“It is a lot harder now to be a police officer than what it used to be” (Steven Seagul). As time goes on, the United States of America’s job as being the police of the world gets harder and harder as time keeps going, but the U.S. stays strong. The U.S. works to keep peace throughout the world, it works to keep the U.S. as being the “American Dream” and it is the only nation qualified to be the police of the world. The United States acts as the police of the world, although some citizens do not approve of that fact. But if the U.S. doesn’t step forward, nothing will happen to improve the world. Why should America take on the thankless task of policing the globe, critics wonder. Does the world need a constable? As long as evil exists, someone needs to be there to police it. Some people say that if we continue to be the police of the world, we should expect to be involved in more incidents around the globe. The best way to prevent future incidents would be to stop looking for global trouble. “We have enough problems here at home.” But, in fact, this job is strategic – it saves the world from communism becoming too powerful and it helps defend our own national security. This job helps the U.S. show off our industries. The military budget of the U.S. is almost as much as the rest of the world’s combined. The international system is a parallel to our neighborhoods. Taking on all of them is a big commitment, but as Kipling warned America, “Ye dare not stoop to less.” The United States works to keep peace with every nation globally. The U.S. has relations with 200 other nations. Foreign policy is a main factor in how America regulates its relations with other nations. What forms foreign policy is the national interest across the Unite... ... middle of paper ... ...to become a cop. At the end of the day, not all Americans find the police of the world role very appealing. People do not always enjoy getting pulled into other nations’ problems. But as Congressman, Jimmy Duncan (Tennessee Republican) stated, “It is a traditional conservative position not to want the United States to be the policeman of the world.” America works hard to keep peace amongst the nations, and amongst the allies, in order to keep the allies dependent. America is the place to invest and to escape from economic problems. America continues to meet the qualifications as the police of the world, even as the world changes by the minute, which makes it harder to police the world. All in all, protects the nations, and observes what they do in order to keep things in order. “The police belongs to the people and the people belong to the police.” (Todor, Zhivkov)
It is somehow strange for today’s reader to find out that the situation with America’s foreign affairs hasn’t changed much. As some clever people have said, “The History book on the shelf is always repeating itself.” Even after nineteen years, Americans think of themselves as citizens of the strongest nation in the world. Even after the September the 11th. Even after Iraq. And Afghanistan.
Schrader. E. (2003, June 28). US push for global police force. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved September 11, 2009, from
One of the most disturbing trends in American policing in recent years has been the militarization of police weaponry and tactics. In his new book, “The Rise of the Warrior Cop”, author Radley Balko traces the roots of American law enforcement from the constables of colonial times to present day SWAT teams and special response units. With the high controversy surrounding the “war on drugs” and the “war on terrorism,” policymakers have signed off on a dangerously aggressive style of policing that too often leads to unnecessary deaths and injuries. Some people say that modern law enforcement is on a collision course with our Bill of Rights and is unconstitutional. In the book “ Rise of the Warrior Cop” the author talks about how modern day policing are adapting mostly all military tactic. These wars are more than just metaphors designed to rally public support and secure all the money they can to support these programs. They change the way we think about what the police do. Wars mean shooting first and asking questions later. Wars require military tactics and weaponry. Wars mean civilian casualties. Are we at war with our own people?
After the Second World War, America came out of the war with the responsibility of being the “superpower” of the world. In the past America would never get involved in foreign affairs however after World War Two things had changed. Since America was considered the most powerful natio...
From the time of the Spanish American war until the beginning of the Cold War the United States went from relative isolation to increased global involvement because of 1 utopian thinking, 2 business expansion, and 3 changes in foreign policy. The consequences on American society of that greater involvement were 4 America’s development into an “international police power”.
In no field other than politics does the justification for action often come from a noteworthy event and the true cause stays hidden behind the headlines. The United States’ transformation from a new state to a global superpower has been a methodical journey molded by international conditions (the global terrain for statecraft), the role of institutions and their programmed actions, and ultimately, the interests of actors (the protection of participants in making policy’s items and i...
In my paper I argue that the US violation of a country’s sovereignty should come only after a careful consideration and deep investigation of the reasons behind an international conflict. Moreover, all interventions should be based on specific achievable end-goals and strategies. Also, US military campaigns’ rationale should suit America’s vital national self-interest, as I define it later. Several reasons support such an international policy:
Examining the now unoccupied position in the Secretary of State, there has been a debate on who will take over the job. On this topic, this paper will include things about: the important job of being Secretary of State, the firing of the recent Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, and Mike Pompeo, the replacement of the position. Now, there are many responsibilities to being the Secretary of State. One of those responsibilities is ensuring citizen protection in foreign countries (“Duties of the Secretary of State”). This is important for the job for protecting American citizens from the possibly strict laws in another country. Another responsibility for this job is informing citizens about concerns in foreign countries (“Duties of the Secretary of State”). This is important as well is it could affect American citizens being more prepared, the citizens’ safety, and the impact of our economy. An addition to the other responsibilities to Secretary of State is that it negotiates U.S. foreign relations (“Duties of the Secretary of State”). How this is important to the position because it could bring peaceful solutions to potential challenges.
Allen Moore’s sordid depiction of twentieth century life presents a complex world, where the distinction between a virtuous hero and a villainous wrongdoer is often blurred. In stark contrast to the traditionally popularized portrayal of superheroes, whose unquestionably altruistic motives ultimately produce unrealistically idealized results; the realistically flawed characters of Watchmen exist in a multi faceted world characterized by moral ambiguity. America’s imperialistic ambitions have long been justified as an expression of American idealism. Much like the portrayal of superheroes in popular culture, America’s intervention in foreign affairs was portrayed as the result of a clearly defined problem, where American intervention was necessary and consensual. The Watchmen exist in an American reality that does not depend on them as the archetypal hero as demonstrated by the fact that their presence is not necessary to the survival of the world. Collectively the characters of Watchmen parallel the tumultuous relationship that as a superpower the United States of America has with the rest of the world.
In the next section of Carpenter’s argument, he discusses the failure of the U.S. to recognize the different forms of engagement options. The most constructive alternative to the current indispensable policy is the consortium model of regional actors that has the U.S. serving as the “first among equals” (pg.24) allowing the U.S. to off-load security responsibilities as well as adopting a more detached strategic role would benefit the U.S. at minimal
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
Without understanding the importance of foreign relations the American people’s way of life could be at stake. Not only could the economic strength of the U.S. diminish, but the military might of the U.S. could also be compromised. Mead argues that without the centrality of foreign policy being evident in American politics the happiness of the world is at risk. “Since the United States has become the central power in a worldwide system of finance, communications, and trade, it is not only the American people whose happiness and security will be greatly affected by the quality of American foreign policy in coming years (Mead 176). I contend that without a strong emphasis on foreign policy, we could begin to see the end of American
domestic affairs in countries which the US considers to be important. The US foreign policy
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.
Abstract: Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has been the world’s only unquestioned superpower. How the United States evaluates its position as global hegemon has important consequences for American foreign policy, particularly with regards to the potential for future policy constraints. Thus, this paper seeks to consider the question: How durable is American hegemony? The paper first defines the state of American hegemony and then considers the primary challengers: Europe, Russia, China, Japan and imperial overstretch. It will conclude that in the long-term, East Asian geopolitical instability poses the greatest threat to American hegemony, but that in the short-term, the hegemony will prove to be quite durable as long as the United States can counteract the phenomenon of imperial overstretch. In order to diffuse both internal and international threats to hegemony, American leaders should work to pursue national interests within a framework of consensus and legitimacy as much as possible.