American Police Action: A Controversy The United States has consistently been the world’s most powerful country, which is a title many Americans are undoubtedly proud to hold. However, with the responsibility that comes with being the most powerful country in the world, the United States has to decide how to use their power. A common but controversial topic is if the US should be the world’s policeman. Time and time again, the world has seen the US act as a global policeman, but there have been no benefits to foreign police actions. It is futile that the United States of America realizes that its role as the world’s policeman is unnecessary and troublesome. The Korean and Vietnam wars were the product of a loophole found in the US Constitution
…show more content…
While many believe that isolationism is also not the correct decision because the repercussions of World War II proved that long ago, citizens of the US believe the country’s involvement is unnecessary (Gottlieb). The US has often marketed its need for international police action on the prospect of communist expansion and direct threats to the United States, but countries such as Russia and China are not as great of threats as people perceive them to be (Peña). Although the American government believes that militant actions are necessary, other educated peoples see America as an expansionist because their actions are not needed by the rest of the world. Some scholars perceive that the US is trying to prove its dominance and widen its sphere of influence (Conry). The US already has enemies far and wide, and being viewed as expansionist is not helping its …show more content…
Many people believe that it is the United State’s duty as the most powerful country to protect third world civilians (Pena). However, the USA can lead and unite their allies as a different way of showing their international power (Gottlieb). In 1993 at West Point, New York, President George H. W. Bush said, “We need not respond by ourselves to each and every outrage violence. The United States should not seek to be the world’s policeman. We would exhaust ourselves in the process. It is our responsibility, it is our opportunity to lead. There is no one else” (Horvitz). President Bush’s ideas were well-received throughout the country, but his idea of leadership was extremely vague (Conry). Experts now realize that the government interpreted the idea of being a leader as also being a policeman (Conry). The US should instead allow their allies to establish their own balance of power while being the mediator during these periods and, during times of aggression, the United States should only be a financial lender of last resort (Pena). The country can lead by example in nonviolent and non-militant ways and set the example that there are many other ways to be
While many believe that isolationism is also not the correct decision because the repercussions of World War II proved that long ago, citizens of the US believe the country’s involvement is unnecessary (Gottlieb). The US has often marketed its need for international police action on the prospect of communist expansion and direct threats to the United States, but countries such as Russia and China are not as great of threats as people perceive them to be (Peña). Although the American government believes that militant actions are necessary, other educated peoples see America as an expansionist because their actions are not needed by the rest of the world. Some scholars perceive that the US is trying to prove its dominance and widen its sphere of influence (Conry). The US already has enemies far and wide, and being viewed as expansionist is not helping its …show more content…
Many people believe that it is the United State’s duty as the most powerful country to protect third world civilians (Pena). However, the USA can lead and unite their allies as a different way of showing their international power (Gottlieb). In 1993 at West Point, New York, President George H. W. Bush said, “We need not respond by ourselves to each and every outrage violence. The United States should not seek to be the world’s policeman. We would exhaust ourselves in the process. It is our responsibility, it is our opportunity to lead. There is no one else” (Horvitz). President Bush’s ideas were well-received throughout the country, but his idea of leadership was extremely vague (Conry). Experts now realize that the government interpreted the idea of being a leader as also being a policeman (Conry). The US should instead allow their allies to establish their own balance of power while being the mediator during these periods and, during times of aggression, the United States should only be a financial lender of last resort (Pena). The country can lead by example in nonviolent and non-militant ways and set the example that there are many other ways to be