldiers. Then in the Korean war we lost about 44,000 soldiers as well as countless Korean soldiers. In the current Iraq war we lost almost 6,000 U.S. soldiers and a undisclosed Iraqi casualties. Based off this information we barley can spread democracy. Only half of Korea became democratic while the other half is communist with nuclear capabilities. And currently we are attempting to spread democracy to Iraq which has put us into a supposed economic recession. Overall I don’t feel we are capable to spread democracy.

Raphael Egziabher
5th hour

Anonymous said...

2.) Should America be the world’s police men? I don’t think that the U.S. should be the world’s police men. We have one of the strongest army’s, a stable economy, and weapons of mass destruction. I think that if we end a conflict between two nations or within a nation itself then it can turn around and backfire on us. We can help them change, but they might not like the change and might come at the U.S. just like 9/11. Then we will feel like we need to interfere and it will be stuck in the country for like 5 plus years until we can settle things within the country. I don’t think we would be able to create order out of chaos. I think that if we tried then we would just have nothing done on the subject just like we hurricane Katrina. That is why I don’t think that the U.S. can police the world.

Andrew Littlefield
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

I think America’s number one foreign policy should be to spread democracy. I think there would be fewer conflicts and war if everyone was run with the same type of rules and guidelines. I think democracy is also the best way to go for countries like Iraq who have no say at all and the government doesn’t do what’s best for them. I also think it would help us reach our other foreign policy goals, such as, remaining a super power, I think by spreading our type of government around the world it would give us more power because we could help each country set it up. And for question number two regarding America acting as a police force, I don’t think we should, I think there are some conflicts and situations we should intervene and help out in, especially if asked but I think by staying out of things that have nothing to do with us will give us fewer enemies and fewer future terrorist attacks.

Jessica Keyes
4th hour

Anonymous said...

I believe that democracy is for everyone but only if they want it. Democracy helps countries around the world to maintain a stabilized government and a strong economy. It keeps the people in charge just as much as the government, instead of a dictatorship. And it keeps alliances where alliances are needed for many countries. But some countries might not want democracy. Some countries might have been prospering without democracy but still don’t have a dictatorship. Unlike Iraq who wasn’t prospering under the rule of the Sadam Hussein dictatorship. And in that situation some countries need democracy to get them going in the right direction to help their country. But mostly countries might not need democracy. Even though it is used in most of the countries around the world. And it has saved countries from depression and dictatorships. Some might not need it. Then there is the United States that has been using democracy since the founding of our nation. And it has helped us to become the superpower of the world. So overall I would have to say democracy is for everyone and used by most everyone in the world. And some countries don’t use it or need it and some absolutely do need it.

Ben Tredwell
5th

Anonymous said...

2. I do not think that America should be the world’s policemen. So far America has been involved in most of the world’s conflicts trying to help solve them. America means well by doing this, but sometimes it is better if the countries themselves resolve the problems, or try to because if we always solve the problems for them, then they will never learn their lesson and will not be able to solve their own conflicts in the future. For some conflicts it is better to help resolve because the forces that are causing the problems are too strong for the country to handle or other reasons. A lot of the times, other countries do not want other countries interfering with their problems. Another huge problem is that if America gets involved in other countries problems, then it might cause problems for America itself. The forces causing problems for that country might turn against America and cause problems with us and possibly cause war. That would be very bad for the security of America.

Jason Schreiber
4th hour

Anonymous said...

Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.?


It is impossible to police the world; literally impossible. Look at the average American city: they all have superb police forces’, yet, there is still crime; still those who fight back. The same applies to the world as a whole; it is just not possible (w/o successfully creating totalitarian rule over the whole world) to successfully create order out of peace, to help end conflicts, etc. There will always be those who rebel; always those who fight back. And yet, the US always finds a way to put on the old uniform for one more time; whether it is invading countries in order to take down dictatorships, or simply boycotting the Olympics over human rights violations. And the most ironic part about this situation is that there is one gigantic double standard between the actions of the US and the actions of other countries. Think about it: how would you feel if America erupted in Civil War tomorrow, and France deployed 500,000 troops in order to secure our country. To me, I wouldn’t want them in any of our business. Yet, nonetheless, we still continue to police around the world like it is our job to do so. While some good may come out of a world policeman, it is only temporary, and the true repercussions will just be twice as bad in the future.


Tyler Friedman
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

I think that America should spread democracy but how and where it should spread is what needs to be figured out. America should not force its democracy upon other countries just like America allows its citizens to have their own unique religions and now have someone else’s religion forced upon you. I think that there are some times when American needs to force democracy on other countries but that is only when they are a threat to our own safety or to the safety of other citizens and people. We should also try to reason with countries about becoming democracies rather than using force to spread democracy around the world. Even though worldwide democracy would benefit more than it would hurt, it is still up to the people and the governments to decide what kind of government they want for their countries and only when the people and others are being denied rights or innocently injured should America try to spread democracy.
phil bolton 5th

Anonymous said...

Blog # 19
I think that America’s main policy should not be to bring democracy around the globe. I think that our main goal should be to stop world hunger or bring world peace. A lot of countries do not like us, or the way we interact with them, so if we start to impose our view of a fair government (democracy) it will only make them angrier at us. We should let countries run themselves, and let them decide what a fair government system is. If Cuba was a huge power, and it tried to force us to be communist how would we react? We would be very frustrated and most likely want to rebel against them. We have to face the fact that America is not the most popular country in the world, because we try to impose our views of religion and politics on everyone else. If start to enforce democracy around the world, it will only influence dislike towards America.

TJ Hyland

Anonymous said...

Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not?
America should not be the world’s policemen because we make more enemies than friends. If we randomly invade countries to help or what we think is helping we will never have time to keep America in one piece. We can’t solve America’s problems if we are always in a different country. I think when we have America in one peace then we can start helping others out. Also we don’t have nearly enough troops to keep sending them around the world to act as policemen. People are dying daily in Iraq and we are there to make peace. If we act as everyone’s policemen we will kill off out army. Not everyone wants help; they might see us as attacking them so the other countries act out in violence. We might think we are helping when really we are making things worse there and even might get ourselves in America bombed. We should only go and help other countries if they ask for it and America truly thinks we they need it. But we should not just turn on the news and say, “hey lets go stop chaos and be a superhero”. Even when we have tried to help other countries with there conflicts it has always backfired in our faces. Iraq’s bombing our peace keepers, warlords and followers shooting down our helicopters in Somalia. It always goes wrong and we lose so many soldiers’. We should only go help others if they ask for it and 100% want it.

Emma Schwartz
4th Hours

Anonymous said...

I do not think that america should be the worlds police men, becuase this is really not what we should be worring about at this day in time. this day in time is only focusing that we are the best and we are to stay the best until the whole middle eastern and other countries should fear us and to do as we say for them to do. but just think about it if i had to make a choice on saving lives or having the war, people would think that saving lives isby having the war and all america right now is about creating an order and aslo by having a forieghn policy. so in my conclusion i do not think that america should be its own police men becuase we are never getting our economy straight and organized to do such a thing like this...
By: Lydia Gaiters

Ryan L. - 2nd Hour said...

I think that America trying to protect U.S. Freedoms at home should be a concept that should be spread throughout the world because if other countries live under the same government styles as our own, we may be able to create more allies from it, and also possibly get a more common ground for trading and power throughout the world. i think that one of the most important things the world could use with a common government would be the economics able to rely on each country as a united whole to have independence within their own individual countries, but at the same time to be dependant on the others for resources and power. Another benefit would be a combined army effort to protect the rights that each country holds as its own, and if one country would be attacked by an outside source not protecting the rights that the other country has, there would be a chain event for each of them to help keep the freedoms they all have established as a whole.

Anonymous said...

1) yes because democracy is the best way to get things done. America is been running on democrat for many years and hasn't come to any problems like the ones in non democratic countries. everyone in a democratic government gets to speak their mind through voting and other forms of free speech. America has already tried to help other countries such as Iraq in 1990. they gave Suddam Hussian weapons of mass destruction to invade Iran. I think they helped him then so that they could use that excuse as black mail to help them get Iraq to become democratic. we are in Iraq because they thought that suddam had weapons of mass destruction. we found nothing but are now trying to create a democratic government similar to our government.

chris giles
5th hour

Megan W. -4th said...

I do not believe that Americas primary goal should be to try to spread democracy around the world, however I do think that it should be one goal. I think that if all other countries were a democracy like ours, than our country would benefit. They would be easier to trade with, we would also know more about what the citizens of those countries want, and there would be less debate about what those people want. I think that with more democratic countries, the world would run much more smoothly. Although, I do think that sometimes we need to be sure not to be nosy and go around in places where we aren’t wanted. I think that in some cases it is necessary to go in and make changes in other countries because of our moral values, like in the rise of Hitler, but in some cases I find it unnecessary.

Megan W.

Geoff Wickersham said...

I think America’s #1 goal should be to spread democracy around the world because it would mean that Americans will be safer and more prosperous. It would also help give people in other countries more freedoms than they have now. America would also get trade relations with more countries. America should not be the world’s policeman because if it got involved with other countries conflicts it would cause even more problems. They should only interfere when the countries really need the help.

Megan K.

Anonymous said...

I think that it is okay for the United States to be the world's policeman, but only to a certain extent. We shouldn't have to be in charge of everything, but helping others out is what we are known for, and if we have the resources then sometimes it is necessary to help other nations. If we didn't help anyone and kept to ourselves, we wouldn't have many allies and other countries would be suffering. However, I do think that it is important to out our own nation's interests before others'. We need to stay focused on our own problems, like the economy for example, before barging into other countries' issues. Overall, I think the United States is doing a pretty good job of looking out for other nations, but our own country is suffering. Our economy is falling, and we need to stop spending most of our money aiding other countries. Right now I think the best solution would be to figure out all of the issues in our own coutnry that need to be resolved, and work on them in small steps. After we are a solid nation, we can then look to others who need our help.

Claire Hayes
2nd hour

Anonymous said...

The question was if the world is ready for American democracy. I don’t believe that the world is ready for American democracy. The people in other countries don’t understand and would not be ready or prepared to change their government so sudden. The world wouldn’t be ready for such a change, and if they were to get democracy, it would have to happen very slowly, for the people to get used to the new government. If the world were to all the sudden change to a democracy, the world would be full of complete chaos. It would create world wide panic and violence among the people of the whole world. It would seem successful at first to have a world wide democracy, but it would eventually go bad. It would also seem impossible to even bring the world to democracy, we would need a very powerful military force. And no one has such a powerful force.
Trevor Nielsen
History/2

Anonymous said...

I dont think that America should be the worlds police men because we cant even help our oqn country and forget the war with iraq. The world knows how bad and how much money we spend in iraq but are we stopping it ? no, we are not. I think we need to help oursleves and resolve our problems before we try to help other countries around the world first. It wouldnt make sense for us to help anyone. Let Amercia help themself and everyone else find a way to get help.
Rae 2nd hour

Anonymous said...

I think that the US should definitely take the roll of the world’s police force. We are one of the world’s great superpowers and it is our duty to not just look out for ourselves, but for troubled countries as well. Countries that are in chaos and are in desperate need of order should be helped by the US. “The United States is not present everywhere and doesn't act perfectly... but neither does any police force. Every police force is subject to criticism, legitimate criticism. But criticizing a police force is not the same thing as arguing that there should not be one." I agree with this quote, its saying that nobody is perfect and everyone has flaws, but something is better than nothing. And if a country is in desperate need of help, because there is violence going on there like genocide, it should be our job to protect the people in need. Even if it means going into a country we are not allies with. You can think of it as us being the neighborhood police force, the neighborhood might not like them being around, but it’s for their own good. I think that the Iraq war is a bad example because I don’t think you can consider us being a police force there, in fact I think that when we label something as “war” we shouldn’t bring in the term “police force”, it just make us seem like the bad guys.

Matt Bajorek
4th

Anonymous said...

No, I don’t think that America’s policy goal should be to spread democracy. You would think that after all the times we’ve tried to spread democracy and home many times we’ve messed it up, that we would learn and let countries handle their own business, stepping in only when asked. Our number one foreign policy should be for us to try to get along with other countries so as not to get blown up again. And no, I don’t think that we should be the world’s policeman. Just because we have the power doesn’t mean that we need to step in every time we think we have to. We were better off as a neutral country, not caring either way. For starters, out economy was A LOT better, and we weren’t worried about war and being attacked unless we were asked for help. I do think that if we were asked to step in then after we weighed the cost of the decision and we felt that we would be ok, then we could help. But to just bust in and start changing things w/o being asked I think is why many countries don’t like us now.

Alexandra Anderson 5th Hour

Anonymous said...

Derrick Brown is da man
5th hour

whole on. I dont Know what Democracy is. i'll be back.

.
.
.
.
.

America shouldnt be da police.
every other country gone wax us.
i think america should focus on our problems within our own country first before we try to go be somebodies superman. america should take care of its own fam before we try to be all democratic with somebody elses country. its good to be consider the top/best or watever country but. Democracy is not really in America it self. i think we need new laws and everything else. wat if we be the worlds police and a slight disagree happen. then america will have tragedies.

Anonymous said...

For part one yes I do think that Americas number one goal in foreign policy should be t spread democracy , as long as the country we are trying to help dos not resist and clearly does not want our help. If they do want our help we can help by creating a stable government that can keep the country on its feet and we can check in later to see if everything is going well and if not we can keep trying to help but if they are fine we can leave and we created another ally.
For question number two I do not think we should be the world’s policeman creating order out of chaos, helping end conflicts. Because we have enough domestic conflicts we should spend our money on stuff like health insurance and build back up the economy instead of wasting our money foreign problems that do not directly involve us.

Ryan Gillis
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

Nicole Niezgocki
2nd hour

American's number on forign policy goal to spread democracy aound the worl, should not be the top. I think that there are mor important issues than that. American needs to look at what the most important in the long run, and go for that goal. A important one is forign jobs. So many people are loosing their jobs to people who will work for less. That is a huge problem.

No, I don't think American should be the worlds policeman. The reason I feel this is because I think that american needs to solve all their problems befour we go off atry and solve someone elses problems. We can't jt jump into a situation that we aren't even involved in. We are getting in the middle when its not even our problem.

Anonymous said...

i think that the U.S. should definitely take the roll as becoming the worlds police force. it is our job to l0ook out for others. And if a country is in desperate need of help, it should be our job to protect the people if it means going into a country we are not allies with.
ashley davis

Carleigh Bechtolt said...

Should America be the world's policeman, creating order out of chaos, helping ending conflicts, etc.? Why or why not?

I don’t think that America should be the world’s policeman because America is in too much trouble with other countries and we don’t need any more trouble. For example, when the United States went into the World Wars. We really didn’t need to go into them. Well I guess we did but only because we didn’t want our economy to fail. If the United States was the world’s policeman then we would be getting into a lot of problems, some easy and some no so easy to solve. Now if there were an easy and non-voilent way to end the conflicts, then I think that it would be a good idea to be the world’s policeman. I guess that I have two opinions on this idea. It would be good for the world if we were because we would be solving problems early before they got any worse but if we wernt, then we would probally get into the whole issue one way or another and end up in a lot more problems then we could have if we stopped it early.

Carleigh Bechtolt

Anonymous said...

I believe that we should be the "world's policemen". If you believe so then what you're basically doing is calling yourself a "super-hero" which means your putting all responsilbilty aon yourself. I believe that if you make a mistake man up, and also let the police handle it. I mean that's what there getting payed for right? Also let Bush handle it. He wants all the attention on him so let him deal with drama.
tommy syrkett 2nd hour