Does the USA have a duty to protect the world?

[Senyosu]

While I am against the American world police, there is no other better alternative. I certainly do not want a PRC world police breathing down my neck, nor one that slips into prosperity and bankruptcy in an erratic fashion.

[Dooom35796821595]

While I am against the American world police, there is no other better alternative. I certainly do not want a PRC world police breathing down my neck, nor one that slips into prosperity and bankruptcy in an erratic fashion.

Team America, World Police!

I prefer each nation policing themselves while being part of the international community.

However, I do think America has a duty to create a space navy to deal with those nazis on the dark side of the moon and secure the helium3 for the prosperity of humanity *coughcoughNATOcoughcough*

[New Waterford]

Of course it doesn't.

While I am against the American world police, there is no other better alternative. I certainly do not want a PRC world police breathing down my neck, nor one that slips into prosperity and bankruptcy in an erratic fashion.

Why not, you know, not have one country be the world police?

[Ragnarokee]

America can't even look after it's self.. So why should it look after other countries?

[Exxosia]

Does the United States of America have a duty to protect the world from tyrants and violence or does it over step its bounds?
It steps over bounds. The US should protect and support is own first, North America second, and nobody else. So unless it is directly needed to protect the US population or the functional security of the continent, there is no reason to intervene. This goes further in that the US has either fought wars to enrich the powerful or to prop up tyranny and violence for the most part since WWII.
If the U.S. doesn't do it, who should? Should anybody at all?
The victims of that tyranny and violence should rise up themselves.
Should organizations like the UN be given more power so they can do their job better?
No, organizations such as the UN should be stripped of all meddling and military powers and be wholly a world diplomacy organization.

[Corumm]

The USA protects its interests, it does not "protect the world".

Such naiveté

[Freies Reich Deutschland]

I'll keep it short because I have a limited amount of time right now:

The US has a duty to keep its greedy, dirty hands out of other people's business.
The US is not the "world police" the media like to paint them as.

Why? Because you can't cause a problem and then try to make yourself look good by blaming the bad, bad terrorists/communists/Muslims/north Koreans/whatever.

That's like giving someone your wallet, then shooting him in the face and crying about how he tried to steal from you....

[Sklavinia]

If they did, they're doing a shitty job at it.

[Distruzio]

No.

[Conserative Morality]

The USA protects its interests, it does not "protect the world".

Such naiveté

Right, and we have an interest in international peace and prosperity. Something about being a brutally mercantile culture.

[Benuty]

The USA protects its interests, it does not "protect the world".

Such naiveté

Right, and we have an interest in international peace and prosperity. Something about being a brutally mercantile culture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezu7H6AUhDw
Reminded me of this.

[Conserative Morality]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezu7H6AUhDw
Reminded me of this.

...

The hell did I just watch?

[Soselo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezu7H6AUhDw
Reminded me of this.

...

The hell did I just watch?

Cocaine is one hell of a drug that I don't use.

[Indian Empire]

Yes, the USA has it's rights as long as the other country has done nothing wrong to the attacking nation.

I spent my 1000th post talking about countries, when this is NationStates

[Ngelvomlam]

All nations and all people have a duty to protect the world.

[MERIZoC]

If the US has a duty to uphold freedom and democracy, it's failing spectacularly.

[Genivaria]

I think the answer is yes but at the same I time I don't think the responsibility falls solely on us.
It is not feasible for one nation to protect the world.
What we need is a kind of S.H.I.E.L.D. to protect the world.

[MERIZoC]

Right, and we have an interest in international peace and prosperity. Something about being a brutally mercantile culture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezu7H6AUhDw
Reminded me of this.

I'm feeling cheated out of 15 seconds there.

[Bentus]

imho, no the US does not have a duty to protect the world and in reality it acts according to its own interests - which really is understandable. A nation's a nation is a nation is a nation. They've been looking out for themselves since the ancient times.

But, back to the US, I'm glad that they're out there promoting their self-interests. Frankly, because their interests largely line up with my own. Not always of course, but the status quo suits me well. I live in a nice house, get a good education, can post on an online forum over the internet - things are pretty good for me. It's similar for a lot of nations out there. The US gets to maintain dominance and flex its influence globally, and in return its allies (not going to name names) get protection and security as well. With the US taking on the military side of things, others can find themselves with more money to spend elsewhere. And then, with the whole economy side of things. The US would very much like a stable world economy, again to largely match up to the status quo, that's in its self-interest. In my mind, a stable world economy is something I very much would like as well. So keep at it 'Merica! You're not doing a very good job, but hey, it's the best we've been able to do in a while (Because that whole Concert of Europe thing...yeugh, that ended well).

[Apparatchikstan]

The United States (like the individuals that comprise it) has the duty (responsibility) to protect itself, and since it's currency is a global trade medium, that means promoting it's economic health wherever that currency flows, and safeguarding it against anti-capitalists. On one hand, the United States is the most potentially benign nation yet founded, on the other, our State Department is an overbloated madhouse of progressive globalists who have misrepresented our responsibility to rationalize pursuing agendas that aren't necessarily relative to the national health, and will most likely jeapordize it in the long run.
So, I sympathize with the honest anti-Americanists whose sentiment is resultant of being burned by US foreign policy. There are those of us here in the States who are struggling to instill temperance and moderation in our government affairs. I ask for patience while we struggle to leash in and attempt to train what is effectively a big dumb clumsy dog. Also bear in mind, that while our public agents are sometimes globe stomping stumble bums, our private citizens are the most charitable on the planet, and have taken the sting out of many peoples cuts with their good works. I don't claim this as recompense, but ask that it be accepted as a silver lining on what has been a stormy cloud.

[Socialist Tera]

We need to protect the world from the US.

[Crysuko]

They have a duty to protect themselves and (possibly) their allies. That's it. This whole "world police" thing just makes them look bad.

[Seleucas]

No; rather, the US should be in a state of perpetual neutrality to keep it from meddling and bullying the rest of the world.