What is the degree to which the US should be involved in foreign affairs...?

[RussianCoffeeAddict]

This is an interesting question, and I dabbled a bit into this with Cid.

Some people think the US should stay as minimally attached as possible to the foreign world (hi, I'm RCA); maintaining agreements they've already made with other countries, upholding bargains, trading, etc, but not really going beyond that. Kind of just sitting around and going with the wind, almost, and fighting when forced to.

Others think we should be the world's police, where we actively look for trouble and dictators and aggressors where they may be and go out to kick ass while playing the US national anthem the whole time (Wade is a nice example of this). This isn't an entirely bad perspective...depending on the situation (*cough* World War 2, Cold War *cough*). On the other hand, the results have been...mixed, for basically the whole 21st century. Afghanistan's been going on for 17 years, and it doesn't look like the people there really give a damn about what we're trying to do there (they've been lining the roads with IEDs for that whole time, so our priorities and theirs might be just a little off...). We've gotten involved in other parts of the world militarily; I think we've meddled in Ukraine, too (although not necessarily militarily).

It's a mess, and US involvement doesn't have any particularly clear benefits; at least, not without drawbacks, or serious mistakes along the way to detriment any perceived benefits we might be bringing.

So how much should the US be involved in foreign affairs...?

Should we be the world police or the city upon the hill? The guys going in to help, or the guy who sets the example for how other countries should run themselves...?

[OrganizationXV]

I think this has to be a case-by-case basis, really. It's hard to just pick a stance because of all the possibilities therein.

That said, I see the value in meddling in other country's affairs for the clear betterment of US citizens as well as the people of that country... although I'd rather it not turn into a decades-long shitshow like the last few years of the millennia-long Middle Eastern conflict.

[RussianCoffeeAddict]

I think this has to be a case-by-case basis, really. It's hard to just pick a stance because of all the possibilities therein.

That said, I see the value in meddling in other country's affairs for the clear betterment of US citizens as well as the people of that country... although I'd rather it not turn into a decades-long shitshow like the last few years of the millennia-long Middle Eastern conflict.

I'd say I'm sort of behind this (I, for the most part, think the US' operations during the Cold War was justified), with a leaning towards the first option I described. Sometimes it's just better to get involved in other countries than to leave everything alone, but sometimes it starts looking a lot less like defensive or "greater good" type activities in some circumstances (like Iraq). And the latter is where I start having a problem with things.

[DokTOR.]

The guys going in to help, or the guy who sets the example for how other countries should run themselves...?

Imagine this. Even when pondering about whether or not you should stop acting like you're above everyone else by intervening in other people's problems, you still act like you're above everyone else by claiming you should be an example to others.

Jesus Christ, I wonder where the fuck America go wrong for these huge-ass egos.

[RussianCoffeeAddict]

you still act like you're above everyone else by claiming you should be an example to others.

Let's be honest, if it weren't for the wars and the meddling, even our bickering over the wall is still an example of a better way to run things compared to 90% of the countries that aren't in Europe, lol.

Juz how et ez, mang. :]

[DokTOR.]

Let's be honest, if it weren't for the wars and the meddling, even our bickering over the wall is still an example of a better way to run things compared to 90% of the countries that aren't in Europe, lol.

Juz how et ez, mang. :]

So you're an example to the other illegitimate countries with no history? Good for you, I guess.

[40 acres]

We always have to interfere we are paid to interfere. Just so Europe can take the moral high ground and dodge wars lol.

[Chara]

I think the best thing would be to pull our troops back and just build a nest egg on the US. Then maybe everyone would stop hating us, and if anyone did try to invade we'd crush them one-sidedly.

[The Poster Formerly Known as Teal]

we should take away foreign aid and use the money to dig moats

[Cid]

We really should help start a restructuring of the UN and NATO instead. Let the UN be the world peacebroker and global diplomatic body that it's supposed to be and fold NATO into it, forcing every country involved in the UN to also pay into and provide troops to NATO as well. Then NATO's job can be to settle the world's military disputes.

That should be the end goal, that way the full military might of the United States becomes reserved solely for those who would attempt to strike us first.

[RussianCoffeeAddict]

We really should help start a restructuring of the UN and NATO instead. Let the UN be the world peacebroker and global diplomatic body that it's supposed to be and fold NATO into it, forcing every country involved in the UN to also pay into and provide troops to NATO as well. Then NATO's job can be to settle the world's military disputes.

That should be the end goal, that way the full military might of the United States becomes reserved solely for those who would attempt to strike us first.

Sounds good to me, TBQH.

[40 acres]

We really should help start a restructuring of the UN and NATO instead. Let the UN be the world peacebroker and global diplomatic body that it's supposed to be and fold NATO into it, forcing every country involved in the UN to also pay into and provide troops to NATO as well. Then NATO's job can be to settle the world's military disputes.

That should be the end goal, that way the full military might of the United States becomes reserved solely for those who would attempt to strike us first.

I mean we tried to pull back our foreign involvement. The result was Russia immediately bullying it's neighbors and the world crying. That is how our current back and forth with Russia started. I remember the headlines talking about a naval standoff. We had to practically get in Russia face to make them calm down lol.

[Ziku]

Imagine this. Even when pondering about whether or not you should stop acting like you're above everyone else by intervening in other people's problems, you still act like you're above everyone else by claiming you should be an example to others.

Jesus Christ, I wonder where the fuck America go wrong for these huge-ass egos.

Stay mad, Yuropoor.

[Cid]

I mean we tried to pull back our foreign involvement. The result was Russia immediately bullying it's neighbors and the world crying. That is how our current back and forth with Russia started. I remember the headlines talking about a naval standoff. We had to practically get in Russia face to make them calm down lol.

The hope would be that NATO becomes beefy enough that they could do that as well, even if Russia pulled it's funding and troop commitment. Same goes for any other country.

But in the flip side, pulling from NATO would also mean having to pull from the UN and losing any global influence that came with it. So one would hope that Russia would be forced to behave better anyhow.

[40 acres]

The hope would be that NATO becomes beefy enough that they could do that as well, even if Russia pulled it's funding and troop commitment. Same goes for any other country.

But in the flip side, pulling from NATO would also mean having to pull from the UN and losing any global influence that came with it. So one would hope that Russia would be forced to behave better anyhow.

I mean I feel the majority of American citizens actually would be behind that. But the government is so disconnected from the people at this point achieving that goal means overcoming a lot of selfish politicians. Governments are giant machines where the people get to choose a replacement part and hope it makes the machine work better while having no real control over the said machine lol.

[Cid]

I mean I feel the majority of American citizens actually would be behind that. But the government is so disconnected from the people at this point achieving that goal means overcoming a lot of selfish politicians. Governments are giant machines where the people get to choose a replacement part and hope it makes the machine work better while having no real control over the said machine lol.

So what you're saying is... We should KILL ALL THE POLITICIANS and start over?

[40 acres]

So what you're saying is... We should KILL ALL THE POLITICIANS and start over?

Yes that is the cure. I always ask myself what would Thanos do? Kill them all is the first answer.

[Pocket Rocket]

The US should be completely in charge of every country on the planet.

[Cid]

Yes that is the cure. I always ask myself what would Thanos do.

Sometimes the hardest choices require the strongest wills.

Want to be my running mate for 2024?

[40 acres]

Sometimes the hardest choices require the strongest wills.

Want to be my running mate for 2024?

Only if I am like Dick Cheney. I have all the power while you take all the hate like Bush.