America As World Police

[GrammerNaziElite]

Does anybody here have some opinions on the stance we take on the world, defending it?

I think it's a noble effort, but it's unnecessary, intrusive, and we're hurting our economy financing it.

[SolInvictus]

everyone keeps complaining that the UN doesn't take enough action, yet when America does the job for them everyone still complains.
either give the UN the power to act or stop complaining when the US does.

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

At 6/7/08 01:44 PM, SolInvictus wrote: everyone keeps complaining that the UN doesn't take enough action, yet when America does the job for them everyone still complains.
either give the UN the power to act or stop complaining when the US does.

agreed its complete assisnine that people complain about the US when the UN doesn't do anything

[GrammerNaziElite]

That's because the UN is biased in a way that keeps the major power's interests at heart. I love the UN.

[bcdemon]

At 6/7/08 01:49 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:

At 6/7/08 01:44 PM, SolInvictus wrote: everyone keeps complaining that the UN doesn't take enough action, yet when America does the job for them everyone still complains.
either give the UN the power to act or stop complaining when the US does.

agreed its complete assisnine that people complain about the US when the UN doesn't do anything

So let's say the UN puts a resolution against Israel to stop them from doing something against the Palestinians, and USA vetoes said resolution like they usually do. The UN didn't decide to 'not do anything', the USA (in this case) stopped the UN from doing something.

Am I asinine to complain about the USA when the UN isn't allowed to do anything?

[Davidzx]

its like who is our enemy anymore?

[Memorize]

If the UN would do its job and countries wouldn't cause mass Global Wars every half century, then the US wouldn't have to be World Police.

C'mon. The UN? They go as far to complain about the US giving TOO MUCH aid, claiming that by doing so, the US is attempting to subvert UN authority.

[KingAdamTheGreat]

well if not us than who would you like to lead the world?

[ChuckAP]

Guys, think about it. The USA is about 90% of the UN's funding, so who do you think their army is?

[SmilezRoyale]

The united states should take a vacation from the UN for maybe 3-7 years, as in a temporary total withdrawl. Not for the reasons that Ron Paul provides, but just for the sake of the lulz.

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

At 6/7/08 08:07 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: The united states should take a vacation from the UN for maybe 3-7 years, as in a temporary total withdrawl. Not for the reasons that Ron Paul provides, but just for the sake of the lulz.

that would be intresting total anarchy all over the world completely defenseless and weak.

[ChristianDude7857]

We shouldn't withdraw, we need to maintain our rep as the most powerful nation on Earth by a wide margin, but we should do that by superior tech and military weapons, not by getting involved in every miniscule conflict

[ChuckAP]

The UN's purpose is to avoid WW3, if the USA doesn't stop these miniscule conflicts they expand into much bigger things. Eventually countries start to use tiny things for reasons to go to war.

[Grammer]

As long as we can't be cited for police brutality I don't mind being the world police. So far, so good.

[SmilezRoyale]

At 6/7/08 10:07 PM, Grammer wrote: As long as we can't be cited for police brutality I don't mind being the world police. So far, so good.

lol if you're sarcastic i'm so dead.

Anyway... people HAVE cited us for police brutality, justified or not.

[Grammer]

At 6/7/08 10:45 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote:

At 6/7/08 10:07 PM, Grammer wrote: As long as we can't be cited for police brutality I don't mind being the world police. So far, so good.

lol if you're sarcastic i'm so dead.

lolz, I don't bite :)

Anyway... people HAVE cited us for police brutality, justified or not.

Yeah but we don't give a shit what other countries think, amirite?

[ChuckAP]

At 6/7/08 10:47 PM, Grammer wrote:

At 6/7/08 10:45 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote:

At 6/7/08 10:07 PM, Grammer wrote: As long as we can't be cited for police brutality I don't mind being the world police. So far, so good.

lol if you're sarcastic i'm so dead.

lolz, I don't bite :)

Anyway... people HAVE cited us for police brutality, justified or not.

Yeah but we don't give a shit what other countries think, amirite?

Oh no, I just got proven completely wrong I'm going to resort to the "Oh Yeah, well I don't care then."
Three year old baby argument tactic wins again Yayyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!! Grammer

[SmilezRoyale]

At 6/7/08 10:47 PM, Grammer wrote:

Yeah but we don't give a shit what other countries think, amirite?

people realise how valuable something really is when they don't have it anymore, i still say we should take a vacation from this whole 'police' buisness, maybe we can use that extra military money to build a giant pyramid in colorado, or a Rhodes colossus statue on the hudson river or something. The UN will fill in for us.

[Memorize]

At 6/7/08 08:18 PM, ChuckAP wrote: The UN's purpose is to avoid WW3, if the USA doesn't stop these miniscule conflicts they expand into much bigger things. Eventually countries start to use tiny things for reasons to go to war.

The only thing keeping the UN together in order to avoid WW3 IS the US.

[SolInvictus]

the entire idea behind the UN was to establish rules and regulations that would apply to all member nations as well as the ability to enforce these. basically the UN is supposed to be the global police, and we support this idea. one problem with the UN is that it does not have its own military, so until then who exactly is supposed to do the policing?

[LazyDrunk]

At 6/8/08 04:14 AM, SolInvictus wrote: basically the UN is supposed to be the global police, and we support this idea. one problem with the UN is that it does not have its own military, so until then who exactly is supposed to do the policing?

Short guys with suits and a really fancy attache.

amiright?

[mindlessdestruction2]

At 6/7/08 07:56 PM, ChuckAP wrote: Guys, think about it. The USA is about 90% of the UN's funding, so who do you think their army is?

more like 97%

[Grammer]

At 6/7/08 10:58 PM, ChuckAP wrote: Oh no, I just got proven completely wrong I'm going to resort to the "Oh Yeah, well I don't care then."
Three year old baby argument tactic wins again Yayyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!! Grammer

uh, are you insulting me? It's kind of hard to tell.

Either way, this isn't really a debate, I just made the point, which is true, that America tends to disregard what the world thinks.

At 6/7/08 11:53 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: The UN will fill in for us.

*sigh* if only it were so... I don't have much faith in the UN, but wouldn't it be just dandy if Japan and China dealt with North Korea, and not us? I suppose it's our fault because this administration wants to solve the world's problems, but it doesn't seem like China wants to help at all.

ah well

[ChuckAP]

At 6/8/08 11:45 PM, Grammer wrote:

At 6/7/08 10:58 PM, ChuckAP wrote: Oh no, I just got proven completely wrong I'm going to resort to the "Oh Yeah, well I don't care then."
Three year old baby argument tactic wins again Yayyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!! Grammer

uh, are you insulting me? It's kind of hard to tell.

sarcasm, my ignorant acquatience

Either way, this isn't really a debate, I just made the point, which is true, that America tends to disregard what the world thinks.

Is that why we have a liberal congress now?

At 6/7/08 11:53 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: The UN will fill in for us.

*sigh* if only it were so... I don't have much faith in the UN, but wouldn't it be just dandy if Japan and China dealt with North Korea, and not us? I suppose it's our fault because this administration wants to solve the world's problems, but it doesn't seem like China wants to help at all.

ah well

DO you remember this little thing called the Korean War. You know the one where we fought Korea, because we were really fighting China. Yeah, that pissed a lot of people off. Basically, what I'm saying is that we're the ones in trouble with NK, not China.

[mindlessdestruction2]

At 6/7/08 10:58 PM, ChuckAP wrote: Oh no, I just got proven completely wrong I'm going to resort to the "Oh Yeah, well I don't care then."
Three year old baby argument tactic wins again Yayyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!! Grammer

lol

[Grammer]

At 6/9/08 12:08 AM, ChuckAP wrote: sarcasm, my ignorant acquatience

You really suck at it. Punctuation and grammar is your friend.

Either way, this isn't really a debate, I just made the point, which is true, that America tends to disregard what the world thinks.

Is that why we have a liberal congress now?

That's relevant... how?

At 6/7/08 11:53 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: The UN will fill in for us.

*sigh* if only it were so... I don't have much faith in the UN, but wouldn't it be just dandy if Japan and China dealt with North Korea, and not us? I suppose it's our fault because this administration wants to solve the world's problems, but it doesn't seem like China wants to help at all.

ah well

DO you remember this little thing called the Korean War.

Fifty years ago.

You know the one where we fought Korea, because we were really fighting China. Yeah, that pissed a lot of people off. Basically, what I'm saying is that we're the ones in trouble with NK, not China.

I don't see how the Korean war has anything to do with our problems wirth Korea today. I think you're just sore because I owned you in the video game debate.

[WilliWowza]

At 6/8/08 11:38 PM, mindlessdestruction2 wrote:

At 6/7/08 07:56 PM, ChuckAP wrote: Guys, think about it. The USA is about 90% of the UN's funding, so who do you think their army is?

more like 97%

More like 22%

[mindlessdestruction2]

More like 22%

no, more like 97%
do you know why the first attempt for a league of nations failed? the US didnt support it. you know why the UN was some-what successful? the US supported it. most of UN forces are from the US.

i win.
you now owe me $48 for no reason.

[bcdemon]

At 6/16/08 12:38 AM, mindlessdestruction2 wrote:

:most of UN forces are from the US.

Actually, that is not correct. The USA is only contributing 289 people to peacekeeping missions, 14 of which are "troops".

[GunnerX86]

America doesn't defend the world.All the wars that we are fighting are not mainly to defend the world.Don't say the war on terrorismwe are fighting in is defending the world.Infact we are only attacking the terrorists that attack us.Some terrorists we fight do attack other countries other than us, but we don't fight them because they attack those other countries, we fight them because they attack us.In 1991 when we attacked Iraq we attacked them because they attacked Kuwait, and we were obligated by the UN to attack Iraq.We accepted the request by the UN to attack Iraq beause we didn't want to look like a bunch of butholes to the entire world.