- Aug 20, 2000
- 20,577
- 432
- 126
This term, my politics elective has a debate segment. I picked to argue in agreeance with the topic, "It is vital for global security that the United States play an active and forceful role in world affairs."
People who disagree with this statement, please take a moment to flip roles and take an intellectual exercise in playing devil's advocate. If you supported this statement, what reasoning would you use to back it up? People who agree with this statement, I just want to hear from you period.
I'd appreciate links to reports, speeches, anything to get a feel for other reasons or ideas. Thanks for the help, and no flaming please.
Here's what I've got so far, incidentally:
- Efforts by unstable nation states such as North Korea and Iran to acquire WMDs need to be curbed as much as possible, albeit delicately. No other nation but the US has the physical assets, budget and therefore authority to take the lead in such an effort.
- In an increasingly smaller (travellable) world, allowing other nation states to implode in the hope that they'll eventually put themselves together with a government that believes in international cooperation and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as laid out by the UN ( See Link ). Just like you would investigate and make decisions on what actions to take if you heard gunshots and screams all night long as your next door neighbour's, so must nation-states weigh the pros and cons of stepping into other people's affairs, knowing that a neighbour or government that does not share the same basic beliefs in humanity as you do might not mind coming over to see what's next door. Again, the USA is the only nation that can fulfil this role globally.
People who disagree with this statement, please take a moment to flip roles and take an intellectual exercise in playing devil's advocate. If you supported this statement, what reasoning would you use to back it up? People who agree with this statement, I just want to hear from you period.
I'd appreciate links to reports, speeches, anything to get a feel for other reasons or ideas. Thanks for the help, and no flaming please.
Here's what I've got so far, incidentally:
- Efforts by unstable nation states such as North Korea and Iran to acquire WMDs need to be curbed as much as possible, albeit delicately. No other nation but the US has the physical assets, budget and therefore authority to take the lead in such an effort.
- In an increasingly smaller (travellable) world, allowing other nation states to implode in the hope that they'll eventually put themselves together with a government that believes in international cooperation and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as laid out by the UN ( See Link ). Just like you would investigate and make decisions on what actions to take if you heard gunshots and screams all night long as your next door neighbour's, so must nation-states weigh the pros and cons of stepping into other people's affairs, knowing that a neighbour or government that does not share the same basic beliefs in humanity as you do might not mind coming over to see what's next door. Again, the USA is the only nation that can fulfil this role globally.