|
I agree that the US government has made some bad decisions concerning international politics, but there are a few points that most outsiders don't realize.
Since the early 1900's, the US government has taken a view on helping world issues. If there is an international issue that needs to be solved but the funds or manpower are preventing it, the US has made the decision to intervene. Sometimes this helps, sometimes it does not. <B>At least we're trying to help</B>. Most "bad" things are reported on the news overseas by these descriptions. When's the last time you saw news on how many dollars are being spent in South Africa? They're not exactly in a good situation.
Which would benefit more, the US attempting to help world issues and failing at some, or the US completely abandoning those in need? Our government realized in the early 1900's that we were going to become the world superpower, hence the president declaring the US as the country that intervenes in times of need. There is good intervention and bad intervention, but it's debatable to say if no intervention at all is better.
Just a little insight from an average American on how our government works concerning international issues. We're not out to concur the world or take over your oil. Our government acts when there's a world issue and no one is doing anything about it, and with that comes the good and the mistakes.
-Lasereth
__________________
"A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert
|