http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,558921,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133436,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/06/us.pakistan/index.html
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Power and Responsibility
The war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan have both required U.S. troops. The people of Sudan and Haiti have required aid in order for their citizens to survive. Iran and North Korea are looking for nuclear weapons. Multiple countries' governments are corrupted. As the leader of the world, the United States has the responsibility to aid in affairs across the globe. This is said to be the job of the United Nations, but the United States has even more obligation to help other countries. At the same time, the U.S. has limited resources. This causes the U.S. to have to decide who is the most important to help. Should we give aid to help political leaders like Aung San Suu Kyi gain freedom and establish democracy in Burma, or do we invest our time and effort into wars against terror in the Middle-East? Also, who questions our actions as a country, and what situations we have the right to take control of? With these questions in mind, I believe that the U.S. should concentrate its efforts as a world leader by giving aid to groups who are standing up for democracy in their nations and to countries who are suffering from disasters like poverty. This blog will discuss issues about what actions should be taken to accomplish these goals. Is it correct to use violence to help leaders who want to establish democracy through peace? Do we have the right to enforce democracy in other nations? I find that these arguments are multi-dimensional because the situations all differ because of events that have taken place in the past. With this in mind, the goal of every situation that the U.S. approaches should be to lessen human suffering.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am looking forward to reading your posts and believe you are going in a very interesting direction but I have a question about the ground work of your argument. You seem to believe that because the U.S. is so rich and powerful we have the obligation to help those countries that are in need. Many may argue against this though saying that we should work on fixing our own country's problems before we try to fix the world's problems. Also, people may argue that the reason many countries hate the U.S. is because we get involved in too much. How would you respond to these criticisms?
ReplyDeleteI would respond to the first subject you brought into question by reflecting on the seriousness of our countries issues compared to the issues of the countries of the world which require aid. It can be understood that the U.S. is in recession, but how serious is this problem compared to the country of Haiti who basically does not have an economy? I would also respond by saying that it is difficult for me to say that the U.S. requires help when hundreds of thousands of people are being massacred in places like Darfur. As to your second question, I think that people do not like the feeling that they are not in control, and the forceful nature that the U.S. has taken in global situations causes people to feel uncomfortable. At the same time, people are naive to the amount of money that U.S. gives to other countries. I find that the pressure which the U.S. puts on other countries is definitely a topic that can be debated. Thank you for your input.
ReplyDelete