SmarterThanTheAverageBear
Gold Member
- Aug 22, 2014
- 29,410
- 4,280
- 280
- Banned
- #1
Should the US be the "world police?" is this something new? Is it something we want? Is there any benefit to the US for doing so?
Many people will tell you that no, the US shouldn't be running around the world like a global traffic cop; and I couldn't disagree more.
My opponent in this debate will be the liberal poster Billy000, who frankly all I know of his position is that he doesn't think we should be the world police.
Anyway, I'll begin this debate by defining "world police" for this purposes of this debate.
For this debate , we will consider any military action by the US which was not used in direct defense of US property or interests , whether here or abroad. For example, the Vietnam War would be considered an example of being the world police, while WWII which we ultimately got involved in because of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, would not be considered a world police action.
At this point I will stop and allow Billy to respond and alter my definition in case he doesn't agree to it.
Many people will tell you that no, the US shouldn't be running around the world like a global traffic cop; and I couldn't disagree more.
My opponent in this debate will be the liberal poster Billy000, who frankly all I know of his position is that he doesn't think we should be the world police.
Anyway, I'll begin this debate by defining "world police" for this purposes of this debate.
For this debate , we will consider any military action by the US which was not used in direct defense of US property or interests , whether here or abroad. For example, the Vietnam War would be considered an example of being the world police, while WWII which we ultimately got involved in because of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, would not be considered a world police action.
At this point I will stop and allow Billy to respond and alter my definition in case he doesn't agree to it.